Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Singapore, Sweden, Thailand, and the United Kingdom; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, and Notice of Intent To Revoke Orders (in Part)

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-427-801, A-428-801, A-475-801, A-588-804, A-559-801, A-401-801 A-

549-801, A-412-801]

Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and

Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Singapore, Sweden,

Thailand, and the United Kingdom; Preliminary Results of Antidumping

Duty Administrative Reviews, Partial Termination of Administrative

Reviews, and Notice of Intent To Revoke Orders (in Part)

AGENCY: International Trade Administration/Import Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of antidumping duty

administrative reviews, partial termination of administrative reviews,

and notice of intent to revoke order (in part).

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

SUMMARY: In response to requests from interested parties, the

Department of Commerce has conducted administrative reviews of the

antidumping duty orders on antifriction bearings (other than tapered

roller bearings) and parts thereof from France, Germany, Italy, Japan,

Singapore, Sweden, Thailand, and the United Kingdom. The classes or

kinds of merchandise covered by these orders are ball bearings,

cylindrical roller bearings, and spherical plain bearings. The reviews

cover 38 manufacturers/exporters and the period May 1, 1992, through

April 30, 1993 (the POR). Although we initiated reviews for nine other

manufacturers/exporters, we are terminating the reviews because the

requests for these reviews were withdrawn in a timely manner. As a

result of these reviews, the Department has preliminarily determined

the weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms to range

from 0.37 percent to 132.25 percent for BBs, from zero to 51.82 percent

for CRBs, and from zero to 92.00 percent for SPBs.

We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary

results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 28, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The appropriate case analyst, for the

various respondent firms listed below, at the Office of Antidumping

Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, Washington, DC 20230; Telephone: (202) 482-4733.

France

Jacqueline Arrowsmith (SNR), Kris Campbell (SNFA), Joseph Hanley (SKF,

Rollix Defontaine), David Levy (Hoesch Rothe Erde), Philip Marchal

(Franke & Heydrich), or Michael Rill.

Germany

Kris Campbell (FAG), Joseph Hanley (Rollix Defontaine), David Levy (NTN

Kugellagerfabrik, INA, Hoesch Rothe Erde), Philip Marchal (SKF, Franke

& Heydrich), Charles Riggle (Fichtel & Sachs, GMN), or Michael Rill.

Italy

Charles Riggle (Meter), Joseph Hanley (SKF, FAG), or Michael Rill.

Japan

Carlo Cavagna (Honda, Nachi), William Czajkowski (Takeshita), Michael

Diminich (NSK), J. David Dirstine (Koyo), Joseph Fargo (Nankai Seiko),

David Levy (NTN), Michael Panfeld (IKS, NPBS), or Richard Rimlinger.

Singapore

Joanna Schlesinger (NMB/Pelmec), or Richard Rimlinger.

Sweden

Philip Marchal (SKF), or Michael Rill.

Thailand

Joanna Schlesinger (NMB/Pelmec), or Richard Rimlinger.

United Kingdom

Jacqueline Arrowsmith (RHP/NSK), Kris Campbell (Barden/FAG), or Michael

Rill.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On May 15, 1989, the Department of Commerce (the Department)

published in the Federal Register (54 FR 20909) the antidumping duty

orders on ball bearings (BBs), cylindrical roller bearings (CRBs) and

spherical plain bearings (SPBs) and parts thereof from France, Germany,

Italy, Japan, Singapore, Sweden, Thailand and the United Kingdom.

Specifically, these orders cover BBs, CRBs, and SPBs from France,

Germany, and Japan; BBs and CRBs from Italy, Sweden, and the U.K.; and

BBs from Singapore and Thailand. On June 28, 1993, in accordance with

19 CFR 353.22(c)(1993), we initiated administrative reviews of those

orders for the period May 1, 1992, through April 30, 1993 (58 FR

34563). The Department is now conducting these administrative reviews

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

(the Tariff Act). These reviews cover the following firms and classes

or kinds of merchandise:

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

Name of firm Class or kind

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

France

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

Franke & Heydrich KG.................... BBs

Hoesch Rothe Erde AG.................... BBs

Rollix Defontaine, S.A.................. BBs

SKF Compagnie d'Applications Mecaniques, BBs, CRBs, SPBs

S.A. (SKF).

SNFA.................................... BBs, CRBs

SNR Roulements (SNR).................... BBs, CRBs

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

Germany

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

FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schaefer KGaA BBs, CRBs, SPBs

(FAG).

