[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 171 (Friday, September 3, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48360-48362]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-23048]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-485-601]


Final Result of Expedited Sunset Review: Solid Urea from Romania

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

ACTION: Notice of Final Result of Expedited Sunset Review on Solid Urea 
from Romania.

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

SUMMARY: On March 1, 1999, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') initiated a sunset review of the antidumping duty order 
on solid urea from Romania pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act 
of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). On the basis of a notice of intent 
to participate and adequate substantive comments filed on behalf of the 
domestic interested parties and inadequate response (in this case, no 
response) from respondent interested parties, the Department determined 
to conduct an expedited sunset review. As a result of this review, the 
Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty order would be 
likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the levels 
indicated in the Final Results of Review section of this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martha V. Douthit or Melissa G. 
Skinner, Office of Policy for Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th St. & 
Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone (202) 482-5050 
or (202) 482-1560, respectively.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 3, 1999.

Statute and Regulations

    This review was conducted pursuant to section 751(c) and 752 of the 
Act. The Department's procedures for the conduct of sunset reviews are 
set forth in Procedures for Conducting Five-year (``Sunset'') Reviews 
of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 
1998) (``Sunset Regulations''). Guidance on methodological or 
analytical issues relevant to the Department's conduct of sunset 
reviews is set forth in the Department's Policy Bulletin 98:3--Policies 
Regarding the Conduct of Five-year (``Sunset'') Reviews of Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 
1998) (``Sunset Policy Bulletin'').

Scope

    The merchandise subject to the antidumping duty order is solid urea 
from Romania. Solid urea is a high-nitrogen content fertilizer which is 
produced by reacting ammonia with carbon dioxide. During the original 
investigation the merchandise was classified under item number 480.3000 
of the Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (``TSUSA''). This 
merchandise is currently classifiable under item number 3102.10.00 of 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (``HTS''). The HTS item number is 
provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description 
of the scope remains dispositive.

History of the Order

    On May 26, 1987, the Department issued its final determination that 
solid urea from Romania was being sold in the United States at less-
than-fair-value. The weighted-average dumping margin

[[Page 48361]]

was 90.71 percent.1 On July 14, 1987, the Department's 
antidumping duty order was published.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Urea From the Socialist Republic of Romania; Final 
Determination of Sales at Less-Than-Fair-Value, 52 FR 19557 (May 26, 
1987).
    \2\ See Antidumping Duty Order; Urea From the Socialist Republic 
of Romania, 52 FR 26367 (July 14, 1987).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department has conducted one administrative review since the 
issuance of this order, covering the period January 1987 through June 
1988, and found no shipments.3 The order remains in effect 
for all Romanian producers and exporters of the subject merchandise. We 
note that, to date, the Department has not issued any duty absorption 
findings in this case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 
Solid Urea From Romania, 54 FR 39558 (September 27, 1989).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    On March 1, 1999, the Department initiated a sunset review of the 
antidumping order on solid urea from Romania pursuant to section 751(c) 
of the Act. On March 16, 1999, the Department received a Notice of 
Intent to Participate on behalf of Agrium US, Inc. (``Agrium'') and 
from the members of the Ad Hoc Committee of Domestic Nitrogen Producers 
4 (the ``Committee''), collectively the (``domestic 
parties''), within the deadline specified in section 351.218(d)(1)(i) 
of the Sunset Regulations. We received complete substantive responses 
from the domestic parties, within the 30-day deadline specified in the 
Sunset Regulations under section 351.218(d)(3)(i). The domestic parties 
claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act as 
United States producers, manufacturers, or wholesalers of the domestic 
like product. The Department did not receive a response from any 
respondent interested party. As a result, pursuant to section 
751(c)(3)(B) of the Act, and our regulations (19 C.F.R. 
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2)), we are conducting an expedited sunset review 
on this order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Committee maintains that it is comprised of a coalition 
of U.S. producers of nitrogen fertilizers and identifies its current 
members : CF Industries, Inc., Costal Chemical, Inc., Mississippi 
Chemical Corp., PCS Nitrogen, Inc., and Terra Industries, Inc. The 
Committee notes that J.R. Simplot Co. is a Committee member, but not 
producer of solid urea. See Substantive Response of the Committee, 
March 30, 1999, at 1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 6, 1999, the Department determined that the sunset review 
of the antidumping duty order on solid urea from Romania is 
extraordinarily complicated. In accordance with section 751(c)(5)(C)(v) 
of the Act, the Department may treat a review as extraordinarily 
complicated if it is a review of a transition order (i.e., an order in 
effect on January 1, 1995). See section 751(c)(6)(C) of the Act. As a 
result of this determination, the Department extended the time limit 
for completion of the final results of this review until not later than 
August 30, 1999, in accordance with section 751(c)(5)(B) of the 
Act.5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Five-Year 
Reviews, 54 FR 36333 (July 6, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination

    In accordance with section 751(c)(1) of the Act, the Department 
conducted this review to determine whether revocation of the 
antidumping order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of 
dumping. Section 752(c) of the Act provides that, in making this 
determination, the Department shall consider the weighted-average 
dumping margins determined in the investigation and subsequent reviews 
and the volume of imports of the subject merchandise for the period 
before and the period after the issuance of the antidumping duty order, 
and it shall provide to the International Trade Commission (``the 
Commission'') the magnitude of the margin of dumping likely to prevail 
if the order is revoked.
    The Department's determinations concerning continuation or 
recurrence of dumping and magnitude of the margin are discussed below. 
In addition, the domestic interested parties' comments with respect to 
the continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the 
margin are addressed within the respective sections below.

