Source: https://regulations.justia.com/regulations/fedreg/2009/08/31/E9-20980.html
Timestamp: 2020-05-29 10:52:54
Document Index: 38492940

Matched Legal Cases: ['art, 44819', 'art, 44819', 'art, 44819', 'art, 74', 'art 216', 'arts 222', 'art, 74', 'arts\n8803']

Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation of an Order in Part, 44819-44822 [E9-20980] :: International Trade Administration :: Department Of Commerce :: Regulation Tracker :: Justia
Justia Regulation Tracker Department Of Commerce International Trade Administration Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation of an Order in Part, 44819-44822 [E9-20980]
Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation of an Order in Part, 44819-44822 [E9-20980]
Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Notices Shrimp from the People’s Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results of the Third Administrative Reviews, 74 FR 26839 (June 4, 2009). On July 22, 2009, the Department published a second notice extending the deadline for the final results of the administrative review. See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People’s Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results of the Third Administrative Reviews, 74 FR 36164 (July 22, 2009). The final results are currently due no later than August 28, 2009. cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘Act’’), requires that the Department issue the final results of an administrative review within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary results are published. If it is not practicable to complete the review within that time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the deadline for the final results to a maximum of 180 days after the date on which the preliminary results are published. On June 4 and July 22, 2009, the Department extended the deadline of the final results by a total of 52 days. Thus, the Department may extend the deadline of the final results by an additional eight days. The Department requires additional time to properly consider the numerous and complex issues raised by interested parties in their case briefs and rebuttal briefs regarding surrogate values for factors of production, numerous company-specific issues, and the separate-rate status for numerous nonmandatory companies. Thus, it is not practicable to complete these reviews by August 28, 2009. Therefore, the Department is again extending the time limit for completion of the final results of these reviews by eight days, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. The final results are now due no later than September 5, 2009.1 We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 1 Because September 5, 2009, falls on a Saturday and the following business day, Monday, September 7, 2009, is a Federal holiday, the deadline of the final results falls on Tuesday, September 8, 2009. VerDate Nov<24>2008 14:57 Aug 28, 2009 Jkt 217001 Dated: August 25, 2009. Edward C. Yang, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. [FR Doc. E9–20986 Filed 8–28–09; 8:45 am] 44819 Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Intent to Revoke Order in Part, 74 FR 19056 (April 27, 2009) (Preliminary Results). For these administrative reviews, the period of review is May 1, 2007, through April 30, 2008. BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. At the request of an interested party, we DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE held a hearing for Italy-specific issues International Trade Administration on June 22, 2009. The Department has [A–427–801, A–428–801, A–475–801, A–588– conducted these administrative reviews in accordance with section 751 of the 804, A–412–801] Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From Scope of the Orders France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the The products covered by the orders United Kingdom: Final Results of are ball bearings and parts thereof. Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation of an Order in These products include all antifriction bearings that employ balls as the rolling Part element. Imports of these products are AGENCY: Import Administration, classified under the following International Trade Administration, categories: Antifriction balls, ball Department of Commerce. bearings with integral shafts, ball bearings (including radial ball bearings) SUMMARY: On April 27, 2009, the Department of Commerce published the and parts thereof, and housed or preliminary results of the administrative mounted ball bearing units and parts reviews of the antidumping duty orders thereof. Imports of these products are on ball bearings and parts thereof from classified under the following France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United Kingdom. The reviews cover 15 United States (HTSUS) subheadings: manufacturers/exporters. The period of review is May 1, 2007, through April 30, 3926.90.45, 4016.93.10, 4016.93.50, 6909.19.50.10, 8431.20.00, 2008. 8431.39.00.10, 8482.10.10, 8482.10.50, Based on our analysis of the 8482.80.00, 8482.91.00, 8482.99.05, comments received, we have made changes, including corrections of certain 8482.99.35, 8482.99.25.80, 8482.99.65.95, 8483.20.40, 8483.20.80, programming and other ministerial 8483.30.40, 8483.30.80, 8483.50.90, errors, in the margin calculations. 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30, 8483.90.70, Therefore, the final results are different 8708.50.50, 8708.60.50, 8708.60.80, from the preliminary results. The final 8708.93.30, 8708.93.60.00, 8708.99.06, weighted-average dumping margins for 8708.99.31.00, 8708.99.40.00, the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of the 8708.99.49.60, 8708.99.58, 8708.99.80.15, 8708.99.80.80, Reviews.’’ 