67 FR 68990, November 14, 2002

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-601]
 
Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and 
Unfinished, from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 2000-
2001 Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of Review, and 
Determination to Revoke Order, in Part

AGENCY:  Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION:  Notice of final results of 2000-2001 administrative review, 
partial rescission of the review, and determination to revoke the order 
in part.

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

SUMMARY:  We have determined that sales of tapered roller bearings and 
parts thereof, finished and unfinished, from the People's Republic of 
China, were made below normal value during the period June 1, 2000, 
through May 31, 2001. We are also rescinding the review, in part, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).
    Based on our review of comments received and a reexamination of 
surrogate value data, we have made certain changes in the margin 
calculations of all of the reviewed companies. Consequently, the final 
results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average 
dumping margins for these firms are listed below in the section 
entitled ``Final Results of the Review.'' Based on these final results 
of review, we will instruct the Customs Service to assess antidumping 
duties based on the difference between the export price and normal 
value on all appropriate entries.
    Tianshui Hailin Import and Export Corporation and Hailin Bearing 
Factory, Wanxiang Group Corporation, and Zhejiang Machinery Import & 
Export Corp. have requested revocation of the antidumping duty order in 
part. Based on record evidence, we find that only Tianshui Hailin 
Import and Export Corporation and Hailin Bearing Factory qualifies for 
revocation. Accordingly, we are revoking the order with respect to the 
subject merchandise produced and exported by Tianshui Hailin Import and 
Export Corporation and Hailin Bearing Factory.

EFFECTIVE DATE:  November 14, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Melani Miller, S. Anthony Grasso, 
Andrew Smith, or Daniel J. Alexy, Group 1, Office I, Antidumping/
Countervailing Duty Enforcement, Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-0116, 
(202) 482-0189, (202) 482-3853, (202) 482-1174, and (202) 482-1540, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Applicable Statute

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (``the Act''), are references to the provisions 
effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to 
the Act by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. In addition, unless 
otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department of Commerce's 
(``the Department'') regulations are to 19 CFR Part 351 (April 2001).

Background

    On July 9, 2002, the Department published the preliminary results 
of this review of tapered roller bearings and parts thereof, finished 
and unfinished (``TRBs'') from the People's Republic of China 
(``PRC''). See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and 
Unfinished, From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of 
2000-2001 Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of Review, and 
Notice of Intent to Revoke Order in Part, 67 FR 45451 (July 9, 2002) 
(``Preliminary Results''). The period of review (``POR'') is June 1, 
2000, through May 31, 2001. This review covers the following producers 
or exporters (referred to collectively as ``the respondents''): 
Zhejiang Machinery Import &Export Corp. (``ZMC''), Wanxiang Group 
Corporation (``Wanxiang''), China National Machinery Import & Export 
Corporation (``CMC''), Tianshui Hailin Import and Export Corporation 
and Hailin Bearing Factory (``Hailin''), Luoyang Bearing Corporation 
(Group) (``Luoyang''), and Weihai Machinery Holding (Group) Co., Ltd. 
(``Weihai''), Chin Jun Industrial Ltd. (``Chin Jun'').
    We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On 
September 9, 2002, we received case briefs from the Timken Company 
(``the petitioner''), ZMC, and a combined case brief from CMC, Luoyang, 
Wanxiang, and Hailin. On September 17, 2002, each of these parties 
submitted rebuttal briefs.
    The Department has conducted this administrative review in 
accordance with section 751 of the Act.

Scope of Review

    Merchandise covered by this review is TRBs from the PRC; flange, 
take up cartridge, and hanger units incorporating tapered roller 
bearings; and tapered roller housings (except pillow blocks) 
incorporating tapered rollers, with or without spindles, whether or not 
for automotive use. This merchandise is currently classifiable under 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') item 
numbers 8482.20.00, 8482.91.00.50, 8482.99.30, 8483.20.40, 8483.20.80, 
8483.30.80, 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30, 8483.90.80, 8708.99.80.15, and 
8708.99.80.80. Although the HTSUS item numbers are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope 
of the order and this review is dispositive.

