[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 71 (Wednesday, April 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19737-19740]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9106]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-588-854]


Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Certain Tin Mill Products From Japan

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 12, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samantha Denenberg or Linda Ludwig, 
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 
Washington DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-1386 and (202) 482-3833, 
respectively.

The Applicable Statute and Regulations

    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 (``the Act'') by 
the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''). In addition, unless 
otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department of Commerce 
(``Department'') regulations are to the regulations at 19 CFR part 351 
(April 1999).

Preliminary Determination

    We preliminarily determine that Certain Tin Mill Products (``TMP'') 
from Japan are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at 
less than fair value (``LTFV''), as provided in section 733 of the Act. 
The estimated margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the ``Suspension of 
Liquidation'' section of this notice. For all the following companies, 
the Department has used adverse facts available for their estimated 
margin: Nippon Steel Corporation (``NSC''); Kawasaki Steel Corporation 
(``Kawasaki''); NKK Corporation (``NKK''); and Toyo Kohan (``Toyo''). 
See Case History section.

Case History

    On November 17, 1999, the Department initiated an antidumping duty 
investigation on imports of Certain Tin Mill Products from Japan 
(Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Investigations: Certain Tin Mill 
Products from Japan (64 FR 66892 (November 30, 1999)) (``Initiation 
Notice''). Since the initiation of this investigation the following 
events have occurred.
    The Department set aside a period for all interested parties to 
raise issues regarding product coverage (see 64 FR 69730 (December 14, 
1999)). Throughout the months of January and February, the Department 
received numerous filings from respondents (i.e., Kawasaki, NKK, NSC) 
and other interested parties (i.e., H.J. Heinz Co.; Silgan Containers 
Corp.; ITOCHU International; Maui Pineapple Co., Ltd.; NAPP Systems, 
Inc.; Reynolds Metals Co.; Fuji Photo Film, Inc.; Mitsui & Co. 
(U.S.A.), Inc.; Eastman Kodak Co.; and Berlin Metals Inc.). On January 
27, 2000 and February 7, 2000, Weirton Steel Corporation, the 
Independent Steelworkers Union, and the United Steelworkers of America, 
AFL-CIO (collectively ``petitioners''), submitted comments to the 
Department requesting that the scope exclude certain TMP from the scope 
of the investigation. On March 13, 2000, March 31, 2000, and April 3, 
2000, petitioners filed letters agreeing to amend the scope of the 
investigation to exclude various types of tin mill products (see Scope 
Amendment Memorandum from Richard Weible to Joseph A. Spetrini, April 
5, 2000).
    On December 3, 1999, petitioners submitted a proposal for model 
match criteria. On December 15, 1999, the Department issued proposed 
model match criteria to all interested parties. On December 22 and 
December 29, 1999, NKK and NSC submitted comments on our proposed model 
matching criteria.
    On December 20, 1999, the United States International Trade 
Commission (``ITC'') notified the Department of its affirmative 
preliminary injury determination on imports of subject merchandise from 
Japan. On December 21, 1999, the ITC published its preliminary 
determination that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in 
the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of the 
subject merchandise from Japan (64 FR 71497).
    On November 30, 1999, the Department issued Section A of its 
antidumping duty questionnaire to NSC, Kawasaki, NKK, and Toyo. On 
December 15, 1999, the Department again issued Section A of the 
antidumping duty questionnaire to Toyo's headquarters in Japan because 
Toyo no longer had legal representation. On December 14, 1999, the 
Department received NKK and Kawasaki's responses to Question 1 of 
Section A. On December 15, 1999, the Department received MITI's 
response to the Department's request for information on the Japanese 
producers. On December 15, 1999, NSC informed the Department that it 
would not be participating in the TMP investigation. On December 21, 
1999, Toyo informed the Department that it would not be participating 
in the TMP investigation.
    On January 5, 2000, the Department issued Sections B-E of its 
antidumping duty questionnaire to Kawasaki and NKK. On January 20, 
2000, petitioners filed comments on Kawasaki's section A response. On 
January 21, 2000, petitioners filed comments on NKK's section A 
response. On February 11, 2000 both Kawasaki and NKK informed the 
Department that they would not be participating in the TMP 
investigation.