8803.10.00, 8803.20.00, 8803.30.00, DATES: Effective Date: August 31, 2009. 8803.90.30, and 8803.90.90. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Yang Jin As a result of changes to the HTSUS, Chun or Richard Rimlinger, AD/CVD effective February 2, 2007, the subject Operations, Office 5, Import merchandise is also classifiable under Administration, International Trade the following additional HTSUS item Administration, U.S. Department of numbers: 8708.30.50.90, 8708.40.75, Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 8708.50.79.00, 8708.50.89.00, Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 8708.50.91.50, 8708.50.99.00, telephone: (202) 482–5760 or (202) 482– 8708.70.60.60, 8708.80.65.90, 4477, respectively. 8708.93.75.00, 8708.94.75, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 8708.95.20.00, 8708.99.55.00, 8708.99.68, 8708.99.81.80. Background Although the HTSUS item numbers On April 27, 2009, the Department of above are provided for convenience and Commerce (the Department) published customs purposes, the written the preliminary results of the descriptions of the scope of these orders administrative reviews of the remain dispositive. The size or precision grade of a antidumping duty orders on ball bearing does not influence whether the bearings and parts thereof from France, bearing is covered by one of the orders. Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United These orders cover all the subject Kingdom. See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, et al.: Preliminary bearings and parts thereof (inner race, PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31AUN1.SGM 31AUN1 44820 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Notices outer race, cage, rollers, balls, seals, shields, etc.) outlined above with certain limitations. With regard to finished parts, all such parts are included in the scope of these orders. For unfinished parts, such parts are included if they have been heat-treated or if heat treatment is not required to be performed on the part. Thus, the only unfinished parts that are not covered by these orders are those that will be subject to heat treatment after importation. The ultimate application of a bearing also does not influence whether the bearing is covered by the orders. Bearings designed for highly specialized applications are not excluded. Any of the subject bearings, regardless of whether they may ultimately be utilized in aircraft, automobiles, or other equipment, are within the scope of these orders. For a list of scope determinations which pertain to the orders, see the ‘‘Memorandum to Laurie Parkhill’’ regarding scope determinations for the 2007–08 reviews, dated April 21, 2009, which is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU) of the main Department of Commerce building, Room 1117, in the General Issues record (A–100–001). Analysis of the Comments Received All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to the current administrative reviews of the antidumping duty orders on ball bearings and parts thereof are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’ (Decision Memo) from Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary John M. Andersen to Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary Carole A. Showers dated August 25, 2009, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded is in the Decision Memo and attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Decision Memo, which is a public document, is on file in the CRU of the main Department of Commerce building, Room 1117, and is accessible on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/ index.html. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Revocation of an Order in Part In the Preliminary Results, we ¨ preliminarily determined that Gebruder Reinfurt GmbH & Co., KG (GRW), qualifies for revocation from the order on ball bearings and parts thereof from Germany pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2)(i). Accordingly, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2)(ii), we preliminarily determined to revoke the order with respect to ball bearings and parts thereof from Germany exported and/or sold by GRW to the United States. We have received comments concerning our intent to revoke the order on ball bearings and parts thereof from Germany exported and/or sold by GRW to the United States. See the Decision Memo at Comment 2 for further discussion of this issue. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2)(ii), we are revoking the order on ball bearings and parts thereof from Germany exported and/or sold by GRW to the United States, effective May 1, 2008. Selection of Respondents Due to the large number of companies in the reviews and the resulting administrative burden to review each company for which a request had been made and not withdrawn, the Department exercised its statutory authority under section 777A(c)(2) of the Act to limit the number of respondents selected for the reviews. Based on our analysis of the responses and our available resources, we chose certain companies for individual examination of their sales of the subject merchandise to the United States during the period of review. For a detailed discussion on the selection of respondents for individual examination, see Preliminary Results, 74 FR at 19057. Country cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES Italy ....................................................................................... United Kingdom .................................................................... Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of comments received and based on our own analysis of the Preliminary Results, we have made revisions that have changed the 14:57 Aug 28, 2009 Jkt 217001 Adverse Facts Available Two of the respondents we selected for individual examination, Edwards Ltd./Edwards High Vacuum Int’l Ltd. (Edwards Japan) of Japan and myonic GmbH (myonic) of Germany, did not provide responses to our questionnaire other than their responses to our quantity-and-value questionnaire. Because these two companies did not respond to our questionnaire fully, they failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of their ability and we could not complete the administrative reviews of these two companies. See Preliminary Results, 74 FR at 19058–59. We received no comments on our preliminary decision to apply adverse facts available to these companies. For our final results, we have based their margins on facts available with an adverse inference in accordance with section 776 of the Act. As facts available with an adverse inference for these non-responsive companies, we have selected the rates of 70.41 percent for Germany and 73.55 percent for Japan. We corroborated these rates in accordance with section 776(c) of the Act. Id. Sales Below Cost in the Home Market The Department disregarded homemarket sales that failed the cost-ofproduction test for the following firms for these final results of reviews: Company France ................................................................................... Germany ............................................................................... VerDate Nov<24>2008 For the final results, we have not changed the source of the rates we applied to respondents not selected for individual examination. See Preliminary Results, 74 FR at 19507–08. Because the margin for SKF Italy changed for the final results, we applied the final margin for SKF Italy to Schaeffler Italia S.r.L. (formerly FAG Italia S.p.A.), which is the sole Italian respondent not selected for individual examination. For discussions of the issues involving the rates for nonselected respondents, see the Decision Memo at Comment 13. SKF France S.A. and SKF Aerospace France S.A.S. (SKF France) GRW Schaeffler KG SKF Industrie S.p.A./Somecat S.p.A. (SKF Italy) Barden/Schaeffler UK SKF (U.K.) Limited (SKF UK) results for certain firms. We have corrected programming and ministerial errors in the margins we included in the Preliminary Results, where applicable. A detailed discussion of each correction we made is in the company-specific PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 analysis memoranda which are on file in the CRU of the main Department of Commerce building, Room 1117. E:\FR\FM\31AUN1.SGM 31AUN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Notices instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full discussion of this clarification, see Assessment of Antidumping Duties. For the responsive companies which were not selected for individual review, Margin we will instruct CBP to apply the rates (percent) listed above to all entries of subject merchandise that were produced and/or exported by such firms. For companies for which we are 10.13 relying on total adverse facts available 10.13 to establish a dumping margin, we will instruct CBP to apply the assigned dumping margins to all entries of subject merchandise during the period 3.32 of review that were produced and/or 0.10 exported by the companies. Final Results of the Reviews We determine that the following percentage weighted-average dumping margins on ball bearings and parts thereof exist for the period May 1, 2007, through April 30, 2008: Company France Edwards Ltd. and Edwards High Vacuum Int’l Ltd. ...... SKF France .......................... Germany Edwards Ltd. and Edwards High Vacuum Int’l Ltd. ...... GRW ..................................... myonic .................................. RWG Frankenjura Industrie Aircraft Bearings GmbH .... Schaeffler KG ....................... SKF GmbH ........................... Italy Schaeffler Italy ...................... SKF Italy ............................... Japan Edwards Japan ..................... Japanese Aero Engines Corporation ............................. Sapporo Precision Inc. ......... 70.41 Export Price With respect to export-price (EP) sales, we divided the total dumping margins (calculated as the difference between normal value and the EP) for each exporter’s importer or customer by 15.10 the total number of units the exporter 15.10 sold to that importer or customer. We will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-unit dollar amount against each unit 73.55 of merchandise on each of that importer’s or customer’s entries under 0.00 the relevant order during the period of 6.65 review. 3.32 3.32 3.32 Constructed Export Price For constructed export-price (CEP) Barden/Schaeffler UK ........... 0.14 sales, we divided the total dumping SKF UK ................................. 18.64 margins for the reviewed sales by the total entered value of those reviewed Assessment Rates sales for each importer. We will direct The Department will determine and CBP to assess the resulting percentage U.S. Customs and Border Protection margin against the entered customs (CBP) shall assess antidumping duties values for the subject merchandise on on all appropriate entries. We intend to each of that importer’s entries under the issue appropriate assessment relevant order during the period of instructions directly to CBP 15 days review. See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). after publication of these final results of Cash-Deposit Requirements reviews. