[Federal Register: May 14, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 93)]
[Notices]
[Page 25861-25863]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14my03-31]
[[Page 25861]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-846]
Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final Results
and Partial Rescission of the Fifth Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and Final Results of the Seventh New Shipper Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of final results and partial rescission of the fifth
antidumping duty administrative review and final results of the seventh
new shipper review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On January 8, 2003, the Department of Commerce published the
preliminary results and preliminary partial rescission of the fifth
antidumping duty administrative review and preliminary results of the
seventh new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on brake
rotors from the People's Republic of China. See Brake Rotors from the
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results and Preliminary Partial
Rescission of the Fifth Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and
Preliminary Results of the Seventh New Shipper Review, 68 FR 1031
(January 8, 2003) (``Preliminary Results''). These reviews examined 18
exporters \1\ (``the respondents''), five of which are exporters
included in three exporter/producer combinations and two of which are
new shippers. The period of review is April 1, 2001, through March 31,
2002 (``POR''). We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on
our preliminary results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The names of the respondents in the fifth administrative
review are as follows: (1) China National Industrial Machinery
Import & Export Corporation (``CNIM''); (2) Laizhou Automobile Brake
Equipment Company, Ltd. (``LABEC''); (3) Longkou Haimeng Machinery
Co., Ltd. (``Haimeng''); (4) Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts
Co., Ltd. (``Hongda''); (5) Hongfa Machinery (Dalian) Co., Ltd.
(``Hongfa''); (6) Qingdao Gren (Group) Co. (``GREN''); (7) Qingdao
Meita Automotive Industry Company, Ltd. (``Meita''); (8) Shandong
Huanri (Group) General Company (``Huanri General''); (9) Yantai
Winhere Auto-Part Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (``Winhere''); and (10)
Zibo Luzhou Automobile Parts Co., Ltd. (``ZLAP''); (11) Beijing
Concord Auto Technology Inc. (``Beijing Concord''); (12) China
National Machinery and Equipment Import & Export (Xinjiang)
Corporation (``Xinjiang''); (13) China National Automotive Industry
Import & Export Corporation (``CAIEC''); (14) Laizhou CAPCO
Machinery Co., Ltd. (``Laizhou CAPCO''); (15) Laizhou Luyuan
Automobile Fittings Co. (``Laizhou Luyuan''); and (16) Shenyang
Honbase Machinery Co., Ltd. (``Shenyang''). (The exporter/producer
combinations excluded from the antidumping duty order are: Xinjiang/
Zibo Botai Manufacturing Co. Ltd (``Zibo''); CAIEC or Laizhou CAPCO/
Laizhou CAPCO; and Laizhou Luyuan or Shenyang/Laizhou Luyuan or
Shenyang). The names of the respondents in the seventh new shipper
review are as follows: (17) Shanxi Fengkun Metallurgical Ltd. Co.
(``Shanxi Fengkun''); and (18) Zibo Golden Harvest Machinery Limited
Company (``Golden Harvest'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the additional publicly available information used in
these final results and the comments received from the interested
parties, we have made changes in the margin calculations for the
respondents in these reviews. The final weighted-average dumping
margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled
``Final Results of Reviews.''
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 14, 2003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terre Keaton or Brian Smith, Import
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1280, or (202)
482-1766, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On January 8, 2003, the Department published in the Federal
Register the Preliminary Results (see 68 FR 1031).
On January 28, 2003, we placed on the record information obtained
from the U.S. Customs Service (now the U.S. Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection (``BCBP'')) then known as the, for the six
outstanding entries noted in the December 31, 2002, memorandum titled,
``Results of Request for Assistance from the U.S. Customs Service to
Further Examine U.S. Entries Made by the Exporter/Producer
Combinations-Preliminary Results'' (see--``Partial Rescission of
Administrative Review'' section below for further discussion). Also on
January 28, 2003, and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(ii), the
respondents submitted additional publicly available information for
consideration in the final results.
