[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