[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 123 (Monday, June 26, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39349-39351]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16106]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-560-810]


Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Certain Expandable Polystyrene Resins From Indonesia

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 26, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Riggle at (202) 482-0650 or 
David Layton at (202) 482-0371, Import Administration, Room 1870, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.

The Applicable Statute and Regulations

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are 
references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective 
date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise 
indicated, all citations to the Department of Commerce regulations 
refer to the regulations codified at 19 CFR part 351 (April 1999).

Preliminary Determination

    We preliminarily determine that certain expandable polystyrene 
resins from Indonesia are being sold, or are likely to be sold, in the 
United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 
733 of the Act. The estimated margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the 
Suspension of Liquidation section of this notice.

Case History

    On November 22, 1999, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received petitions on certain expandable polystyrene resins (EPS) from 
Indonesia and the Republic of Korea (Korea) filed in proper form by 
BASF Corporation, Huntsman Expandable Polymers Company LC, Nova 
Chemicals Inc., and Styrochem U.S., Ltd., (collectively the 
petitioners). On December 1 and 3, 1999, the Department received 
amendments to the petitions.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The preliminary determination for EPS from Korea will be 
published in a separate Federal Register notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 13, 1999, the Department initiated antidumping 
investigations of EPS from Indonesia and Korea. See Initiation of 
Antidumping Duty Investigations: Certain Expandable Polystyrene Resins 
from Indonesia and the Republic of Korea, 64 FR 71112 (December 20, 
1999) (Initiation Notice). Since the initiation of this investigation, 
the following events have occurred:
    On January 7, 2000, the United States International Trade 
Commission (the ITC) preliminarily determined that there is a 
reasonable indication that imports of the subject merchandise are 
materially injuring the U.S. industry. See Certain Expandable 
Polystyrene Resins from Indonesia and Korea, 65 FR 2429 (January 14, 
2000).
    On January 13, 2000, the Department selected PT Risjad Brasali 
Styrindo (Brasali), the only known Indonesian producer/exporter of the 
subject

[[Page 39350]]

merchandise, as the mandatory respondent in this investigation. See 
Memorandum to Gary Taverman: Selection of Respondents, dated January 
13, 2000. On January 31, 2000, the Department issued its antidumping 
questionnaire to Brasali. On February 16, 2000, Brasali notified the 
Department that it would not respond to the Department's questionnaire.
    On April 13, 2000, the Department published a Federal Register 
notice postponing the deadline for the preliminary determination until 
June 20, 2000. See Notice of Postponement of Preliminary Antidumping 
Duty Determinations: Certain Expandable Polystyrene Resins from 
Indonesia and the Republic of Korea, 65 FR 19872 (April 13, 2000).

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 1998, through 
September 30, 1999. This period corresponds to the four most recent 
fiscal quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition (i.e., 
December 1999).

Scope of Investigation

    The scope of this investigation includes certain expandable 
polystyrene resins in primary forms; namely, raw material or resin 
manufactured in the form of polystyrene beads, whether of regular 
(shape) type or modified (block) type, regardless of specification, 
having a weighted-average molecular weight of between 160,000 and 
260,000, containing from 3 to 7 percent blowing agents, and having bead 
sizes ranging from 0.4 mm to 3 mm.
    Specifically excluded from the scope of these investigations are 
off-grade, off-specification expandable polystyrene resins.
    The covered merchandise is found in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States (HTSUS) subheading 3903.11.00.00. Although this 
HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the 
written description of the merchandise is dispositive.