On February 5, 2003, the Department published in the Federal
Register an amended preliminary results of the seventh new shipper
review of the antidumping duty order on brake rotors from the People's
Republic of China (``PRC'') to reflect its intention to assign
exporter/producer combination cash deposit rates to the new shipper
companies in the final results. See Brake Rotors from the People's
Republic of China: Amended Preliminary Results of the Seventh New
Shipper Review, 68 FR 5867. On February 21, 2003, the petitioner \2\
and the respondents submitted case briefs, and on February 28, 2003,
they submitted rebuttal briefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The petitioner is the Coalition for the Preservation of
American Brake Drum and Rotor Aftermarket Manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 4, and 25, 2003, we placed on the record additional
publicly available information on electricity, pallet wood and
brokerage and handling for consideration in the final results. On March
7, 2003, the petitioner submitted comments on the publicly available
information we had placed on the record on February 25, 2003.
Scope of Order
The products covered by this order are brake rotors made of gray
cast iron, whether finished, semifinished, or unfinished, ranging in
diameter from 8 to 16 inches (20.32 to 40.64 centimeters) and in weight
from 8 to 45 pounds (3.63 to 20.41 kilograms). The size parameters
(weight and dimension) of the brake rotors limit their use to the
following types of motor vehicles: automobiles, all-terrain vehicles,
vans and recreational vehicles under ``one ton and a half,'' and light
trucks designated as ``one ton and a half.''
Finished brake rotors are those that are ready for sale and
installation without any further operations. Semi-finished rotors are
those on which the surface is not entirely smooth, and have undergone
some drilling. Unfinished rotors are those which have undergone some
grinding or turning.
These brake rotors are for motor vehicles, and do not contain in
the casting a logo of an original equipment manufacturer (``OEM'')
which produces vehicles sold in the United States (e.g., General
Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, Volvo). Brake rotors covered in
this order are not certified by OEM producers of vehicles sold in the
United States. The scope also includes composite brake rotors that are
made of gray cast iron, which contain a steel plate, but otherwise meet
the above criteria. Excluded from the scope of this order are brake
rotors made of gray cast iron, whether finished, semifinished, or
unfinished, with a diameter less than 8 inches or greater than 16
inches (less than 20.32 centimeters or greater than 40.64 centimeters)
and a weight less than 8 pounds or greater than 45 pounds (less than
3.63 kilograms or greater than 20.41 kilograms).
Brake rotors are classifiable under subheading 8708.39.5010 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Although
the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes,
our written description of the scope of this order is dispositive.
[[Page 25862]]
Partial Rescission of Administrative Review
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we have determined that, during
the POR, the exporters which are part of the three exporter/producer
combinations which received zero rates in the less-than-fair-value
(``LTFV'') investigation did not make shipments of subject merchandise
to the United States during the POR. Specifically, we have determined
that during the POR, (1) neither CAIEC nor Laizhou CAPCO exported brake
rotors to the United States that were manufactured by producers other
than Laizhou CAPCO; (2) neither Shenyang Honbase nor Laizhou Luyuan
exported brake rotors to the United States that were manufactured by
producers other than Shenyang Honbase or Laizhou Luyuan; and (3)
Xinjiang did not export brake rotors to the United States that were
manufactured by producers other than Zibo.
In order to make this determination, we first examined POR subject
merchandise shipment data furnished by the Customs Service by
performing a data query. Because the data from our initial query was
voluminous, we randomly selected 31 entries from the data query results
for further examination by the Customs Service (see Memorandum dated
October 3, 2002, from Davina Hashmi, Senior Analyst, to the File,
titled, ``Request for Assistance: Shipments of Brake Rotors from the
People's Republic of China Which Were Manufactured and/or Exported by
Five PRC Companies during the Period April 1, 2001, Through March 31,
2002'').