Fichtel & Sachs AG...................... BBs

Franke & Heydrich KG.................... BBs

Georg Mueller Nurnberg, AG (GMN)........ BBs

Hoesch Rothe Erde AG.................... BBs

INA Walzlager Schaeffler KG (INA)....... BBs, CRBs

NTN Kugellagerfabrik (Deutschland) GmbH BBs,

(NTN).

Rollix Defontaine, S.A.................. BBs

SKF GmbH................................ BBs, CRBs, SPBs

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

Italy

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

FAG Italia S.p.A........................ BBs, CRBs

Meter, S.p.A............................ BBs, CRBs

SKF Industrie S.p.A..................... BBs, CRBs

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

Japan

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

General Bearing Corp.................... BBs, CRBs, SPBs

Honda Motor Co., Ltd.................... BBs, CRBs, SPBs

Izumoto Seiko Co., Ltd.................. BBs

Koyo Seiko Co........................... BBs, CRBs, SPBs

Nachi-Fujikoshi Corp.................... BBs, CRBs

Nankai Seiko Co......................... BBs

Nippon Pillow Block Sales Company, Ltd. BBs

(NPBS).

NSK Ltd................................. BBs, CRBs, SPBs

NTN Corp................................ BBs, CRBs, SPBs

Takeshita Seiko Co., Ltd................ BBs

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

Singapore

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

NMB Singapore Ltd./Pelmec Ind. (Pte.) BBs

Ltd. (NMB/Pelmec).

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

Sweden

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

SKF Sverige............................. BBs, CRBs

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

Thailand

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

NMB Thai Ltd./Pelmec Thai Ltd. (NMB/ BBs

Pelmec).

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

United Kingdom

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

Barden Corp. (U.K.) Ltd./FAG (U.K.) Ltd. BBs, CRBs

(Barden/FAG).

RHP Bearings/NSK Bearings Europe, Ltd. BBs, CRBs

(RHP/NSK).

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

Subsequent to the publication of our initiation notice, we received

timely withdrawals of review requests for INA (France), SNECMA (France

and Italy), Asahi Seiko (Japan), Fujino Iron Works (Japan), Tottori

Yamakei Bearing Seisakusho (Japan), and Revolvo (U.K.). Because there

were no other requests for review of these companies from any other

interested parties, we are terminating the reviews with respect to

these companies, in accordance with 19 CFR 353.22(a)(5).

On January 13, 1994, GMN also requested that the Department allow

GMN to withdraw its request for review and terminate the review of the

order on BBs from Germany with respect to GMN. Although its request to

withdraw was submitted well after the deadline for doing so, GMN

claimed that the circumstances of the firm's bankruptcy rendered it

unable to proceed further with the review. After giving careful

consideration to GMN's circumstances, we find that it would be

inappropriate to terminate the review. GMN's request to terminate the

review was submitted during the verification process, which is an

advanced stage of the review process, and at a point at which it had

become clear that the company would be unable to complete verification

successfully. Furthermore, a domestic interested party objected to

termination of the review at that stage. Therefore, we are not

terminating the review of GMN.

In addition, we initiated reviews for SST Bearing Corp. (SST), and

Peer International (Peer) with respect to subject merchandise from

Japan. SST informed us that it neither produced AFBs in Japan nor

exported Japanese-produced bearings to the United States. Peer informed

us that although it is a reseller of Japanese-made bearings, all of its

suppliers had knowledge at the time of sale that the merchandise was

destined for the United States. Consequently, Peer is not a reseller as

defined in 19 CFR 353.2(s) because its sales cannot be used to

calculate the U.S. price. Therefore, we are preliminarily terminating

the reviews with respect to SST and Peer. If we obtain any information

that contradicts these companies' assertions, we will complete the

reviews with respect to these companies.

Best Information Available

In accordance with section 776(c) of the Tariff Act, we have

preliminarily determined that the use of best information available

(BIA) is appropriate for certain firms. The Department's regulations

provide that we may take into account whether a party refuses to

provide information in determining what is the best information

available (19 CFR 353.37(b)). For purposes of these reviews and in

accordance with past Commerce practice, we have used the most adverse

BIA--generally the highest rate for any company for the class or kind

of merchandise from the same country from this or any prior segment of

the proceeding, including the less-than-fair-value (LTFV)

investigation--whenever a company refused to cooperate with the

Department or otherwise significantly impeded the proceeding. When a

company substantially cooperated with our requests for information, but

failed to provide all information requested in a timely manner or in

the form requested, we used as BIA the higher of (1) the highest rate

(including the ``all others'' rate) ever applicable to the firm for the

same class or kind of merchandise from the same country from either the

LTFV investigation or a prior administrative review; or (2) the highest

calculated rate in this review for any firm for the class or kind of

merchandise from the same country (see Final Results of Antidumping

Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation in Part of an Antidumping

Duty Order, 58 FR 39728 (July 26, 1993)).

