Sparklers From the People's Republic of China; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[A-570-804]

Sparklers From the People's Republic of China; 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 the petitioners, the Elkton

Sparkler Company and the Diamond Sparkler Company, the Department of

Commerce (the Department) has conducted an administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on sparklers from the People's Republic of China

(PRC). The review was requested for one manufacturer, Guangxi Native

Produce Import and Export Corporation, Beihai Fireworks and

Firecrackers Branch (Guangxi). The review covers the period June 1,

1993 through May 31, 1994.

As a result of this review, we have preliminarily determined to

assess an antidumping duty of 93.54 percent on the merchandise subject

to the review. Interested parties are invited to comment on these

preliminary results of the review.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 4, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Blaskovich or Zev Primor,

Office of Antidumping Compliance, Import Administration, International

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

Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-

5831/4114.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On June 18, 1991, the Department published in the Federal Register

the antidumping duty order on sparklers from the PRC (56 FR 27946). On

June 7, 1994, the Department published a notice in the Federal Register

notifying interested parties of the opportunity to request an

administrative review of sparklers from the PRC (58 FR 31941). On June

23, 1994, the petitioners requested, in accordance with 19 CFR

353.22(a), that we conduct an administrative review of exports to the

United States by Guangxi, for the period June 1, 1993 through May 31,

1994. We published a notice of initiation of the antidumping duty

administrative review on July 15, 1994 (58 FR 39007).

The initiation notice indicated that the review would cover Guangxi

and would cover conditionally all other exporters of this merchandise.

The Department is now conducting a review in accordance with section

751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

Scope of the Review

The products covered by this administrative review are sparklers

from the PRC. Sparklers are fireworks, each comprising a cut-to-length

wire, one end of which is coated with a chemical mix that emits bright

sparks while burning. Sparklers are currently classifiable

[[Page 39932]]

under the Harmonized Tariff System (HTS) subheading 3604.10.00. The HTS

subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The

written description remains dispositive as to the scope of this

proceeding.

Best Information Available

On July 20, 1994, we mailed Guangxi a questionnaire explaining the

review procedures. In addition, a short questionnaire was sent to

Guangxi, the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region People's Government, the

Embassy of the People's Republic of China, the Guangxi Foreign Economic

Relations and Trade Commission and the Guangxi People's Government-

Beijing Office. This questionnaire sought to ascertain whether Guangxi

shall be entitled to a separate rate by demonstrating both de jure and

de facto absence of central government control with respect to exports.

In addition, the questionnaire states:

[b]ecause we consider the PRC to be a non-market economy for the

purposes of this review, we will presume that each company that

exported the subject merchandise during the period of review (POR)

is owned or controlled by the PRC government until evidence is

placed on the record that demonstrates otherwise. Absent evidence to

the contrary, we will consider a single antidumping duty rate to be

appropriate for all exporters. However, if a company can demonstrate

an absence of central government control with respect to pricing

exports, both in law and in fact, it will be entitled to a rate

separate from the rate for other PRC firms.

The questionnaires, which covered exports to the United States for

the period of review (POR), were due on August 23, 1994. We did not

receive a response from any party by the due date.

Furthermore, we had previously asked Skypak International Express

(TNT) to trace the mailing and verify Guangxi's receipt of the

document. On August 3, 1994, TNT's delivery office in Hong Kong

confirmed that the questionnaire was accepted by a representative of

Guangxi on August 2, 1994. Because we received no response and have not

been contacted by Guangxi or any other respondent, we preliminarily

determine that Guangxi is no longer entitled to a separate rate, as

absence of central government control with regard to exports was not

demonstrated. Therefore, in accordance with section 776(c) of the Act,

we are using the best information available (BIA) as the basis for

determining a dumping margin for all entries into the United States of

the subject merchandise during the POR.

In determining what to use as BIA, the Department follows a two-

tiered methodology whereby the Department normally assigns lower

margins to those respondents who cooperate in a review, and margins

based on more adverse assumptions for those respondents who do not

cooperate in a review.

In accordance with our BIA methodology for uncooperative

respondents, we assign as BIA the higher of: (1) the highest of the

rates found for any firm for the same class or kind of merchandise in

the same country of origin in the less than fair value (LTFV)

investigation or prior administrative reviews; or (2) the highest rate

found in this review for any firm for the same class or kind of

merchandise in the same country of origin (see Final Results of

Antidumping Administrative Review: Antifriction Bearings (Other Than

Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France; et. al. (57 FR

28379, June 24, 1992)).

This methodology has been upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for

the Federal Circuit (see Allied-Signal Aerospace Co. v. the United

States, 996 F.2nd 1185 (CAFC 1993); see also Krupp Stahl Ag. et. al. v.

the United States, 822 F. Supp. 789 (CIT 1993)). Given that Guangxi did

not respond to the Department's questionnaires, we find that Guangxi

has not cooperated in this review.

In accordance with our methodology we have used as BIA the highest

rate established in the remand of the LTFV final determination (58 FR

53708, July 29, 1993), the PRC country-wide rate of 93.54 percent.

Preliminary Results of the Review

As a result of our review, we preliminarily determine the dumping

margin to be the following:

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

Margin

Manufacturer/exporter Time period (percent)

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

PRC country-wide rate..................... 6/1/93-5/31/94 93.54

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

Interested parties to this proceeding may request disclosure within

5 days of publication of this notice and may request a hearing within

10 days of publication. Interested parties may submit case briefs and/

or written comments not later than 30 days after the date of

publication. Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals to written comments, limited

to issues raised in such briefs or comments, may be filed not later

than 37 days after the date of publication. Any hearing, if requested,

will be held 44 days after the date of publication, or the first

workday thereafter. The Department will publish a notice of the final

results of this administrative review, which will include the results

of its analysis of issues raised in any briefs or comments.

Upon completion of this review, the Department shall determine, and

the U.S. Customs Service shall assess, antidumping duties on all

appropriate entries. The Department will issue appraisement

instructions directly to the U.S. Customs Service.

Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective

upon publication of notice of final results of administrative review

for all shipments of sparklers from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from

warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as

provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for

Guangxi will be the PRC country-wide rate as stated above; (2) for

previously reviewed or investigated companies that received separate

rates not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the

company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) for all

other PRC exporters, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC country-wide

rate of 93.54 percent, the rate established on remand of the LTFV final

determination; and (4) the cash deposit rate for any non-PRC exporter

will be the rate established for that firm; if a non-PRC exporter does

not have its own separate rate, the deposit rate for that firm's

shipments will be the rate applicable to the PRC supplier of that

exporter. In all cases, the rate applicable to a firm normally should

change only as a result of a review of that firm, except in instances

of change of ownership.

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.

[[Page 39933]]

Dated July 28, 1995.

Susan G. Esserman,

Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 95-19260 Filed 8-3-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P