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated, To calculate the cash-deposit rate for whenever possible, an importer/ each respondent, i.e., each exporter and/ customer-specific assessment rate or or manufacturer included in these value for subject merchandise. reviews, we divided the total dumping The Department clarified its margins for each company by the total ‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on net value of that company’s sales of May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and merchandise during the period of Countervailing Duty Proceedings: review subject to each order. Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 To derive a single deposit rate for FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment of each respondent, we weight-averaged Antidumping Duties). This clarification the EP and CEP deposit rates (using the will apply to entries of subject EP and CEP, respectively, as the merchandise during the period of weighting factors). To accomplish this review produced by companies when we sampled CEP sales (see included in these final results of Preliminary Results, 74 FR at 19060), we reviews for which the reviewed first calculated the total dumping companies did not know their margins for all CEP sales during the merchandise was destined for the period of review by multiplying the United States. In such instances, we will sample CEP margins by the ratio of total cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES United Kingdom VerDate Nov<24>2008 14:57 Aug 28, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44821 days in the period of review to days in the sample weeks. We then calculated a total net value for all CEP sales during the period of review by multiplying the sample CEP total net value by the same ratio. Finally, we divided the combined total dumping margins for both EP and CEP sales by the combined total value for both EP and CEP sales to obtain the deposit rate. We will direct CBP to collect the resulting percentage deposit rate against the entered customs value of each of the exporter’s entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice. Entries of parts incorporated into finished bearings before sales to an unaffiliated customer in the United States will receive the respondent’s deposit rate applicable to the order. Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of this notice of final results of administrative reviews for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cashdeposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates shown above except that, for firms whose weighted-average margins are less than 0.5 percent and therefore de minimis, the Department shall not require a deposit of estimated antidumping duties; (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 cashdeposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; (4) the cash-deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be the all-others rate for the relevant order made effective by the final results of review published on July 26, 1993. See Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation in Part of an Antidumping Duty Order, 58 FR 39729 (July 26, 1993). For ball bearings from Italy, see Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof from France, et al.; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 66472, 66521 (December 17, 1996). These rates are the all-others E:\FR\FM\31AUN1.SGM 31AUN1 44822 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 167 / Monday, August 31, 2009 / Notices rates from the relevant LTFV investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further notice. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board This notice 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 period of review. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department’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 order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of the destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: August 25, 2009. Carole A. Showers, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations. cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES Appendix 1. Zeroing of Negative Margins 2. Verification for GRW’s Revocation 3. 15-Day Liquidation Policy 4. CEP Offset and CEP Profit 5. Sample Sales 6. Short-Term U.S. Interest Rates 7. Freight, Insurance, and Packing Revenue 8. Rate for Firms Not Selected for Individual Examination 9. Miscellaneous Issues A. Freight Expense B. Packing Expense C. Imputed Credit D. Completeness of Database E. Cost of Grease 10. Ministerial Errors [FR Doc. E9–20980 Filed 8–28–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [Order No. 1633] Notification to Importers DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE RIN 0648–XP18 Grant of Authority; Establishment of a Foreign-Trade Zone, Lansing, MI Marine Mammals; Record of Decision; File Nos. 14324 through 14337, Except 14333 Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order: Whereas, the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Act provides for ‘‘* * * the establishment * * * of foreign-trade zones in ports of entry of the United States, to expedite and encourage foreign commerce, and for other purposes,’’ and authorizes the ForeignTrade Zones Board to grant to qualified corporations the privilege of establishing foreign-trade zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) ports of entry; Whereas, the Capital Region Airport Authority (the Grantee) has made application to the Board (FTZ Docket 52–2008, filed 10/1/08), requesting the establishment of a foreign-trade zone in Lansing, Michigan, at the Capital Region International Airport, which was designated as a CBP user fee port facility on January 22, 2008; Whereas, notice inviting public comment has been given in the Federal Register (73 FR 58930, 10/8/08), and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations; and, Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner’s report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and Board’s regulations are satisfied, and that approval of the application is in the public interest; Now, therefore, the Board hereby grants to the Grantee the privilege of establishing a foreign-trade zone, designated on the records of the Board as Foreign-Trade Zone No. 275, at the site described in the application, and subject to the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations, including section 400.28. Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of August 2009. Foreign-Trade Zones Board. Gary Locke, Secretary of Commerce, Chairman and Executive Officer. [FR Doc. E9–20990 Filed 8–28–09; 8:45 am] P VerDate Nov<24>2008 14:57 Aug 28, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; Record of Decision and issuance of permits. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that NMFS issued a new Record of Decision (ROD) on August 10, 2009, for the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for Steller Sea Lion and Northern Fur Seal Research. Subsequently, 12 permits were issued to conduct research on Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) and northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus) throughout their ranges in the United States. ADDRESSES: The permits and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment in the following office(s): Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301)713–2289; fax (301)713–0376; and Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802–1668; phone (907)586–7221; fax (907)586–7249. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tammy Adams, Kate Swails, or Amy Sloan, (301)713–2289. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 13, 2009, notice was published in the Federal Register (74 FR 22518) that requests for permits to conduct research on marine mammals had been submitted by various applicants. The requested permits have been issued under the authorities of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR parts 222–226), and the Fur Seal Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1151 et seq.). The permits are valid through August 31, 2014. File No. 14324: The permit issued to Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC), Seward, AK, (Principal Investigator: John Maniscalco) authorizes them to E:\FR\FM\31AUN1.SGM 31AUN1
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 167 (Monday, August 31, 2009)]
[Pages 44819-44822]
[FR Doc No: E9-20980]
Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews and Revocation of an Order in Part
SUMMARY: On April 27, 2009, the Department of Commerce published the
preliminary results of the administrative reviews of the antidumping
Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom. The reviews cover 15
manufacturers/exporters. The period of review is May 1, 2007, through
changes, including corrections of certain programming and other
ministerial errors, in the margin calculations. Therefore, the final
results are different from the preliminary results. The final weighted-
average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the
section entitled ``Final Results of the Reviews.''
DATES: Effective Date: August 31, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:  Yang Jin Chun or Richard Rimlinger, AD/CVD
5760 or (202) 482-4477, respectively.
On April 27, 2009, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
published the preliminary results of the administrative reviews of the
antidumping duty orders on ball bearings and parts thereof from France,
Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom. See Ball Bearings and
Parts Thereof From France, et al.: Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Reviews and Intent to Revoke Order in Part, 74 FR
19056 (April 27, 2009) (Preliminary Results). For these administrative
reviews, the period of review is May 1, 2007, through April 30, 2008.
Results. At the request of an interested party, we held a hearing for
Italy-specific issues on June 22, 2009. The Department has conducted
these administrative reviews in accordance with section 751 of the
The products covered by the orders are ball bearings and parts
8803.30.00, 8803.90.30, and 8803.90.90.
and customs purposes, the written descriptions of the scope of these
orders remain dispositive.
The size or precision grade of a bearing does not influence whether
the bearing is covered by one of the orders. These orders cover all the
subject bearings and parts thereof (inner race,
[[Page 44820]]
outer race, cage, rollers, balls, seals, shields, etc.) outlined above
with certain limitations. With regard to finished parts, all such parts
are included in the scope of these orders. For unfinished parts, such
parts are included if they have been heat-treated or if heat treatment
is not required to be performed on the part. Thus, the only unfinished
parts that are not covered by these orders are those that will be
subject to heat treatment after importation. The ultimate application
of a bearing also does not influence whether the bearing is covered by
the orders. Bearings designed for highly specialized applications are
not excluded. Any of the subject bearings, regardless of whether they
may ultimately be utilized in aircraft, automobiles, or other
equipment, are within the scope of these orders.