Because Franke & Heydrich, General Bearing Corp., and SNFA failed

to respond to the Department's questionnaire, we have used the highest

rate ever found for each relevant class or kind of merchandise and

country of origin. Also, because GMN had substantially cooperated with

our requests for information, but was unable to complete verification,

we used as BIA its highest previous rate, in this case the rate from

the LTFV investigation.

Intent to Revoke

The following firms have submitted requests, in accordance with 19

CFR 353.25(b), to revoke the orders covering the indicated merchandise:

Spherical plain bearings from France--SKF

Ball bearings from Germany--NTN Kugellagerfabrik and GMN

Cylindrical roller bearings from Italy--SKF

Spherical plain bearings from Japan--NTN and Honda

Ball bearings from Japan--Honda

Cylindrical roller bearings from Japan--Honda

In accordance with 19 CFR 353.25(a)(2)(iii), these requests were

accompanied by certifications from the firms that they had not sold the

relevant class or kind of merchandise at less than fair value for a

three-year period including this review period, and will not do so in

the future. Each of these firms also agreed to its immediate

reinstatement in the relevant antidumping orders, as long as it is

subject to those orders, if the Department concludes under 19 CFR

353.22(f) that, subsequent to revocation, it sold the subject

merchandise at less than fair value.

In the two prior reviews of these orders, we determined that SPBs

from France sold by SKF, BBs from Germany sold by NTN Kugellagerfabrik

and GMN, CRBs from Italy sold by SKF, and BBs, CRBs, and SPBs from

Japan sold by Honda were not sold at less than fair value. In this

review, we preliminarily determine that these firms, with the exception

of NTN Germany and GMN, have not sold these products at less than fair

value, which will satisfy the three-year period of no sales at less

than fair value, if these preliminary findings are affirmed in our

final results. Therefore, we intend to revoke the orders with respect

to the following firms and merchandise:

Spherical plain bearings from France--SKF

Cylindrical roller bearings from Italy--SKF

Spherical plain bearings from Japan--Honda

Ball bearings from Japan--Honda

Cylindrical roller bearings from Japan--Honda

With respect to SPBs from Japan sold by NTN and BBs from Germany

sold by NTN and GMN, we have not established that there has been a

three-year period of sales at not less than fair value. The final

results of the previous administrative review indicated the existence

of dumping margins on NTN's sales of SPBs from Japan (see Final Results

of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation in Part of an

Antidumping Duty Order, 58 FR 39729, July 26, 1993). In addition, we

preliminarily determine in this review that there are dumping margins

on NTN's sales of BBs from Germany. Therefore, we do not intend to

revoke the orders on SPBs from Japan with respect to NTN or on BBs from

Germany with respect to NTN.

Concerning GMN, as BIA, (see ``Best Information Available'' section

above), we have preliminarily determined that dumping margins exist on

GMN's sales of BBs from Germany during the 1992-93 review period.

Furthermore, on February 10, 1994, the company withdrew its request for

revocation. Therefore, we do not intend to revoke the order on BBs from

Germany with respect to GMN.

Scope of Reviews

The products covered by these reviews are antifriction bearings

(other than tapered roller bearings), and parts thereof (AFBs), and

constitute the following ``class or kinds'' of merchandise:

1. Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof: These products include all

antifriction bearings that employ balls as the rolling element. Imports

of these products are classified under the following categories:

antifriction balls, ball bearings with integral shafts, ball bearings

(including radial ball bearings) and parts thereof, and housed or

mounted ball bearing units and parts thereof.

Imports of these products are classified under the following

Harmonized Tariff Schedules (HTS) subheadings: 4016.93.10, 4016.9350,

8482.99.05, 8482.99.35, 8708.70.6060, 8708.93.6000, 8708.99.3100,

8708.99.4000, 8708.99.4960, 8708.5800, 8708.99.8015, 8708.99.8080.