Rescission of Review in Part

    As noted in the Preliminary Results, on April 4, 2002, Weihai 
withdrew its request for a review. The petitioner did not request a 
review for Weihai. While Weihai's rescission request was made more than 
90 days after initiation, 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1) provides that the 
Department may extend this deadline, and it is the Department's 
practice to do so where it poses no undue burden on the parties or on 
the Department. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we 
have accepted Weihai's request and we are rescinding the review with 
respect to Weihai. For a complete discussion of this decision see the 
Memorandum from Team to Susan Kuhbach, ``Partial Rescission of 
Review,'' dated May 20, 2002, which is on file in the Department's 
Central Records Unit located in the main Commerce building in Room B-
099 (``CRU'').
    With respect to Chin Jun, as stated in the Preliminary Results, 
Chin Jun reported no shipments of subject merchandise to the United 
States during the POR. Entry data provided by the Customs Service 
confirms that there were no POR entries from Chin Jun of TRBs. 
Therefore, consistent with the Department's regulations and practice,

[[Page 68991]]

we are rescinding this review with respect to Chin Jun. (See 19 CFR 
351.213(d)(3); see, also, Silicon Metal from Brazil; Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 61 FR 46763 (September 5, 
1996).)

Determination To Revoke the Order, In Part

    The Department ``may revoke, in whole or in part'' an antidumping 
duty order upon completion of a review under section 751 of the Act. 
While Congress has not specified the procedures that the Department 
must follow in revoking an order, the Department has developed a 
procedure for revocation that is described in 19 CFR 351.222. This 
regulation requires, inter alia, that a company requesting revocation 
must submit the following: (1) A certification that the company has 
sold the subject merchandise at not less than NV in the current review 
period and that the company will not sell at less than NV in the 
future; (2) a certification that the company sold the subject 
merchandise in each of the three years forming the basis of the request 
in commercial quantities; and (3) an agreement to reinstatement of the 
order if the Department concludes that the company, subsequent to the 
revocation, sold subject merchandise at less than NV. See 19 CFR 
351.222(e)(1).
    As noted in the Preliminary Results, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.222(e)(1), Hailin, Wanxiang, and ZMC requested revocation of the 
antidumping duty order as it pertains to them. Weihai also requested 
revocation of the antidumping duty order, in part, on this same basis. 
However, as we are rescinding this review with respect to Weihai, as 
discussed above, no further analysis is required with respect to 
partial revocation of the antidumping duty order as it pertains to 
Weihai.
    According to 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2), upon receipt of such a request, 
the Department may revoke an order, in part, if it concludes that (1) 
the company in question has sold subject merchandise at not less than 
NV for a period of at least three consecutive years; (2) the continued 
application of the antidumping duty order is not otherwise necessary to 
offset dumping; and (3) the company has agreed to its immediate 
reinstatement in the order if the Department concludes that the 
company, subsequent to the revocation, sold subject merchandise at less 
than NV.
    With respect to ZMC, we find that a dumping margin exists for ZMC 
in the instant review. Moreover, in Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts 
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From the People's Republic of China; 
Final Results of 1998-1999 Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of 
Review, and Determination Not to Revoke Order in Part, 66 FR 1953 
(January 10, 2001) and Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, 
Finished and Unfinished, From the People's Republic of China; Amended 
Final Results of 1998-1999 Administrative Review and Determination to 
Revoke Order in Part, 66 FR 11562 (February 26, 2001) (collectively, 
``TRBs XII''), ZMC was found to have made sales below NV. Because ZMC 
does not have three consecutive years of sales at not less than NV, we 
find that ZMC does not qualify for revocation of the order on TRBs 
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b).
    As for Wanxiang, in TRBs XII and Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts 
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From the People's Republic of China; 
Final Results of 1999-2000 Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of 
Review, and Determination Not to Revoke Order in Part, 66 FR 57420 
(November 15, 2001), we determined that Wanxiang did not qualify for 
revocation because it did not sell the subject merchandise in the 
United States in commercial quantities in each of the three years 
underlying its request for revocation. In the instant review, based on 
our previous determination that Wanxiang did not make sales in 
commercial quantities during at least one of the three years forming 
the basis of the revocation request, i.e., TRBs XII, we do not need to 
examine whether Wanxiang made sales in commercial quantities in either 
of the other two years underlying Wanxiang's request for revocation. 
Thus, because Wanxiang did not make sales in commercial quantities in 
each of the three years cited by the company to support its revocation 
request, we find that Wanxiang does not qualify for revocation of the 
order on TRBs pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b).
    Finally, with respect to Hailin, Hailin sold the subject 
merchandise at not less than NV for a period of at least three 
consecutive years. Hailin has also agreed in writing to the immediate 
reinstatement in the order, as long as any exporter or producer is 
subject to the order, if the Department concludes that Hailin, 
subsequent to the revocation, sold the subject merchandise at less than 
NV. Finally, based on our examination of the sales data submitted by 
Hailin (see Hailin's July 1, 2002, preliminary results calculation 
memorandum, which is on file in the Department's CRU, for our 
commercial quantities analysis with respect to this data), we determine 
that Hailin sold the subject merchandise in the United States in 
commercial quantities in each of the three years cited by Hailin to 
support its request for revocation. Therefore, based on the above 
facts, and absent evidence on the record that the continued application 
of the antidumping order is otherwise necessary to offset dumping from 
Hailin, we determine that Hailin qualifies for revocation of the order 
on TRBs pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2). Accordingly, we are revoking 
the order with respect to merchandise produced and exported by Hailin.