Specifically, we requested the Customs Service to examine further
the documentation filed at the U.S. port for each of those selected
entries made by the exporters at issue to determine the manufacturer of
the merchandise. In response to our request for information, the
Customs Service was only able to provide us with information on 25
entries made by these respondents. After a review of the data we
received from the Customs Service in response to our data query, we
found no evidence that any of the exporter/producer combinations
subject to this administrative review made shipments of the subject
merchandise during the POR (see Memoranda dated December 31, 2002, from
Davina Hashmi, Senior Analyst, and January 28, 2003, from Terre Keaton,
Analyst, to the File, both titled, ``Results of Request for Assistance
from the U.S. Customs Service to Further Examine U.S. Entries Made By
Exporter/Producer Combinations''). Therefore, we are rescinding this
review with respect to CAIEC, Laizhou CAPCO, Shenyang Honbase, Laizhou
Luyuan, and Xinjiang. See Issues and Decision Memorandum (``Decision
Memo'') from Jeffrey May, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, to Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration at Comment 1 for further discussion.
Facts Available
In the Preliminary Results, 68 FR at 1033, the Department
determined that the use of facts available was warranted in accordance
with section 776(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'')
to calculate the dumping margin for Beijing Concord. Because Beijing
Concord failed to provide requested information and did not properly
notify the Department of its difficulty in meeting our requirements in
accordance with section 782(copyright)) of the Act, we determined that
Beijing Concord did not cooperate to the best of its ability. Since the
preliminary results nothing has changed to reverse our preliminary
decision regarding Beijing Concord. Therefore, for the final results of
this review we continue to find that Beijing Concord is not eligible to
receive a separate rate and thus it continues to be part of the PRC
non-market economy (``NME'') entity, subject to the PRC-wide rate.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case briefs are addressed in the Decision
Memo, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues
raised, all of which are in the Decision Memo, is attached to this
notice as an Appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of all
issues raised in the briefs and the corresponding recommendations in
this public memorandum which is on file in the Central Records Unit,
room B-099 of the main Department building. In addition, a complete
version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at
http://ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper copy and electronic version of the
Decision Memo are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on the use of additional publicly available information and
the comments received from the interested parties, we have made changes
in the margin calculation for each respondent. For a discussion of
these changes, see the ``Margin Calculations'' section of the Decision
Memo.
For the final results, we calculated average surrogate percentages
for factory overhead, selling, general and administrative expenses, and
profit using the 2000-2001 financial data of Kalyani Brakes Limited
(``Kalyani''), Mando Brake Systems India Limited (``Mando''), and Rico
Auto Industries Limited (``Rico''). See Decision Memo at Comment 3.
To value direct, indirect, and packing labor, we used the updated
value from the International Trade Administration Web site at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/index.html
.
To value electricity, we used the 2000-2001 ``revised estimate''
average rate for industrial consumption as published in the Annual
Report (2001-02) on the Working of State Electricity Boards &
Electricity Departments by the Government of India's Planning
Commission (Power & Energy Division).
To value pallet wood, we used the April 2000-March 2001 average
import values from Monthly Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India
(``Monthly Statistics'').
For those respondents which reported in their responses that they
used non-alloy pig iron to produce the subject merchandise, we used the
April 2001-December 2001 average import values for the appropriate non-
alloy pig iron HTS subcategory from Monthly Statistics to value this
input. See Decision Memo at Comment 2.
To value foreign brokerage and handling expenses, we relied on
public information reported in the 1998-1999 antidumping duty
administrative and new shipper reviews of stainless steel bar from
India.
We corrected a calculation error which affected the surrogate value
used for marine insurance.
We deducted an amount for foreign brokerage and handling expenses
from the U.S. starting prices reported by Golden Harvest which we
inadvertently did not do in the preliminary results.
We corrected a programming error which affected the direct labor
per-unit amounts for certain brake rotor models reported by Golden
Harvest.
We corrected a programming error which affected the marine
insurance calculation for U.S. sales with C.I.F. terms of sale reported
by LABEC. In addition, based on data contained in LABEC's response, we
subtracted an amount for marine insurance for certain sales which LABEC
had indicated it incurred this expense which we inadvertently did not
do in the preliminary results.
