[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1847-1849]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-744]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-485-803]
Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From Romania: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On September 7, 1999 the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary results of review of the
antidumping duty order on cut-to-length carbon steel plate from
Romania. This review covers one manufacture/exporter of the subject
[[Page 1848]]
merchandise to the United States and the period August 1, 1997 through
July 31, 1998. We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on
our preliminary results. Based on our analysis of the comments
received, we have changed the results from those presented in the
preliminary results of review.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 12, 2000.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Baker or Robert James, AD/CVD
Enforcement Group III--Office 8, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-2924
(Baker), (202) 482-5222 (James).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Applicable Statute
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act) are references to the provisions effective
January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to the Act
by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless
otherwise indicated, all references to the Department's regulations are
to 19 CFR Part 351 (1998).
Background
The Department published an antidumping duty order on certain cut-
to-length carbon steel plate from Romania on August 19, 1993 (58 FR
44167). The Department published a notice of ``Opportunity to Request
an Administrative Review'' of the antidumping duty order fur the 1997/
98 review period on August 11, 1998 (63 FR 42821). On August 31, 1998,
respondents Windmill International PTE Ltd. of Singapore, Windmill
International Romania Branch, and Windmill International Ltd. (USA)
(collectively ``Windmill'') requested that the Department conduct an
administrative review. On August 31, 1998, we also received a request
for an administrative review from Bethlehem Steel Corporation and U.S.
Steel Group, a Unit of USX Corporation (petitioners). We published a
notice of initiation of the review on September 29, 1998 (63 FR 51893).
Under the Act, the Department may extend the deadline for
completion of administrative reviews if it determines that it is not
practicable to complete the review within the statutory time limit of
365 days. See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. On March 26, 1999, the
Department extended the time limit for the preliminary results in this
case. See Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Romania; Extension of
Time Limits for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 64 FR 14689.
On September 7, 1999 the Department published in the Federal
Register the preliminary results of review of the antidumping duty
order on cut-to-length carbon steel place from Romania (64 FR 48581).
The Department has now completed this administrative review in
accordance with section 751 of the Act.
Scope of the Review
The products covered in this review include hot-rolled carbon steel
universal mill plates (i.e., flat-rolled products rolled on four faces
or in a closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 millimeters but not
exceeding 1,250 millimeters and of a thickness of not less than 4
millimeters, not in coil and without patterns in relief), of
rectangular shape, neither clad, plated nor coated with metal, whether
or not painted varnished, or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic
substances; and certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat-rolled products in
straight lengths, of rectangular shape, hot rolled, neither clad,
plated, nor coated with metal, whether or not painted, varnished, or
coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances, 4.75 millimeters
or more in thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters and
measures at least twice the thickness, as currently classifiable in the
HTS under item numbers 7208.31.0000, 7208.32.0000, 7208.33.1000,
7208.33.5000, 7208.41.0000, 7208.42,0000, 7208.43,0000, 7208.90.0000,
7210.70.3000, 7210.90.9000, 7211.11.0000, 7211.12.0000, 7211.21.0000,
7211.22.0045, 7211.90.0000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.50.5000 and
7212.50.0000. Included in this review are flat-rolled products of
nonrectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved
subsequent to the rolling process (i.e., products which have been
``worked after rolling'')--for example, products which have been
bevelled or rounded at the edges. Excluded from this review is grade X-
70 plate.
These HTS item numbers are provided for convenience and U.S.
Customs purposes. The written description remains dispositive.
The period of review is August 1, 1997, through July 31, 1998. This
review covers sales of certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate by
Windmill International PTE Ltd. of Singapore (Windmill Singapore).
Windmill's supplier during the POR was the unaffiliated producer C.S.
Sidex S.A. (Sidex).
Use of Facts Available
Section 776(a) of the Act provides that if necessary information is
not available on the record, the Department shall use, subject to
section 782(d) of the Act, the facts otherwise available in reaching
the applicable determination. In this review, information is not on the
record to enable the Department to make an adjustment to U.S. price for
a miscellaneous fund account using the surrogate value method the
Department uses in calculating margins for shipments from non-market
economy (NME) countries. Therefore, as a non-adverse facts available,
we have made this adjustment using the exact amount Windmill recorded
in its books. Windmill records this amount in a market-economy
currency. For more information, see comment 3 (below).