2. Cylindrical Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof: These products

include all AFBs that employ cylindrical rollers as the rolling

element. Imports of these products are classified under the following

categories: antifriction rollers, all cylindrical roller bearings

(including split cylindrical roller bearings) and parts thereof, and

housed or mounted cylindrical roller bearing units and parts thereof.

Imports of these products are classified under the following HTS

subheadings: 4016.93.10, 4016.9350, 8482.99.25, 8482.99.6530,

8482.99.6560, 8708.99.4000, 8708.99.4960, 8708.99.8080.

3. Spherical Plain Bearings and Parts Thereof: These products

include all spherical plain bearings that employ a spherically shaped

sliding element.

Imports of these products are classified under the following HTS

subheadings: 8483.30.40, 8483.30.80, 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30,

8485.90.00, 8708.99.50.

The size or precision grade of a bearing does not influence whether

the bearing is covered by the order. The HTS item numbers are provided

for convenience and Customs purposes. The written descriptions remain

dispositive.

United States Price

In calculating United States price (USP), the Department used

purchase price (PP) or exporter's sales price (ESP), as defined in

section 772 of the Tariff Act, as appropriate.

Due to the extremely large number of transactions that occurred

during the POR and the resulting administrative burden involved in

calculating individual margins for all of these transactions, we

sampled sales to calculate USP, in accordance with section 777A of the

Tariff Act. When a firm made more than 2,000 ESP sales transactions to

the United States for a particular class or kind of merchandise, we

reviewed ESP sales which occurred during sample weeks. We selected one

week from each two-month period in the review period, for a total of

six weeks, and analyzed each transaction made in those six weeks. The

sample weeks included May 31-June 6, 1992; July 26-August 1, 1992;

October 18-24, 1992; November 22-28, 1992; February 14-20, 1993; and

April 18-24, 1993. We reviewed all PP sales transactions during the POR

because there were few PP sales.

United States price was based on the packed f.o.b., c.i.f., or

delivered price to unrelated purchasers in, or for exportation to, the

United States. We made deductions, as appropriate, from PP and ESP for

movement expenses, discounts and rebates.

We made additional deductions from ESP for direct selling expenses,

indirect selling expenses, and repacking in the United States.

We made an addition to USP for value-added taxes (VAT) in

accordance with section 772(d)(1)(C) of the Tariff Act. In making our

adjustment for VAT, we followed the instructions of the United States

Court of International Trade (CIT) in Federal Mogul Corp. and The

Torrington Co. v. United States, Slip Op. 93-194 (CIT October 7, 1993).

The Department added to USP the result of multiplying the foreign

market tax rate by the price of the United States merchandise at the

same point in the chain of commerce that the foreign market tax was

applied to foreign market sales. The Department also adjusted the tax

amount calculated for USP and the amount of tax included in foreign

market value (FMV). We deducted the portions of the foreign market tax

and the USP tax that are the result of expenses that are included in

the foreign market price used to calculate foreign market tax and in

the United States price used to calculate the USP tax. Because these

expenses are later deducted to calculate FMV and USP, these adjustments

are necessary to prevent our new methodology for calculating the USP

tax from creating dumping margins where no margins would exist if no

taxes were levied upon foreign market sales.

With respect to subject merchandise to which value was added in the

United States, e.g., parts of bearings that were imported and further

processed into finished bearings by U.S. affiliates of foreign

exporters, prior to sale to unrelated U.S. customers, we deducted any

increased value in accordance with section 772(e)(3) of the Tariff Act.

Those bearings otherwise subject to the order that are incorporated

into nonbearing products, which collectively comprise less than one

percent of the value of the finished products sold to unrelated

customers in the United States, are not subject to the assessment of

antidumping duties. In Roller Chain, Other Than Bicycle, from Japan (48

FR 51801; November 14, 1983), roller chain, which was subject to an

antidumping duty order, was imported by a related party and

incorporated into finished motorcycles. The finished motorcycles were

the first articles of commerce sold by the subject producer to

unrelated purchasers in the United States. Because the roller chain did

not constitute a significant percentage of the value of the completed

product, the Department found that a USP could not reasonably be

determined for the roller chain. The Department, therefore, did not

assess dumping duties on these transactions. We have applied this same

principle to these reviews.

Foreign Market Value

The home market was viable for all companies and all classes or

kinds of merchandise. The Department used home market prices or

constructed value (CV), as defined in section 773 of the Tariff Act, as

appropriate, to calculate foreign market value (FMV).