For a list of scope determinations which pertain to the orders, see
the ``Memorandum to Laurie Parkhill'' regarding scope determinations
for the 2007-08 reviews, dated April 21, 2009, which is on file in the
Central Records Unit (CRU) of the main Department of Commerce building,
Room 1117, in the General Issues record (A-100-001).
All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to the current
administrative reviews of the antidumping duty orders on ball bearings
and parts thereof are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision
Memorandum'' (Decision Memo) from Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary
John M. Andersen to Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary Carole A. Showers
dated August 25, 2009, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list
of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded
is in the Decision Memo and attached to this notice as an Appendix. The
Decision Memo, which is a public document, is on file in the CRU of the
In the Preliminary Results, we preliminarily determined that
Gebr[uuml]der Reinfurt GmbH & Co., KG (GRW), qualifies for revocation
from the order on ball bearings and parts thereof from Germany pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2)(i). Accordingly, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.222(b)(2)(ii), we preliminarily determined to revoke the order with
respect to ball bearings and parts thereof from Germany exported and/or
sold by GRW to the United States.
We have received comments concerning our intent to revoke the order
on ball bearings and parts thereof from Germany exported and/or sold by
GRW to the United States. See the Decision Memo at Comment 2 for
further discussion of this issue. In accordance with 19 CFR
351.222(b)(2)(ii), we are revoking the order on ball bearings and parts
thereof from Germany exported and/or sold by GRW to the United States,
Due to the large number of companies in the reviews and the
resulting administrative burden to review each company for which a
request had been made and not withdrawn, the Department exercised its
statutory authority under section 777A(c)(2) of the Act to limit the
number of respondents selected for the reviews. Based on our analysis
of the responses and our available resources, we chose certain
companies for individual examination of their sales of the subject
merchandise to the United States during the period of review. For a
detailed discussion on the selection of respondents for individual
examination, see Preliminary Results, 74 FR at 19057. For the final
results, we have not changed the source of the rates we applied to
respondents not selected for individual examination. See Preliminary
Results, 74 FR at 19507-08. Because the margin for SKF Italy changed
for the final results, we applied the final margin for SKF Italy to
Schaeffler Italia S.r.L. (formerly FAG Italia S.p.A.), which is the
sole Italian respondent not selected for individual examination. For
discussions of the issues involving the rates for non-selected
respondents, see the Decision Memo at Comment 13.
Two of the respondents we selected for individual examination,
Edwards Ltd./Edwards High Vacuum Int'l Ltd. (Edwards Japan) of Japan
and myonic GmbH (myonic) of Germany, did not provide responses to our
questionnaire other than their responses to our quantity-and-value
questionnaire. Because these two companies did not respond to our
questionnaire fully, they failed to cooperate by not acting to the best
of their ability and we could not complete the administrative reviews
of these two companies. See Preliminary Results, 74 FR at 19058-59. We
received no comments on our preliminary decision to apply adverse facts
available to these companies. For our final results, we have based
their margins on facts available with an adverse inference in
accordance with section 776 of the Act.
As facts available with an adverse inference for these non-
responsive companies, we have selected the rates of 70.41 percent for
Germany and 73.55 percent for Japan. We corroborated these rates in
accordance with section 776(c) of the Act. Id.
The Department disregarded home-market sales that failed the cost-
of-production test for the following firms for these final results of
France.................................  SKF France S.A. and SKF
Aerospace France S.A.S. (SKF
Germany................................  GRW
Italy..................................  SKF Industrie S.p.A./Somecat
S.p.A. (SKF Italy)
United Kingdom.........................  Barden/Schaeffler UK
changed the results for certain firms. We have corrected programming
and ministerial errors in the margins we included in the Preliminary
Results, where applicable. A detailed discussion of each correction we
made is in the company-specific analysis memoranda which are on file in
the CRU of the main Department of Commerce building, Room 1117.