Scope of Investigation

    The scope of this investigation includes tin mill flat-rolled 
products that are coated or plated with tin, chromium or chromium 
oxides. Flat-rolled steel products coated with tin are known as tin 
plate. Flat-rolled steel products coated with chromium or chromium 
oxides are known as tin-free steel or electrolytic chromium-coated 
steel. The scope includes all the noted tin mill products regardless of 
thickness, width, form (in coils or cut sheets), coating type 
(electrolytic or otherwise), edge (trimmed, untrimmed or further 
processed, such and scroll cut), coating thickness, surface finish, 
temper, coating metal (tin, chromium, chromium oxide), reduction 
(single- or double-reduced), and whether or not coated with a plastic 
material.
    All products that meet the written physical description are within 
the scope of this investigation unless specifically excluded. The 
following

[[Page 19738]]

products, by way of example, are outside and/or specifically excluded 
from the scope of this investigation:
     Single reduced electrolytically chromium coated steel with 
a thickness 0.238 mm (85 pound base box) (10%) or 0.251 mm 
(90 pound base box) (10%) or 0.255 mm (10%) 
with 770 mm (minimum width) (-0/+1.588 mm) by 900 mm (maximum length if 
sheared) sheet size or 30.6875 inches (minimum width) (-0/+ \1/16\ 
inch) and 35.4 inches (maximum length if sheared) sheet size; with type 
MR or higher (per ASTM) A623 steel chemistry; batch annealed at T2\1/2\ 
anneal temper, with a yield strength of 31 to 42 kpsi (214 to 290 Mpa); 
with a tensile strength of 43 to 58 kpsi (296 to 400 Mpa); with a 
chrome coating restricted to 32 to 150 mg/m\2\; with a chrome oxide 
coating restricted to 6 to 25 mg/m\2\ with a modified 7B ground roll 
finish or blasted roll finish; with roughness average (Ra) 0.10 to 0.35 
micrometers, measured with a stylus instrument with a stylus radius of 
2 to 5 microns, a trace length of 5.6 mm, and a cut-off of 0.8 mm, and 
the measurement traces shall be made perpendicular to the rolling 
direction; with an oil level of 0.17 to 0.37 grams/base box as type 
BSO, or 2.5 to 5.5 mg/m\2\ as type DOS, or 3.5 to 6.5 mg/m\2\ as type 
ATBC; with electrical conductivity of static probe voltage drop of 0.46 
volts drop maximum, and with electrical conductivity degradation to 
0.70 volts drop maximum after stoving (heating to 400 degrees F for 100 
minutes followed by a cool to room temperature).
     Single reduced electrolytically chromium or tin-coated 
steel in the gauges of 0.0040 inch nominal, 0.0045 inch nominal, 0.0050 
inch nominal, 0.0061 inch nominal (55 pound base box weight), 0.0066 
inch nominal (60 pound base box weight), and 0.0072 inch nominal (65 
pound base box weight), regardless of width, temper, finish, coating or 
other properties.
     Single reduced electrolytically chromium coated steel in 
the gauge of 0.024 inch, with widths of 27.0 inches or 31.5 inches, and 
with T-1 temper properties.
      Single reduced electrolytically chromium coated steel, 
with a chemical composition of 0.005% max carbon, 0.030% max silicon, 
0.25% max manganese, 0.025% max phosphorous, 0.025% max sulfur, 0.070% 
max aluminum, and the balance iron, with a metallic chromium layer of 
70-130 mg/m\2\, with a chromium oxide layer of 5-30 mg/m\2\, with a 
tensile strength of 260-440 N/mm\2\, with an elongation of 28-48%, with 
a hardness (HR-30T) of 40-58, with a surface roughness of 0.5-1.5 
microns Ra, with magnetic properties of Bm (KG) 10.0 minimum, Br (KG) 
8.0 minimum, Hc (Oe) 2.5-3.8, and  1400 minimum, as measured 
with a Riken Denshi DC magnetic characteristic measuring machine, Model 
BHU-60.
      Bright finish tin-coated sheet with a thickness equal to 
or exceeding 0.0299 inch, coated to thickness of \3/4\ pound (0.000045 
inch) and 1 pound (0.00006 inch).
    The merchandise subject to this investigation is classified in the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''), under 
HTSUS subheadings 7210.11.0000, 7210.12.0000, 7210.50.0000, 
7212.10.0000, and 7212.50.0000 if of non-alloy steel and under HTSUS 
subheadings 7225.99.0090, and 7226.99.0000 if of alloy steel. Although 
the subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, our 
written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

Period of Investigation

    The Period of Investigation (``POI'') is October 1, 1998 through 
September 30, 1999.