Due to the extremely large number of transactions that occurred

during the POR and the resulting administrative burden involved in

examining all of these transactions, we sampled sales to calculate FMV,

in accordance with section 777A of the Tariff Act. When a firm had more

than 2,000 home market sales transactions for a particular class or

kind of merchandise, we used sales from sample months that corresponded

to the sample weeks selected for U.S. sales sampling plus one

contemporaneous month prior to the POR and one following the POR. The

sample months included March, June, July, October, and November of

1992, and February, April, and June of 1993.

In general, the Department relies on monthly weighted-average

prices in the calculation of FMV in administrative reviews. Because of

the significant volume of home market sales involved in these reviews,

we examined whether it was appropriate to average, in accordance with

section 777A of the Tariff Act, all of each respondent's home market

sales on an annual basis. In this case, the use of POR weighted-average

prices results in significant time and resource savings for the

Department. To determine whether a POR weighted-average price was

representative of the transactions under consideration, we performed a

three-step test.

We first compared each monthly weighted-average home market price

for each model with the weighted-average POR price of that model. We

calculated the proportion of each model's sales whose POR weighted-

average price did not vary meaningfully (i.e., was within plus or minus

10 percent) from the monthly weighted-average prices. We did this for

each model within each class or kind of merchandise. We then compared

the volume of sales of all models within each class or kind of

merchandise whose POR weighted-average price did not vary meaningfully

from the monthly weighted-average price with the total volume of sales

of that class or kind of merchandise. If the POR weighted-average price

of at least 90 percent of sales in each class or kind of merchandise

did not vary meaningfully from the monthly weighted-average price, we

considered the POR weighted-average prices to be representative of the

transactions under consideration. Finally, we tested whether there was

any correlation between fluctuations in price and time for the home

market sales. Where the correlation coefficient was less than 0.05

(where a coefficient approaching 1.0 means a direct relation between

price and time, i.e., that prices consistently rise from month to

month, and a coefficient approaching zero means no relation between

prices and time), we concluded that there was no significant relation

between price and time. We calculated a weighted-average POR FMV only

for those classes or kinds that satisfied our three-step test for the

factors of price, volume, and time.

We compared U.S. sales with sales of such or similar merchandise in

the home market. We considered all non-identical products within a

bearing family to be equally similar. As defined in the questionnaire,

a bearing family consists of all bearings within a class or kind of

merchandise that are the same in the following physical

characteristics: load direction, bearing design, number of rows of

rolling elements, precision rating, dynamic load rating, and outer

diameter, inner diameter, and width.

Home market prices were based on the packed, ex-factory or

delivered prices to related or unrelated purchasers in the home market.

Where applicable, we made adjustments for movement expenses,

differences in cost attributable to differences in physical

characteristics of the merchandise, and differences in packing. We also

made adjustments for differences in circumstances of sale in accordance

with 19 CFR 353.56. For comparisons to PP sales, we deducted home

market direct selling expenses and added U.S. direct selling expenses.

For comparisons to ESP sales, we deducted home market direct selling

expenses. We also made adjustments, where applicable, for home market

indirect selling expenses to offset U.S. commissions in PP and ESP

calculations and to offset U.S. indirect selling expenses deducted in

ESP calculations, but not exceeding the amount of the indirect U.S.

expenses. For comparisons to both ESP and PP sales, we adjusted for VAT

using the methodology detailed in the ``United States Price'' section

of this notice.

We used sales to related customers only where we determined such

sales were made at arm's length, i.e., at prices comparable to prices

at which the firm sold identical merchandise to unrelated customers.

Where we found home market sales below the cost of production in

the previous administrative review period, we concluded that reasonable

grounds exist to believe or suspect that home market sales during the

POR were made at prices below the cost of production, and we therefore

initiated cost investigations.

In accordance with section 773(b) of the Tariff Act, in determining

whether to disregard home market sales made at prices below the cost of

production, we examined whether such sales were made in substantial

quantities over an extended period of time. When less than 10 percent

of the home market sales of a particular model were at prices below the

cost of production, we found that substantial quantities of such sales

were not made and did not disregard any sales of that model. When 10

percent or more, but not more than 90 percent, of the home market sales

of a particular model were determined to be below cost, we determined

that substantial quantities of such sales were made and excluded the

below-cost home market sales from our calculation of FMV provided that

these below-cost sales were made over an extended period of time. When

more than 90 percent of the home market sales of a particular model

were made below cost over an extended period of time, we disregarded

all home market sales of that model from our calculation of FMV and

went to CV.