[[Page 44821]]
We determine that the following percentage weighted-average dumping
margins on ball bearings and parts thereof exist for the period May 1,
2007, through April 30, 2008:
Edwards Ltd. and Edwards High Vacuum Int'l Ltd..........           10.13
SKF France..............................................           10.13
Edwards Ltd. and Edwards High Vacuum Int'l Ltd..........            3.32
GRW.....................................................            0.10
myonic..................................................           70.41
RWG Frankenjura Industrie Aircraft Bearings GmbH........            3.32
Schaeffler KG...........................................            3.32
SKF GmbH................................................            3.32
Schaeffler Italy........................................           15.10
SKF Italy...............................................           15.10
Edwards Japan...........................................           73.55
Japanese Aero Engines Corporation.......................            0.00
Sapporo Precision Inc...................................            6.65
Barden/Schaeffler UK....................................            0.14
SKF UK..................................................           18.64
entries. We intend to issue appropriate assessment instructions
directly to CBP 15 days after publication of these final results of
reviews. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated,
whenever possible, an importer/customer-specific assessment rate or
value for subject merchandise.
included in these final results of reviews for which the reviewed
clarification, see Assessment of Antidumping Duties.
review, we will instruct CBP to apply the rates listed above to all
entries of subject merchandise that were produced and/or exported by
such firms.
For companies for which we are relying on total adverse facts
available to establish a dumping margin, we will instruct CBP to apply
the assigned dumping margins to all entries of subject merchandise
during the period of review that were produced and/or exported by the
dumping margins (calculated as the difference between normal value and
the EP) for each exporter's importer or customer by the total number of
merchandise on each of that importer's or customer's entries under the
relevant order during the period of review.
For constructed export-price (CEP) sales, we divided the total
dumping margins for the reviewed sales by the total entered value of
those reviewed sales for each importer. We will direct CBP to assess
the resulting percentage margin against the entered customs values for
the subject merchandise on each of that importer's entries under the
relevant order during the period of review. See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
To calculate the cash-deposit rate for each respondent, i.e., each
exporter and/or manufacturer included in these reviews, we divided the
total dumping margins for each company by the total net value of that
company's sales of merchandise during the period of review subject to
To derive a single deposit rate for each respondent, we weight-
averaged the EP and CEP deposit rates (using the EP and CEP,
respectively, as the weighting factors). To accomplish this when we
sampled CEP sales (see Preliminary Results, 74 FR at 19060), we first
calculated the total dumping margins for all CEP sales during the
period of review by multiplying the sample CEP margins by the ratio of
total days in the period of review to days in the sample weeks. We then
calculated a total net value for all CEP sales during the period of
review by multiplying the sample CEP total net value by the same ratio.
Finally, we divided the combined total dumping margins for both EP and
CEP sales by the combined total value for both EP and CEP sales to
obtain the deposit rate.
We will direct CBP to collect the resulting percentage deposit rate
against the entered customs value of each of the exporter's entries of
consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice. Entries
of parts incorporated into finished bearings before sales to an
unaffiliated customer in the United States will receive the
respondent's deposit rate applicable to the order.
reviews for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or
publication, consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The
cash-deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates shown
above except that, for firms whose weighted-average margins are less
than 0.5 percent and therefore de minimis, the Department shall not
require a deposit of estimated antidumping duties; (2) for previously
reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash-deposit
review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV)
the merchandise; (4) the cash-deposit rate for all other manufacturers
or exporters will continue to be the all-others rate for the relevant
order made effective by the final results of review published on July
26, 1993. See Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews
and Revocation in Part of an Antidumping Duty Order, 58 FR 39729 (July
26, 1993). For ball bearings from Italy, see Antifriction Bearings
(Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof from France, et
al.; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and
Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 66472, 66521
(December 17, 1996). These rates are the all-others
[[Page 44822]]
rates from the relevant LTFV investigation.
These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further
relevant entries during this period of review. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that