Facts Available

    Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that, if an interested party 
(A) withholds information that has been requested by the Department; 
(B) fails to provide such information in a timely manner or in the form 
or manner requested subject to section 782(c)(1) and (e) of the Act; 
(C) significantly impedes a proceeding under the antidumping statute; 
or (D) provides such information but the information cannot be 
verified, the Department shall, subject to subsection 782(d) of the 
Act, use facts otherwise available in reaching the applicable 
determination. In this case, as stated above, on February 16, 2000, 
Brasali informed us that it would not answer the Department's 
antidumping questionnaire. Because Brasali failed to respond to our 
questionnaire, pursuant to section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act, we are 
required to employ facts otherwise available to determine the dumping 
margin for Brasali. Because Brasali has provided no information 
whatsoever, sections 782(d) and (e) of the Act are not applicable.
    Section 776(b) of the Act provides that the Department may use an 
inference adverse to the interests of a party that has failed to 
cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with the 
Department's requests for information. See also Statement of 
Administrative Action accompanying the URAA, H.R. Rep. No. 103-316 at 
870 (1994) (SAA). The statute and the SAA provide that such an adverse 
inference may be based on secondary information, including information 
drawn from the petition. Brasali's refusal to respond to the 
Department's antidumping questionnaire constitutes a failure to act to 
the best of its ability to comply with a request for information, 
within the meaning of section 776(b) of the Act. Accordingly, for 
purposes of the preliminary determination, the Department has 
determined that, in selecting among the facts otherwise available, an 
adverse inference is warranted with respect to Brasali.
    Consistent with the Department's practice in investigations where 
the respondent refuses to participate by not answering the Department's 
questionnaire, as adverse facts available, we have determined to apply 
a margin based on the highest margin alleged in the petition. See, 
e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Flat Rolled Carbon Quality Steel Products 
from Argentina, Japan and Thailand, 64 FR 60410, 60414 (November 5, 
1999); Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Stainless Steel Wire Rod from Germany, 63 FR 10847 (March 5, 
1998).
    Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies 
upon ``secondary information'' in using facts otherwise available such 
as the petition rates, it must, to the extent practicable, corroborate 
that information from independent sources that are reasonably at the 
Department's disposal. The SAA clarifies that ``corroborate'' means 
that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information 
to be used has probative value (see SAA at 870). The SAA also states 
that independent sources used to corroborate such evidence may include, 
for example, published price lists, official import statistics and 
customs data, and information obtained from interested parties during 
the particular investigation (see SAA at 870).
    We reviewed the adequacy and accuracy of the information in the 
petition during our pre-initiation analysis, to the extent appropriate 
information was available for this purpose. See Import Administration 
AD Investigation Initiation Checklist, dated December 13, 1999, for a 
discussion of the margin calculations in the petition. To corroborate 
the rate that we are applying as adverse facts available for purposes 
of the preliminary determination, we examined the basis of the rates 
contained in the petition. The petitioners based export price (EP) on 
the average unit value (AUV) of the merchandise as derived from the 
U.S. government's IM-145 data, which we were able to corroborate with 
the statistical source. Normal value (NV) was based upon prices for 
products which are identical to the products used as the basis for the 
EP. We corroborated the data used by petitioners to calculate NV in a 
telephone conference with the market research firm responsible for 
gathering the data. See Memorandum to the File, Telephone Conversation 
with Market Research Firm Regarding the Petition for the Imposition of 
Antidumping Duties, dated December 3, 1999. Our review of the EP and NV 
calculations indicated that the information in the petitions has 
probative value, given that certain information included in the margin 
calculations in the petition is from public sources concurrent, for the 
most part, with the POI (e.g., average unit values for U.S. sales). We 
did not receive any other information from the petitioners or other 
interested parties with regard to EP and NV and are aware of no other 
independent sources that would enable us to further corroborate the 
margin calculation in the petition. Accordingly, we find, for purposes 
of this preliminary determination, that this information is 
corroborated to the extent practicable, pursuant to section 776(c) of 
the Act.

All Others Rate

    Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act provides that, where the estimated 
weighted-averaged dumping margins established for all exporters and 
producers individually investigated are zero or de minimis or are 
determined entirely under section 776 of the Act, the Department may 
use any reasonable

[[Page 39351]]

method to establish the estimated all-others rate for exporters and 
producers not individually investigated. Our recent practice under 
these circumstances has been to assign, as the ``all others'' rate, the 
simple average of the margins in the petition. We have done so in this 
case. See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value: Stainless Steel Plate in Coil from Canada, 64 FR 15457 
(March 31, 1999); see also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Stainless Steel Plate in Coil from Italy, 64 FR 
15458, 15459 (March 21, 1999).

Suspension of Liquidation

    For entries of EPS from Indonesia, we are directing the U.S. 
Customs Service to suspend liquidation of those entries that are 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the 
date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. We are also 
instructing the Customs Service to require a cash deposit or the 
posting of a bond equal to the dumping margin, as indicated in the 
chart below. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in 
effect until further notice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                    Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PT Risjad Brasali Styrindo..................................       96.65
All Others..................................................       95.79
------------------------------------------------------------------------

ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we have notified the 
ITC of our determination. If our final antidumping determination is 
affirmative, the ITC will determine whether these imports are 
materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry. 
The deadline for that ITC determination would be the later of 120 days 
after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after the 
date of our final determination.

Public Comment

    Case briefs must be submitted no later than 30 days after the 
publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Rebuttal briefs 
must be filed within five business days after the deadline for 
submission of case briefs. A list of authorities used, a table of 
contents, and an executive summary of issues should accompany any 
briefs submitted to the Department. Executive summaries should be 
limited to five pages total, including footnotes.
    Section 774 of the Act provides that the Department will hold a 
hearing to afford interested parties an opportunity to comment on 
arguments raised in case or rebuttal briefs, provided that such a 
hearing is requested by any interested party. If a request for a 
hearing is made in an investigation, the hearing will tentatively be 
held two days after the deadline for submission of the rebuttal briefs, 
at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 
Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230. Parties should confirm by telephone 
the time, date, and place of the hearing 48 hours before the scheduled 
time.
    Interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or to participate 
if one is requested, must submit a written request within 30 days of 
the publication of this notice. Requests should specify the number of 
participants and provide a list of the issues to be discussed. Oral 
presentations will be limited to issues raised in the briefs.
    If this investigation proceeds normally, we will make our final 
determination no later than 75 days after the date of this preliminary 
determination.
    This determination is published pursuant to sections 733(d) and 
777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: June 20, 2000.
Roland L. MacDonald,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-16106 Filed 6-23-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P