[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-1776]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: January 27, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-351-825, A-533-810, A-475-813, A-588-833 and A-469-805]

 

Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Stainless Steel 
Bar From Brazil, India, Italy, Japan and Spain

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 27, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Jenkins or Shawn Thompson, Office 
of Antidumping Investigations, Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-
1756, or (202) 482-3965.

INITIATION OF INVESTIGATIONS:

The Petitions

    On December 30, 1993, we received petitions filed in proper form by 
five producers of stainless steel bar (AL Tech Specialty Steel Corp., 
Carpenter Technology Corp., Republic Engineered Steels, Slater Steels 
Corporation and Talley Metals Technology, Inc.) and one labor union 
(United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO/CLC) (collectively, 
petitioners). On January 4, 1994, and January 7, 1994, Electralloy 
Corp. and the Crucible Specialty Metals Division of the Crucible 
Materials Corp., respectively, notified the Department that they are 
also petitioners in these investigations. In accordance with 19 CFR 
353.12, the petitioners allege that imports of stainless steel bar from 
Brazil, India, Italy, Japan and Spain are being, or are likely to be, 
sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of 
section 731 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and that 
these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, 
a U.S. industry.
    The petitioners have stated that they have standing to file the 
petitions because they are interested parties, as defined under 
sections 771(9)(C) and 771(9)(D) of the Act, and because the petitions 
were filed on behalf of the U.S. industry producing the product subject 
to these investigations. If any interested party, as described under 
paragraphs (C), (D), (E), or (F) of section 771(9) of the Act, wishes 
to register support for, or opposition to, these petitions, it should 
file a written notification with the Acting Assistant Secretary for 
Import Administration.
    Under the Department's regulations, any producer or reseller 
seeking exclusion from a potential antidumping duty order must submit 
its request for exclusion within 30 days of the date of the publication 
of this notice. The procedures and requirements are contained in 19 CFR 
353.14.

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation is July 1, 1993 to December 31, 1993.

Scope of Investigations

    For purposes of these investigations, the term ``stainless steel 
bar'' means articles of stainless steel in straight lengths that have 
been either hot-rolled, forged, turned, cold-drawn, cold-rolled or 
otherwise cold-finished, or ground, having a uniform solid cross 
section along their whole length in the shape of circles, segments of 
circles, ovals, rectangles (including squares), triangles, hexagons, 
octagons or other convex polygons. Stainless steel bar includes cold-
finished stainless steel bars that are turned or ground in straight 
lengths, whether produced from hot-rolled bar or from straightened and 
cut rod or wire, and reinforcing bars that have indentations, ribs, 
grooves, or other deformations produced during the rolling process.
    Except as specified above, the term does not include stainless 
steel semi-finished products, cut length flat-rolled products (i.e., 
cut length rolled products which if less than 4.75 mm in thickness have 
a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness, or if 4.75 mm or 
more in thickness having a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures at 
least twice the thickness), wire (i.e., cold-formed products in coils, 
of any uniform solid cross section along their whole length, which do 
not conform to the definition of flat-rolled products), and angles, 
shapes and sections.
    The stainless steel bar subject to these investigations is 
currently classifiable under subheadings 7222.10.00, 7222.20.00 and 
7222.30.00 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 these 
investigations is dispositive.
    For purposes of these initiations we are considering the subject 
merchandise to be one class or kind of merchandise. We invite 
interested parties to comment on this issue by March 25, 1994.

United States Price and Foreign Market Value

Brazil

    Petitioners based United States price (USP) on January-March 1993 
invoices issued by the U.S. subsidiary of Acos Villares SA (Villares), 
a Brazilian producer of stainless steel bar, to an unrelated U.S. 
customer. Since USP was based on C&F terms of sale, petitioners 
deducted from USP amounts for U.S. duty, ocean freight, marine 
insurance, and harbor maintenance and U.S. merchandise processing fees.
    Petitioners used Villares' delivered home market prices as the 
basis for FMV. These prices and related expenses were contained in a 
market research report. FMV was based on actual tax-exclusive, May-June 
1993 delivered sales prices of Villares to unrelated customers in 
Brazil. Petitioners deducted from FMV an amount for inland freight.
    Petitioners indicate that the home market price used for FMV was 
reported in U.S. dollars, thus taking into account Brazil's 
hyperinflationary economy.
    Based on a comparison of USP to FMV, the dumping margin alleged by 
petitioners for stainless steel bar from Brazil is 19.43 percent.

India

    Petitioners calculated USP based on two different methodologies. 
First, petitioners obtained a July 1993 U.S. price quote for stainless 
steel bar from India to an unrelated U.S. customer. Since the prices 
were quoted C&F for delivery to the east or west coast of the United 
States, petitioners deducted from USP amounts for import duties, ocean 
freight, marine insurance, and harbor maintenance and U.S. merchandise 
processing fees.
    Petitioners calculated a second weighted-average USP using the 
average import values of stainless steel bar from India for August and 
September 1993. The unit values were derived from U.S. Department of 
Commerce import statistics.
    Petitioners used Indian home market prices for stainless steel bar 
from Mukand Ltd., the largest stainless steel bar producer in India, as 
the basis for FMV. These prices were contained in a market research 
report. Petitioners deducted from these prices taxes, insurance, 
freight, and a distributor's margin based on information in the market 
research report. Because the comparison of USP and FMV involved non-
identical merchandise, petitioners made an adjustment for differences 
in merchandise based on information contained in the market research 
report.
    For purposes of this initiation, we have accepted petitioners' 
calculation of USP based on the first methodology. Accordingly, the 
range of dumping margins of stainless steel bar from India based on a 
comparison of USP to FMV alleged by petitioners under this methodology 
is 11.26 to 21.02 percent.