Use of Facts Otherwise Available

    As discussed in detail in the Preliminary Results, we have 
determined that companieswhich did not respond to the Department's 
questionnaire in this proceeding should not receive separate rates and, 
thus, are viewed as part of the PRC-wide entity. Moreover, as noted in 
the Preliminary Results, we determine that, in accordance with sections 
776(a) and (b) of the Act, the use of adverse facts available is 
appropriate for companies that did not respond to our requests for 
information. No party in this proceeding has commented on these issues 
since the publication of the Preliminary Results. Thus, for these final 
results, we have continued to assign the PRC-wide rate of 33.18 percent 
to companies that are part of the PRC-entity.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this investigation are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum'' from Richard W. Moreland, Deputy Assistant Secretary, 
Import Administration, to Faryar Shirzad, Assistant Secretary, Import 
Administration, dated November 6, 2002 (``Decision Memorandum''), which 
is hereby adopted by this notice. Attached to this notice as an 
Appendix is a list of the issues that parties have raised and to which 
we have responded in the Decision Memorandum. Parties can find a 
complete discussion of all issues raised in this investigation and the 
corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on 
file in the CRU. In addition, a complete version of the Decision 
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/ under the heading ``China PRC.'' The paper copy and 
electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our review of comments received and a reexamination of

[[Page 68992]]

surrogate value data, we have made certain changes to the calculations 
for the final results. These changes are discussed in the following 
Comments in the Decision Memorandum or in the referenced final 
calculation memoranda for particular companies:

All Companies

    [sbull] Cup and Cone Steel Valuation
    Decision Memorandum Comment 2
    [sbull] Roller and Cage Steel and Scrap Valuations
     Decision Memorandum Comment 4
    [sbull] Profit Ratio
    Decision Memorandum Comment 5

Assessment Rates

    In the Preliminary Results, we miscalculated the per-unit 
assessment rates of Luoyang, Hailin, and ZMC by incorrectly multiplying 
the importer-specific per-unit duty by 100. This error has been 
corrected in these final results. Also, for all respondents, we have 
added programming language to determine whether the importer-specific 
duty assessment rates were de mimimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent).

Wanxiang

    We excluded domestic brokerage and handling costs from Wanxiang's 
reported SG&A labor factor and deducted these expenses as a movement 
expense in Wanxiang's U.S. price calculation. See Comment 12 in the 
Decision Memorandum.

