Brass Sheet and Strip from Germany; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-428-602]

Brass Sheet and Strip from Germany; Final Results of Antidumping

Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of antidumping duty administrative

review.

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

SUMMARY: On April 7, 1998, the Department of Commerce (the Department)

published the preliminary results of its administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on brass sheet and strip (BSS) from Germany (63

FR 16963). The review covers exports of this merchandise to the United

States by one manufacturer/exporter, Wieland-Werke AG (Wieland), during

the period March 1, 1996 through February 28, 1997.

We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on our

preliminary results of review. We received no comments on the

preliminary results. On May 11, 1998, Wieland withdrew from

participation in this review. On May 21, 1998, petitioners submitted a

letter commenting on Wieland's withdrawal from participation in the

review. Because of Wieland's withdrawal from participation, we have

based the margin in this determination on adverse facts available, in

accordance with section 776(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended

(the Act). As adverse facts available, we have applied the highest

margin from any prior review of this order.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 11, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Killiam or John Kugelman,

Office of AD/CVD Enforcement, Group III, Import Administration,

International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th

Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230;

telephone: (202) 482-2704 or 482-0649, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Act are references

to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the

amendments to the Act by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. In addition,

unless otherwise indicated, all references to the Department's

regulations refer to the regulations as codified at 19 CFR part 353

(April 1, 1997).

Background

On April 7, 1997, the Department (the Department) published in the

Federal Register the preliminary results of its administrative review

of the antidumping duty order on BSS from Germany (63 FR 16963). The

antidumping duty order on BSS from Germany was published March 6, 1987

(52 FR 6997). The petitioners are Hussey Copper, Ltd., The Miller

Company, Outokumpu American Brass, Revere Copper Products, Inc.,

International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers,

International Union, Allied Industrial Workers of America (AFL-CIO),

Mechanics Educational Society of America (Local 56), and the United

Steelworkers of America (AFL-CIO/CLC).

Scope of the Review

Imports covered by this review are shipments of BSS, other than

leaded and tinned BSS, from Germany. The chemical composition of the

covered products is currently defined in the Copper Development

Association (C.D.A.) 200 Series or the Unified Numbering System

(U.N.S.) C2000. This review does not cover products the chemical

compositions of which are defined by other C.D.A. or U.N.S. series. In

physical dimensions, the products covered by this review have a solid

rectangular cross section over 0.006 inches (0.15 millimeters) through

0.188 inches (4.8 millimeters) in finished thickness or gauge,

regardless of width. Coiled, wound-on-reels (traverse wound), and cut-

to-length products are included. The merchandise is currently

classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item numbers

7409.21.00 and 7409.29.00. Although the HTS item numbers are provided

for convenience and Customs purposes, the written description of the

scope of this order remains dispositive.

The period of review is March 1, 1996 through February 28, 1997.

The review involves one manufacturer/exporter, Wieland.

Facts Available

Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that if an interested party

withholds information that has been requested by the Department, fails

to provide such information in a timely manner or in the form

requested, significantly impedes a proceeding under the antidumping

statute, or provides information that cannot be verified, the

Department shall use facts available in reaching the applicable

determination.

In selecting from among the facts otherwise available, section

776(b) of the Act authorizes the Department to use an adverse inference

if the Department finds that a party has failed to cooperate by not

acting to the best of its ability to comply with requests for

information. See the Statement of Administrative Action at 870 (SAA).

To determine whether the respondent ``cooperated'' by ``acting to the

best of its ability'' under section 776(b), the Department considers,

among other facts, the accuracy and completeness of submitted

information and whether the respondent has hindered the calculation of

accurate dumping margins. See, e.g., Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipes

and Tubes From Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review, 62 FR 53808, 53819-53820 (October 16, 1997).

In this case, Wieland submitted its questionnaire responses by the

established deadlines and agreed to verification of its responses.

Then, on May 11, 1998, Wieland informed the Department that it was

withdrawing from participation in the review. As a result the

Department was not able to collect necessary missing information and

was unable to verify Wieland's responses. Because the Department was

unable to verify the submitted information, as required by section

782(i) of the Act, the Department had no authority to rely upon that

unverified information in making its determination; thus, section

776(a) of the Act mandates that the Department use facts available in

making its determination.

Further, by withdrawing its participation, Wieland effectively

impeded the instant review. Under section 776(a)(2)(C) and (D) of the

Act, the Department has therefore used facts available. As noted above,

in selecting facts otherwise available, pursuant to section 776(b) the

Act, the Department may use an adverse inference if the Department

finds that an interested party failed to cooperate by not acting to the

best of its ability to comply with requests for information. When a

respondent does not allow the

[[Page 42824]]

Department to verify submitted information, it is deemed uncooperative,

which constitutes grounds for applying adverse facts available. See

Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Steel

Wire Rod From Venezuela, 63 FR 8946, 8947 (February 23, 1998); Notice

of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Vector

Supercomputers From Japan, 62 FR 45623, 45624 (August 28, 1997); and

Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:

Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From Romania, 61 FR 24274, 24275

(May 14, 1996).

Consistent with Department practice in cases where a respondent

fails to cooperate to the best of its ability, and in keeping with

section 776(b)(3) of the Act, as adverse facts available we have

applied a margin based on the highest margin found either in prior

reviews or in the fair value investigation. See for example Viscose

Rayon Staple Fiber From Finland: Final Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review, 63 FR 32820, 32822, June 16, 1998). In this case

the highest margin from either prior reviews or the fair value

investigation is 16.18%.

Section 776(c) of the Act requires the Department to corroborate,

to the extent practicable, secondary information used as facts

available. Secondary information is described in the SAA (at 870) as

``[i]nformation derived from the petition that gave rise to the

investigation or review, the final determination concerning the subject

merchandise, or any previous review under section 751 concerning the

subject merchandise.''

The SAA further provides that ``corroborate'' means simply that the

Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information to be

used has probative value (see SAA at 870). Thus, to corroborate

secondary information, to the extent practicable, the Department will

examine the reliability and relevance of the information used. However,

unlike other types of information, such as input costs or selling

expenses, there are no independent sources for calculated dumping

margins. The only source for margins is an administrative

determination. Thus, in an administrative review, if the Department

chooses as total adverse facts available a calculated dumping margin

from a prior segment of the proceeding, it is not necessary to question

the reliability of the margin from that time period (i.e., the

Department can normally be satisfied that the information has probative

value and that it has complied with the corroboration requirements of

section 776(c) of the Act). See, e.g., Elemental Sulphur From Canada:

Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 62 FR

971 (January 7, 1997) and Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered

Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, et al.; Final Results

of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 62 FR 2081, 2088 (January

15, 1997) .

Final Results of Review

We have determined that the following margin exists for Wieland:

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

Percent

Manufacturer/exporter Period margin

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

Wieland-Werke AG........................... 3/1/96-2/28/97 16.18

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

The Department shall determine, and the U.S. Customs Service shall

assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department

shall issue appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service.

Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective

for all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from

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

final results, as provided for by section 751(a)(1) of the Act.

(1) The cash deposit rate for Wieland will be the rate stated

above;

(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 7.30 percent, the ``all others'' rate established

in the LTFV investigation.

This notice also serves as a final 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 the 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 notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to

administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility

concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under

APO in accordance with 19 CFR 353.34(d). Timely written notification of

the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial

protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the

regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to

sanction. This administrative review and this 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: July 31, 1998.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 98-21380 Filed 8-10-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P