Italy

    Petitioners based USP on price quotations for U.S. sales made by 
Cogne, an Italian producer of stainless steel bar, to an unrelated U.S. 
customer. Since these USPs were quoted FOB duty paid, petitioners 
deducted the applicable import duties.
    Petitioners calculated FMV using two methodologies. First, 
petitioners used Cogne's delivered home market prices as the basis for 
FMV. These prices were contained in a market research report. 
Petitioners deducted from these prices inland freight and insurance 
based on information contained in the same report.
    Second, petitioners based FMV on constructed value (CV). 
Petitioners used CV because they alleged that Cogne's home market sales 
are being made at prices below the cost of production (COP). 
Petitioners also allege that another Italian company, Bolzano, is 
making home market sales of stainless steel bar at prices below the 
COP. These allegations are based on a comparison of home market prices 
for Cogne and Bolzano, obtained from the market research report, with 
COP. COP was based on the COP of an efficient U.S. producer of 
stainless steel bar, adjusted for known differences in costs between 
the United States and Italy. Where petitioners calculated CV, they used 
the COP derived from this U.S. producer and added the statutory minimum 
of eight percent for profit.
    The Department is initiating COP investigations for the two 
companies where petitioners provided company-specific home market 
prices, contingent upon whether these companies become respondents in 
this investigation. The Department is not initiating COP investigations 
for those companies and exporters where petitioners did not provide 
company-specific home market prices.
    Petitioners allege a price-to-price dumping margin for stainless 
steel bar from Italy of 15.15 percent. Petitioners allege a price-to-CV 
dumping margin of 157.03 percent.

Japan

    Petitioners based USP on June 1993 sales invoices from Daido Steel 
Sheet Corporation (Daido), a Japanese producer of stainless steel bar, 
to an unrelated U.S. customer. Since the USPs were quoted ex-dock, duty 
paid, Los Angeles, petitioners deducted from USP amounts for U.S. duty, 
ocean freight, marine insurance, harbor maintenance and U.S. 
merchandise processing fees.
    Petitioners used Daido's delivered May-June 1993 home market sales 
prices as the basis for FMV. These prices were contained in a market 
research report. To calculate an ex-factory price, except for credit, 
petitioners used expense information from the market research report. 
For credit, petitioners used the rate in effect in Japan for March 1993 
as reported in the International Financial Statistics, July 1993. 
Petitioners deducted from FMV an amount for inland freight and 
insurance, trade discounts, rebates and sales promotion expenses, 
advertising and warranties. Petitioners made circumstance-of-sale 
adjustments for credit and packing.
    Based on a comparison of USP to FMV, the dumping margins alleged by 
petitioners for stainless steel bar from Japan range from 48.00 to 
61.47 percent.

Spain

    Petitioners based USP on a September 1993 price quote for U.S. 
sales made by Acenor, a Spanish producer of stainless steel bar, to an 
unrelated U.S. company. Since USP was quoted on a direct mill delivery 
basis, petitioners deducted the applicable import duties, ocean 
freight, marine insurance, harbor maintenance and U.S. merchandise 
processing fees.
    Petitioners calculated FMV using two methodologies. First, 
petitioners used Acenor's delivered home market prices as the basis for 
FMV. These prices were contained in a market research report. 
Petitioners deducted inland freight from FMV using information 
contained in the same report.
    Second, petitioners based FMV on CV because they alleged that 
Acenor's home market sales are being made at prices below the COP. 
Petitioners also allege that another Spanish company, Roldan, is making 
home market sales of stainless steel bar at prices below the COP. These 
allegations are based on a comparison of home market prices for Acenor 
and Roldan, obtained from the market research report, with COP. COP was 
based on the COP of an efficient U.S. producer, adjusted for known 
differences in costs between the United States and Spain. Where 
petitioners calculated CV, they used the COP from this producer and 
added the statutory minimum of eight percent for profit.
    The Department is initiating COP investigations for the two 
companies where petitioners provided company-specific home market 
prices, contingent upon whether these companies become respondents in 
this investigation. The Department is not initiating COP investigations 
for those companies and exporters where petitioners did not provide 
company-specific home market prices.
    Petitioners allege a price-to-price dumping margin for stainless 
steel bar from Spain of 38.82 percent. Petitioners allege a price-to-CV 
dumping margin of 144.88 percent.

Initiation of Investigations

    We have examined the petitions on stainless steel bar from Brazil, 
India, Italy, Japan and Spain, and have found that the petitions meet 
the requirements of section 732(b) of the Act. Therefore, we are 
initiating antidumping duty investigations to determine whether imports 
of stainless steel bar from Brazil, India, Italy, Japan and Spain are 
being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair 
value.

Preliminary Determination by the International Trade Commission

    The International Trade Commission (ITC) will determine by February 
14, 1994, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of 
stainless steel bar from Brazil, India, Italy, Japan and Spain are 
materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. A 
negative ITC determination on any one of these investigations will 
result in that investigation being terminated; otherwise, the 
investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time 
limits.
    This notice is published pursuant to section 732(c)(2) of the Act 
and 19 CFR 353.13(b).

    Dated: January 19, 1994.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 94-1776 Filed 1-26-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P