ZMC

    We revised ZMC's final results calculations to take into account a 
minor reporting error noted by ZMC in its case briefs. See Memorandum 
from Case Analyst to File, ``Final Results Calculation Memorandum for 
Zhejiang Machinery Import and Export Corporation,'' dated November 6, 
2002, which is on file in the Department's CRU.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following dumping margins exist for the 
period June 1, 2000, through May 31, 2001:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Weighted-average margin
           Exporter/manufacturer                     percentage.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
China National Machinery Import & Export                            0.71
 Corporation..............................
Wanxiang Group Corporation................                          0.00
Tianshui Hailin Import and Export                                   0.00
 Corporation and Hailin Bearing Factory...
Luoyang Bearing Corporation (Group).......             0.06 (de minimis)
Zhejiang Machinery Import & Export Corp...                          0.81
PRC-wide rate.............................                         33.18
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated 
importer (or customer)-specific assessment rates for the merchandise 
subject to this review. To determine whether the duty assessment rates 
were de minimis, in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 
351.106(c)(2), we calculated importer (or customer)-specific ad valorem 
rates by aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales 
to that importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the total 
value of the sales to that importer (or customer). Where an importer 
(or customer)-specific ad valorem rate was greater than de minimis, we 
calculated a per unit assessment rate by aggregating the dumping 
margins calculated for all U.S. sales to that importer (or customer) 
and dividing this amount by the total quantity sold to that importer 
(or customer). All entries subject to the PRC-wide rate will be 
assessed duties at the PRC-wide rate listed above.
    All other entries of the subject merchandise during the POR will be 
liquidated at the antidumping duty rate in place at the time of entry.
    The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions 
directly to the Customs Service within 15 days of publication of these 
final results of review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the finalresults of this administrative review for all 
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as 
provided for by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) for the PRC companies 
named above, the cash deposit rates will be the rates for these firms 
shown above, except that, for exporters with de minimis rates (i.e., 
less than 0.5 percent) no deposit will be required; (2) for previously-
reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters with separate rates, the cash 
deposit rate will be the company-specific rate established for the most 
recent period for which they were reviewed; (3) for all other PRC 
exporters, the rate will be the PRC country-wide rate, which is 33.18 
percent; and (4) for all other non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise 
from the PRC, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the 
PRC supplier of that exporter. These deposit requirements, when 
imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results 
of the next administrative review.

Notification to Importers

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 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.

Notification Regarding APOs

    This notice also serves as a 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, which continues 
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the 
proceeding. 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 section 751(a)(1) and 771(i) of the Act.

[[Page 68993]]


    Dated: November 6, 2002.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

APPENDIX

List of Comments and Issues in the Decision Memorandum
Comment 1: Steel Data Used for Valuing Cups and Cones is Aberrational
Comment 2: Excluding Certain Data from the Cups and Cones Valuation
Comment 3: Steel Data Used for Valuing Rollers and Cages is 
Aberrational
Comment 4: Excluding Certain Data Used in Steel and Scrap Surrogate 
Values
Comment 5: Overhead, Selling, General, and Administrative Expense 
(``SG&A''), and Profit Ratios
Comment 6: Marine Insurance
Comment 7: Energy Factors
Comment 8: Seals Allegedly Used in the Manufacture of TRBs
Comment 9: Treatment of Sales Above Normal Value (``NV'')
Comment 10: Revocations
Comment 11: Wanxiang Group Corporation (``Wanxiang'') Constructed 
Export Price (``CEP'') vs. Export Price (``EP'') Sales
Comment 12: Wanxiang Domestic Brokerage and Handling
Comment 13: Wanxiang Credit Expenses
Comment 14: Zhejiang Machinery Import & Export Corp.'s (``ZMC'') Market 
Economy Steel
Comment 15: ZMC Ocean Freight
Comment 16: Valuation of ZMC's Ocean Freight Costs on a Packed Weight 
Basis
Comment 17: ZMC Labor Hours
Comment 18: China National Machinery Import & Export Corporation 
(``CMC'') Cage Steel
Comment 19: Valuation of CMC's U.S. Inland Freight Costs on a Packed 
Weight Basis
[FR Doc. 02-28924 Filed 11-13-02; 8:45 am]