We corrected a programming error by adding an amount for loading
fees to Huanri General's coal freight cost instead of its carton
freight cost.
We corrected a calculation error which affected the entered values
derived for GREN.
[[Page 25863]]
Final Results of Reviews
We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentages
exist for the following companies during the period April 1, 2001,
through March 31, 2002:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Manufacturer/producer/exporter percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC NME entity (which includes Beijing Concord)............ 43.32
China National Industrial Machinery Import & Export * 0.08
Corporation...............................................
Hongfa Machinery (Dalian) Co., Ltd......................... 0.00
Laizhou Automobile Brake Equipment Company, Ltd............ * 0.22
Longkou Haimeng Machinery Co., Ltd......................... * 0.05
Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts Co., Ltd............. 0.00
Qingdao Gren (Group) Co.................................... * 0.06
Qingdao Meita Automotive Industry Company, Ltd............. * 0.09
Shanxi Fengkun Metallurgical Ltd. Co....................... 0.00
Shandong Huanri (Group) General Company.................... 0.00
Yantai Winhere Auto-Part Manufacturing Co., Ltd............ 0.00
Zibo Golden Harvest Machinery Limited Company.............. 0.00
Zibo Luzhou Automobile Parts Co., Ltd...................... * 0.14
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* De minimis.
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, and the BCBP shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), we calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty
assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of the dumping
margins calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of
those same sales. In order to estimate the entered value for those
sales where this information was unavailable, we subtracted applicable
movement expenses from the gross sales value. In accordance with 19 CFR
351.106(c)(2), we will instruct the BCBP to liquidate without regard to
antidumping duties all entries of subject merchandise during the POR
for which the importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis
(i.e., less than 0.50 percent). The Department will issue appropriate
assessment instructions directly to the BCBP within 15 days of
publication of these final results of review. For entries of the
subject merchandise during the POR from companies not subject to this
review, we will instruct the BCBP to liquidate them at the cash deposit
rate in effect at the time of entry.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Bonding will no longer be permitted to fulfill security
requirements for shipments from Golden Harvest or Shanxi Fengkun of
brake rotors from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of
the new shipper review.
The following deposit rates shall be required for merchandise
subject to the order entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication date of these final results, as
provided by section 751(a)(1) and (a)(2)(B) of the Act: (1) The cash
deposit rate for CNIM, GREN, Haimeng, Hongda, Hongfa, Huanri General,
LABEC, Meita, Winhere, ZLAP, Golden Harvest (i.e., for subject
merchandise manufactured and exported by Golden Harvest) and Shanxi
Fengkun (i.e., for subject merchandise manufactured and exported by
Shanxi Fengkun) will be the rate indicated above; (2) the cash deposit
rate for PRC exporters who received a separate rate in a prior segment
of the proceeding will continue to be the rate assigned in that segment
of the proceeding; (3) the cash deposit rate for the PRC NME entity
(including Beijing Concord) and for subject merchandise exported by
either Golden Harvest or Shanxi Fengkun but not manufactured by them
will continue to be the PRC-wide rate (i.e., 43.32 percent); and (4)
the cash deposit rate for non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise from
the PRC will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied
that exporter. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) 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 doubled antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 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.
We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1), 751(a)(2)(B), and 777(i) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.213 and 351.214.
Dated: May 8, 2003.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix--Issues in Decision Memo
Comments
1. Whether to Reverse the Preliminary Results With Respect to the
Exporter/Producer Combinations
2. Whether We Should Have Requested a Respondent to Submit Revised
Databases Based on Our Verification Findings
3. Whether to Use Data Contained in the Financial Statements
Submitted for Two Additional Indian Producers of Subject and/or
Comparable Merchandise
4. Surrogate Value Selection for Pig Iron
5. Whether the Respondents' Case Brief Complies With the
Department's Filing and Service Requirements
[FR Doc. 03-12031 Filed 5-13-03; 8:45 am]