[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 85 (Monday, May 4, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24528-24529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-11429]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-201-802]


Gray Portland Cement and Clinker From Mexico: Amended Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 4, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nithya Nagarajan, Kristen Stevens, or 
John Totaro, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue N.W, 
Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3793.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute

    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 (hereinafter, 
``the Act'') by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''). In 
addition, unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department's 
regulations are to the old regulations (19 CFR part 353 (1997)).

Scope of the Review

    The products covered by this review include gray portland cement 
and clinker. Gray portland cement is a hydraulic cement and the primary 
component of concrete. Clinker, an intermediate material product 
produced when manufacturing cement, has no use other than being ground 
into finished cement. Gray portland cement is currently classifiable 
under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item number 2523.29 and 
cement clinker is currently classifiable under HTS item number 2523.10. 
Gray portland cement has also been entered under HTS item number 
2523.90 as ``other hydraulic cements.'' The HTS subheadings are 
provided for convenience and U.S. Customs Service purposes only. Our 
written description of the scope of the order remains dispositive.

Amendment of Final Results

    On March 16, 1998, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published the final results of the administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on Gray Portland Cement and Clinker from Mexico 
(63 FR 12764 ). This review covered CEMEX S.A de C.V (CEMEX), and its 
affiliate, Cementos de Chihuahua (CDC), manufacturers/exporters of the 
subject merchandise to the United States. The period of review (POR) is 
August 1, 1995 through July 31, 1996.
    On March 24, 1998, counsel for petitioner, the Southern Tier Cement 
Producers Committee, filed allegations of clerical errors with regard 
to the final results in the sixth administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order of gray portland cement and clinker from Mexico. 
On April 3, 1997, counsel for the respondent, CEMEX, also filed 
allegations of clerical errors with regard to this review. Petitioner 
then filed rebuttal comments on April 10, 1998. The Department, upon 
review of the allegations, agrees that certain aspects of the final 
results constitute ministerial errors within the meaning of 19 CFR 
353.28, and is hereby issuing an amended final based on corrections for 
these ministerial errors.
    First, CEMEX and petitioner noted that the margin program contained 
an incorrect instruction which resulted in an incorrect calculation of 
home market credit and inventory carrying cost. The Department, upon 
review of the margin program determined that the original final margin 
program failed to perform the proper mathematical calculation in 
calculating home market credit and inventory carrying cost, and U.S. 
credit and inventory carrying cost. The Department has corrected the 
amended final margin program to reflect these changes. For a complete 
discussion of the Department's corrected margin program, please see the 
amended final results analysis memo from the case analyst to the file.
    Second, CEMEX contends that the Department used an incorrect factor 
to convert quantities from short tons to metric tons in the margin 
calculation program. CEMEX did not raise this alleged error in its case 
brief for the sixth review. The petitioner argues that the Department 
used this conversion factor in the fifth review amended final results, 
the sixth review preliminary results, and the sixth review final 
results. We agree with petitioner, moreover, CEMEX did not object to 
the explicit statement in the Federal Register notice of the fifth 
review amended final results that the Department used the conversion 
factor CEMEX now contests--.907194 metric tons per short ton--in the 
amended final results. The Department's short ton/ metric ton 
conversion factor (1 MT=1.1023 ST; 1/1.1023=0.907194) varies by 
0.000009 from the factor proposed by CEMEX as the ``numerically 
correct'' factor (1 ST=2000 Lbs.; 1 MT=2,204.623 Lbs.; 2000/
2,204.623=0.907185). Clearly, the Department's conversion factor is 
also ``numerically correct,'' but reflects a different calculation 
methodology from that proposed by CEMEX. Thus, the Department did not 
err by using this factor, and we will not depart from established 
practice by adopting CEMEX's conversion factor for the sixth review 
amended final results.
    Third, CEMEX alleges that the Department used incorrect inflation 
factors for the months of December 1995 and January 1996 in its 
calculation of the difference in merchandise (DIFMER) adjustment. 
Petitioner did not object to the corrected inflation factor, but noted 
that the Department failed to use the appropriate costs, as revised 
after verification, in the DIFMER adjustment calculation. Upon review 
of the margin program, the Department determined that CEMEX and 
petitioner are both correct, therefore, we have revised the inflation 
factors for the months of December 1995 and January 1996, revised the 
cost of production to reflect the costs as reported to us after 
verification, and recalculated DIFMER for both CEMEX and its collapsed 
affiliate, CDC. For a complete discussion of the Department's corrected 
margin program, please see the amended final results analysis memo from 
the case analyst to the file.
    Finally, petitioner alleges that the Department failed to issue a 
final duty absorption finding in the Federal Register notice for the 
final results of review. CEMEX did not rebut petitioner's allegation. 
Upon review of the final results, the Department has determined that 
its position has not altered from the preliminary results of review and 
has determined that the

[[Page 24529]]

parties to the proceeding did not comment on the Department's 
preliminary finding. Therefore, consistent with our prior practice, the 
Department will continue to adhere to its preliminary finding for the 
final results of review. However, due to the fact that the final 
weighted-average dumping margin was revised between the preliminary and 
final results, we have finally determined that CEMEX has margins on 
92.49 percent of its U.S. sales.
    Pursuant to section 353.28 of the Department's regulations, parties 
to the proceeding will have 5 days after the date of publication of 
this notice to notify the Department of other ministerial or clerical 
errors, as well as, 5 days thereafter to rebut any comments by parties.

Amended Final Results of Review

    As a result of our review, we have determined that the following 
margins exist:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin  
          Manufacturer/Exporter              Time period      (percent) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CEMEX S.A de C.V........................     8/1/95-7/31/96        37.49
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall 
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Individual 
differences between United States price and foreign market value may 
vary from the percentages stated above. The Department will issue 
appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service.
    Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective, 
upon publication of this notice of amended final results of review for 
all shipments of gray portland cement and clinker from Mexico, 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) 
The cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates for 
those firms as stated above; (2) for previously 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, or the original 
investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be 
the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of 
the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other 
manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 61.85 percent for gray 
portland cement and clinker, the all others rate established in the 
LTFV investigations. See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Gray Portland Cement and Clinker from Mexico, 55 FR 29244, 
(1990).
    These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect 
until publication of the final results of the next administrative 
review.
    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 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 double antidumping duties.
    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 section 353.34(d) of the Department's 
regulations. Timely notification of return/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.
    This administrative review and notice are in accordance with 
section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR 353.22.

    Dated: April 21, 1998.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-11429 Filed 5-1-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P