Analysis of Comments Received
We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the
preliminary results. We received comments from the petitioners.
Comment 1: Use of Surrogate Value for Foreign Inland Freight
Petitioners argue that the Department erred by using a surrogate
value for foreign inland freight, rather than the invoiced value. They
argue that even though nothing on the record indicates whether the
freight provider was a market economy or non-market economy provider,
the record does indicate that the foreign inland freight was invoiced
and paid in U.S. dollars, and that therefore the Department should use
that value in its computation of net U.S. price.
Department's Position: We disagree. Evidence on the record suggests
that the foreign inland freight was originally calculated in Romanian
lei and only later converted into U.S. dollars prior to invoicing. See
Romanian verification exhibit 34 of the August 30, 1999 verification
report, p. 3. Furthermore, the address of the freight provider suggests
that it was a nonmarket economy provider. Id. at 1 and 3. Therefore, in
these final results of review, we have continued to use a surrogate
value for computation of the foreign inland freight.
Comment 2: Tax on Foreign Inland Freight
Petitioners argue that the Department erred by not deducting from
the U.S. price the tax that Windmill pays to the Romanian government on
the foreign inland freight. They argue that this tax
[[Page 1849]]
should be considered a charge incident to bringing the subject
merchandise to the United States, and should thus be deducted from the
U.S. price. They further argue that even though the tax is invoiced and
paid in Romanian lei, the Department should use the U.S. dollar amount
of the tax because only that value is on the record.
Department's Position: We disagree. Because Windmill paid the tax
at issue to the Romanian government, we consider it to be an intra-NME
expense. We do not use such expenses in our margin calculations, but
rather rely on surrogate values. Therefore, we have continued to rely
exclusively on the calculated surrogate value for foreign inland
freight.
Comment 3: Deduction for Miscellaneous Expense Account
Petitioners argue that the Department erred by failing to deduct
from U.S. price a cost Windmill records in its books under the account
for ``commissions.'' The verification report describes this accounting
code as ``a miscellaneous fund used to facilitate, for example,
shipments and loading.'' See the verification report at 28. They argue
that this expense should be considered a charge incident to bringing
the subject merchandise to the United States, and should thus be
deducted form U.S. price. They further argue that even though the
expense is paid in Romanian lei, the Department should use the U.S.
dollar amount of the expense because only that value is on the record.
Department's Position: We agree in part. Contrary to petitioner's
assertion, the record does not indicate in what currency this expense
was paid, and is unclear as to whether it was paid at all. However, the
record does indicate that Windmill recognizes this expense as a cost in
its accounting records. Although it is not our practice to make an
adjustment for expenses paid, as here, to NME suppliers (except through
the use of surrogate values), we regard the expense at issue as a
movement expense and, therefore, we agree with petitioners that we
should make an adjustment for it. As non-adverse facts available, we
have deducted from U.S. price, as petitioners suggested, the exact
amount that Windmill records in its accounting records. We used this
method because Windmill records the expense in market-economy currency
and because the record explains how Windmill determines the amount to
be recorded in its books. See the verification report, p. 28.
Final Results of the Review
As a result of this review, we have determined that a weighted-
average dumping margin of 21.07 percent exists for Windmill for the
period August 1, 1997 through July 31, 1998.
The Department shall determine, and the U.S. Customs shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department shall
issue appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service. In
accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated an importer-
specific assessment rate by dividing the dumping margin found on the
subject merchandise examined by the entered value of such merchandise.
We will direct the United States Customs Service to assess antidumping
duties on appropriate entries by applying the assessment rate to the
entered value of the merchandise entered during the POR.
Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective
upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for
all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as
provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the case deposit
rate for Windmill will be the rate established in the final results of
this administrative review; (2) for all other Romanian exporters, the
case deposit rate will be the Romania-wide rate made effective by the
final determination in the less-than-fair-value investigation (see
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cut-to-
Length Carbon Steel Plate from Romania, 58 FR 37209 (July 9, 1993));
(3) for non-Romanian exporters of subject merchandise from Romania, the
cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the Romanian supplier
of that exporter.
These deposit requirements will remain in effect until publication
of the final results of the next administrative review.
This notice also 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 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 orders (APOs) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
19 CFR 351.306. Timely written notification of the 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.
We are issuing and publishing this administrative review and notice
in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 771(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: January 5, 2000.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-744 Filed 1-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M