To determine if sales below cost had been made over an extended

period of time, we compared the number of months in which sales below

cost had occurred for a particular model to the number of months in

which the model was sold. If the model was sold in three or fewer

months, we did not find that below-cost sales were made over an

extended period of time unless there were sales below cost of that

model in each month. If a model was sold in more than three months, we

did not find that below-cost sales were made over an extended period of

time unless there were sales below cost in at least three of the months

in which the model was sold.

Since none of the respondents has submitted information indicating

that any of its sales below cost were at prices which would have

permitted ``recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time in

the normal course of trade,'' within the meaning of section 773(b)(2)

of the Tariff Act, we were unable to conclude that the costs of

production of such sales were recovered within a reasonable period. As

a result, we disregarded below-cost sales when the conditions described

above were met.

Home market sales of obsolete merchandise and distress sales were

not disregarded in our cost analysis unless there was documented

information on the record demonstrating that such sales were outside

the ordinary course of trade.

With respect to FAG Germany, we disregarded certain sales reported

by the company in its home market database. The disregarded sales

pertain to two unrelated German resellers of FAG bearings. Although FAG

reported that it did not know whether these resellers sold its bearings

in Germany or abroad, we preliminarily determine, based on the

following information obtained at verification, that FAG, at a minimum,

should have known that the two resellers would export its bearings.

At verification, we found that FAG referred, both orally and in its

records, to these resellers as ``indirect exporters.'' We learned that

one FAG subsidiary sold to one of these resellers from its export price

list, rather than from its domestic price list. Finally, we contacted

one of the resellers independently and were told that it only sells in

export markets and that its suppliers were aware of this.

During verification, we inquired of other German producers/

exporters about potential sales to ``indirect exporters.'' We did not

obtain conclusive evidence that reported home market sales were in fact

export sales. However, if we obtain additional information indicating

that other producers reported home market sales that we ultimately

conclude were export sales, we will delete these sales from their home

market databases.

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

constructed value as the basis for FMV when there were no usable sales

of such or similar merchandise for comparison.

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

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 costs 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. For comparisons to PP sales, we deducted home

market direct selling expenses and added U.S. direct selling expenses.

For comparisons to ESP sales, we deducted home market direct selling

expenses. We also made adjustments, where applicable, for home market

indirect selling expenses to offset U.S. commissions in PP and ESP

calculations. For comparisons involving ESP transactions, we made

further deductions for constructed value for indirect selling expenses

in the home market, capped by the indirect selling expenses incurred on

ESP sales in accordance with 19 CFR 353.56(b)(2).

Preliminary Results of Reviews

As a result of our reviews, we preliminarily determine the

weighted-average dumping margins (in percent) for the period May 1,

1992 through April 30, 1993 to be:

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

Company BBs CRBs SPBs

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

France:

Franke & Heydrich.......................... 66.42 (\2\) (\2\)

Hoesch Rothe Erde.......................... (\1\) (\2\) (\2\)

Rollix Defontaine.......................... (\1\) (\2\) (\2\)

SKF........................................ 3.12 (\1\) 0.00

SNFA....................................... 66.42 18.37 (\2\)

SNR........................................ 3.31 2.58 (\2\)

Germany:

FAG........................................ 17.46 14.24 17.54

Fichtel & Sachs............................ 11.71 (\2\) (\2\)

Franke & Heydrich.......................... 132.25 (\2\) (\2\)

GMN........................................ 35.43 (\2\) (\2\)

Hoesch Rothe Erde.......................... (\1\) (\2\) (\2\)

INA........................................ 29.81 9.14 (\2\)

NTN........................................ 9.06 (\1\) (\1\)

Rollix Defontaine.......................... (\1\) (\2\) (\2\)

3SKF....................................... 28.41 27.45 60.23

Italy:

FAG........................................ 3.08 (\1\)

Meter...................................... 1.22 (\1\)

SKF........................................ 3.71 0.00

Japan:

General Bearing............................ 106.61 51.82 92.00

Honda...................................... 0.37 0.01 0.01

IKS........................................ 27.96 (\2\) (\2\)

Koyo....................................... 12.19 5.34 (1)

Nachi...................................... 28.27 4.33 (\2\)

Nankai Seiko............................... 1.08 (\2\) (\2\)

NPBS....................................... 18.32 (\2\) (\2\)

NSK........................................ 27.17 20.42 (\1\)

NTN........................................ 5.09 2.34 0.01

Takeshita.................................. 14.58 (\2\) (\2\)

Singapore:

NMB/Pelmec................................. 4.84

Sweden:

SKF........................................ 16.00 1.85

Thailand:

NMB/Pelmec................................. 0.37

United Kindgom:

Barden/FAG................................. 4.86 8.22

RHP/NSK.................................... 16.01 18.40

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

1No U.S. sales during the review period.