Continuation or Recurrence of Dumping

    Drawing on the guidance provided in the legislative history 
accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''), specifically 
the Statement of Administrative Action (``the SAA''), H.R. Doc. No. 
103-316, vol. 1 (1994), the House Report, H.R. Rep. No. 103-826, pt.1 
(1994), and the Senate Report, S. Rep. No. 103-412 (1994), the 
Department issued its Sunset Policy Bulletin providing guidance on 
methodological and analytical issues, including the basis for 
likelihood determinations. The Department indicated that determinations 
of likelihood will be made on an order-wide basis (see section II.A.2 
of the Sunset Policy Bulletin). In addition, the Department normally 
will determine that revocation of an antidumping order is likely to 
lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping where (a) dumping 
continued at any level above de minimis after the issuance of the 
order, (b) imports of the subject merchandise ceased after the issuance 
of the order, or (c) dumping was eliminated after the issuance of the 
order and import volumes for the subject merchandise declined 
significantly (see section II.A.3 of the Sunset Policy Bulletin).
    In addition to considering the guidance on likelihood cited above, 
section751(c)(4)(B) of the Act provides that the Department shall 
determine that revocation of an order is likely to lead to continuation 
or recurrence of dumping where a respondent interested party waives it 
participation in the sunset review. In the instant review, the 
Department did not receive a response from any respondent interest 
party. Pursuant to section 351.218(d)(2)(iii) of the Sunset 
Regulations, this constitutes a waiver of participation.
    In their substantive responses the domestic parties assert that 
revocation of the antidumping duty order of solid urea from Romania 
would likely result in the continuation or resumption of dumping. The 
domestic parties argue that imports of the subject merchandise ceased 
after the issuance of the order and provide import statistics to 
support their claim.
    The domestic parties maintain that the Department should conclude 
that because imports of Romanian urea into the United States ceased 
after the issuance of the order, Romanian producers and exporters 
cannot sell solid urea in the U.S. markets without dumping.
    In addition, the domestic parties argue that the dumping margin of 
90.71 percent has remained unchanged since the investigation. The 
domestic parties assert that no Romanian urea producer or exporter has 
ever sought a review to obtain a reduced margin. Therefore, the 
domestic parties assert, the magnitude and longevity of the original 
antidumping margin indicates that Romania urea cannot be sold in the 
U.S. market at non-dumped prices.
    For the reasons stated above, the domestic parties conclude that if 
the order on solid urea from Romania be revoked, there is likelihood of 
continuation and recurrence of dumping.
    As discussed in Section II.A.3 of the Sunset Policy Bulletin, the 
SAA at 890, and the House Report at 63-64, existence of dumping margins 
after the order is highly probative of the likelihood of continuation 
or recurrence of dumping. Further, if imports ceased after the order is 
issued, it is reasonable to assume that the exporters could not sell in 
the United States without

[[Page 48362]]

dumping and that to reenter the U.S. market, they would have to resume 
dumping. In this case we find that imports ceased after the issuance of 
the order and dumping margins continued to exist. Therefore, given that 
imports ceased, dumping margins continue to exist, respondent 
interested parties waived their right to participate in this review, 
and absent argument and evidence to the contrary, the Department 
determines that dumping of solid urea from Romania is likely to 
continue or recur if the order were revoked.

Magnitude of the Margin

    In the Sunset Policy Bulletin, the Department stated that it will 
normally provide to the Commission the margin that was determined in 
the final determination in the original investigation. Further, for 
companies not specifically investigated, or for companies that did not 
begin shipping until after the order was issued, the Department 
normally will provide a margin based on the country-wide rate from the 
investigation. (See section II.B.1 of the Sunset Policy Bulletin.) 
Exceptions to this policy permit the use of a more recently calculated 
margin, when appropriate, and consideration of duty absorption 
determinations. (See sections II.B.2 and 3 of the Sunset Policy 
Bulletin.)
    With respect to the magnitude of the margin likely to prevail if 
the antidumping duty orders were revoked, the domestic parties argue 
that the Department should provide the Commission the dumping margin 
from the final results of the original investigation, 90.71 percent. 
The domestic parties assert that this margin is the only rate that has 
been calculated by the Department and it is the only rate that reflects 
the behavior of Romanian producers and exporters of urea without the 
discipline of the order.
    The Department agrees with the domestic parties concerning the 
choice of the dumping margin to report to the Commission. In our final 
determination of sales at less-than-fair-value, we reported a weighted-
average dumping margin of 90.71 percent for I.C.E. Chimica ( the only 
company investigated) and for all others. Therefore, consistent with 
the Department's Sunset Policy Bulletin we determine that the original 
margin, is probative of the behavior of the Romanian producers and 
exporters of solid urea if the order were revoked. We will report to 
the Commission the rate from the original investigation contained in 
the Final Results of Review section of this notice.

Final Results of Review

    As a result of this review, the Department finds that revocation of 
the antidumping order would be likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of dumping at the margins listed below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                  Manufacturers/ Exporters                    (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I.C.E. Chimica.............................................        90.71
All Others.................................................        90.71
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice serves as the only 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 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 five-year (``sunset'') review and notice are published in 
accordance with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
    Dated: August 30, 1999.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 99-23048 Filed 9-2-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P