2No review requested.

Parties to this proceeding may request disclosure within 5 days of

the date of publication of this notice. Any interested party may

request a hearing within 10 days of the date of publication of this

notice. A general issues hearing, if requested, and any hearings

regarding issues related solely to specific countries, if requested,

will be held in accordance with the following schedule and at the

indicated locations in the main Commerce building:

Italy--March 28, 1994; 9:00 am; room 1617-M-4

General Issues--March 28, 1994; 1:00 pm; room 4830

Thailand--March 29, 1994; 9:00 am; room 1617-M-1

Singapore--March 29, 1994; 10:30 am; room 1617-M-1

Germany--March 29, 1994; 2:00 pm; room 1617-M-4

Japan--March 30, 1994; 9:00 am; room 1617-M-1

United Kingdom--March 30, 1994; 2:00 pm; room 1617-M-1

France--March 31, 1994; 9:00 am; room 1617-M-4

Sweden--March 31, 1994; 1:00 pm; room 1617-M-4

Issues raised in hearings will be limited to those raised in the

respective briefs or written comments, and rebuttal briefs or rebuttals

to written comments. Briefs or written comments from interested

parties, and rebuttal briefs or rebuttals to written comments, limited

to the issues raised in the respective case briefs and comments, may be

submitted not later than the dates shown below for general issues and

the respective country-specific cases. The Department will subsequently

publish the final results of these administrative reviews, including

the results of its analysis of issues raised in any such written

comments or hearings.

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

Briefs/comments

Case due Rebuttals due

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

General Issues...................... Mar. 16, 1994... Mar. 23, 1994

Italy............................... Mar. 16, 1994... Mar. 23, 1994

Thailand............................ Mar. 17, 1994... Mar. 24, 1994

Singapore........................... Mar. 17, 1994... Mar. 24, 1994

Germany............................. Mar. 17, 1994... Mar. 24, 1994

Japan............................... Mar. 18, 1994... Mar. 25, 1994

U.K................................. Mar. 18, 1994... Mar. 25, 1994

France.............................. Mar. 21, 1994... Mar. 28, 1994

Sweden.............................. Mar. 21, 1994... Mar. 28, 1994

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

The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall

assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Because sampling

prevents calculation of duties on an entry-by-entry basis, we will

calculate an importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rate for each

class or kind of merchandise based on the ratio of the total value of

antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales made during the

POR to the total customs value of the sales used to calculate those

duties. This rate will be assessed uniformly on all entries of that

particular importer made during the POR. (This is equivalent to

dividing the total value of antidumping duties, which are calculated by

taking the difference between statutory FMV and statutory USP, by the

total statutory USP value of the sales compared, and adjusting the

result by the average difference between USP and customs value for all

merchandise examined during the POR.)

Where we do not have entered customs value to calculate an ad

valorem rate, we will calculate an average per-unit dollar amount of

antidumping duty based on all sales examined during the POR. We will

instruct the Customs Service to assess this average amount on all units

included in each entry made by the particular importer during the POR.

The Department will issue appropriate appraisement instructions

directly to the Customs Service upon completion of these reviews.

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 these administrative reviews, as provided by section

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

reviewed companies will be those rates established in the final results

of these reviews; (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 the ``all others''

rate made effective by the final results of the most recent

administrative reviews of the orders (see Final Results of Antidumping

Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation in Part of an Antidumping

Duty Order, 58 FR 39729, July 26, 1993). As noted in those previous

final results, these rates are the ``all others'' rates from the

relevant LTFV investigations. These deposit requirements, when imposed,

shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the

next administrative reviews.

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.

These administrative reviews and notice are in accordance with

section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1) and 19 C.F.R.

353.22(c)(5)).

Dated: February 18, 1994.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 94-4505 Filed 2-25-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P