Facts Available

    Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that, if an interested party: 
(A) Withholds information that has been requested by the Department; 
(B) fails to provide such information in a timely manner or in the form 
or manner requested; (C) significantly impedes a proceeding under the 
antidumping statute; or (D) provides such information but the 
information cannot be verified, the Department shall use facts 
otherwise available in reaching the applicable determination.
    In this case, NSC and Toyo indicated that they would not 
participate in the Department's investigation and did not provide the 
Department with information requested and needed to calculate a dumping 
margin. Therefore, we determine that NSC and Toyo withheld information 
requested by the Department. Accordingly, the Department finds it 
necessary to use the facts otherwise available for these respondents in 
accordance with section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act.
    With respect to Kawasaki and NKK, both companies responded to 
Section A of the Department's questionnaire. However, both companies 
failed to respond to Sections B-C of the Department's questionnaire. On 
February 11, 2000, Kawasaki and NKK informed the Department that they 
would not be submitting responses to section B-C of the Department's 
questionnaire. Therefore, the Department determines that Kawasaki and 
NKK withheld information requested by the Department. Because the 
Department is lacking complete information, we find it necessary to use 
the facts otherwise available for Kawasaki and NKK in accordance with 
section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act.
    In selecting from among the facts otherwise available, section 
776(b) of the Act provides that adverse inferences may be used when a 
party has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability 
to comply with the Department's requests for information. See also 
Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the URAA, H.R. Rep. No. 
103-316, Vol. I, at 870 (1994) (``SAA''). In this case, NSC and Toyo 
completely failed to respond to the Department's questionnaires 
notwithstanding warnings under section 782(d) that the information was 
necessary and that failure to provide it could result in the use of the 
facts available. Further, the companies indicated that they would not 
participate in the Department's investigation. Because of the 
companies' complete lack of participation in this investigation, we 
find that the companies failed to cooperate to the best of their 
abilities, and that section 782(e) of the Act does not apply. 
Accordingly, when selecting among the facts available, we find that the 
use of an adverse inference is warranted in accordance with section 
776(b) of the Act.
    With respect to Kawasaki and NKK, while the companies did respond 
to the Department's section A questionnaires, neither company responded 
to the Department's Sections B-C questionnaires. In light of these 
facts, the Department finds that Kawasaki and NKK failed to act to the 
best of their abilities to comply with the Department's requests for 
information under section 776(b) of the Act. Because of this finding, 
section 782(e) of the Act is not applicable. Thus, the Department has 
determined that, in selecting among the facts otherwise available, an 
adverse inference is warranted for these companies as well.
    Section 776(b) states that an adverse inference may include 
reliance on information derived from the petition or any other 
information placed on the record. See also SAA at 829-831. As adverse 
facts available, the Department is assigning to NSC, Kawasaki, NKK, and 
Toyo a dumping margin of 95.29 percent, which was calculated from 
petition information placed on the record by petitioners on October 28, 
1999 and November 8, 1999, and represents the highest petition margin.

[[Page 19739]]

As explained in detail in the ``Corroboration'' section below, we are 
using this information because it represents the best price-to-price 
comparison on the record. Further, the Department determines that use 
of this margin accomplishes the statute's aim of encouraging 
participation. As the SAA provides, where a party has not cooperated in 
a proceeding:

    Commerce * * * may employ adverse inferences about the missing 
information to ensure that the party does not obtain a more 
favorable result by failing to cooperate than if it had cooperated 
fully. In employing adverse inferences, one factor the agencies will 
consider is the extent to which a party may benefit from its own 
lack of cooperation. SAA at 870.

    Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies 
on secondary information (which includes information from the petition) 
in using the facts otherwise available, it must, to the extent 
practicable, corroborate that information from independent sources that 
are reasonably at its disposal.
    The SAA clarifies that ``corroborate'' means that the Department 
will satisfy itself that the secondary information to be used has 
probative value. See SAA at 870. The SAA also states that independent 
sources used to corroborate such evidence may include, for example, 
published price lists, official import statistics and customs data, and 
information obtained from interested parties during the particular 
investigation. See SAA at 870.
    We reviewed the adequacy and accuracy of the information in the 
petition during our pre-initiation analysis of the petition, to the 
extent appropriate information was available for this purpose. See 
Import Administration Antidumping Duty (``AD'') Investigation 
Initiation Checklist (November 17, 1999), for a discussion of the 
margin calculations in the petition. In addition, in order to determine 
the probative value of the margins in the petition in accordance with 
section 776(c) of the Act, we examined the key elements of the export 
price (``EP'') and normal value (``NV'') calculations on which the 
margins in the petition were based. Petitioners constructed normal 
values based on the average prices of tin mill products sold in Japan 
by NSC to large end users during June 1999. Petitioners determined 
that, because NSC is the largest producer of the subject merchandise in 
the Japanese market, NSC's prices would be representative of the normal 
value in the Japanese tin mill market. The Japanese home market prices 
for five sample models of tin plate products and thirteen sample models 
of tin free steel were obtained by foreign market research consultants 
in Japan. The prices used in the calculation of NV were delivered, VAT 
exclusive prices. Petitioners derived NV by deducting a commission from 
the delivered price, which represents payment made to large trading 
companies. Petitioners also deducted expenses for freight, handling, 
and other movement related expenses such as storage during 
transportation and tolls. For the calculation of dumping margins, 
petitioners compared the average unit value for all five sample sales 
of tin plate to the average customs value for the corresponding HTSUS 
item for the month of June 1999, and the average unit value for all 
thirteen sample sales of tin free steel to the average customs value 
for the corresponding HTSUS item for the month of June 1999.
    The estimated dumping margins in the petition were based on a 
comparison between NSC's home market prices and U.S. prices derived 
from IM-145 statistics. The Department determined the adequacy and 
accuracy of the information from which the petition margins were 
calculated by reviewing all of the data presented and by requesting 
clarification and confirmation from petitioners and their sources as 
needed (see Petition on Certain Tin Mill Products from Japan: 
Deficiency Questionnaire, November 3, 1999). As the EP values were 
derived by using IM-145 statistics, the Department notes that no 
further corroboration is necessary because the source is official U.S. 
import statistics (see Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value: Collated Roofing Nails from the People's Republic of 
China, 62 FR 51410, 51412 (October 1, 1997)). Our review of the EP and 
NV calculations indicated that the information in the petition has 
probative value, as relevant information included in the margin 
calculations in the petition are from public sources concurrent with 
the POI (e.g., IM-145 statistics and interest rates).

All Others

    Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act provides that, where the estimated 
weighted-average dumping margins established for all exporters and 
producers individually investigated are zero or de minimis or are 
determined entirely under section 776 of the Act, the Department may 
use any reasonable method to establish the estimated all-others rate 
for exporters and producers not individually investigated. Our recent 
practice under these circumstances has been to assign as the ``all 
others'' rate the simple average of the margins in the petition. See 
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Stainless Steel Plate in Coil from Canada, 64 FR 15457 (March 31, 
1999); Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Stainless Steel Plate in Coil from Italy, 64 FR 15458, 15459 (March 21, 
1999).
    We are basing the ``all others'' rate on the simple average of 
margins in the petition, including information placed on the record by 
petitioners on November 8, 1999, which is 32.52 percent (see Memorandum 
of Analysis for the Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty 
Investigation of Certain Tin Mill Products from Japan, April 5, 2000).

Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d) of the Act, we are directing the 
Customs Service to suspend liquidation of all imports of subject 
merchandise that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the 
Federal Register. We will instruct the Customs Service to require a 
cash deposit or the posting of a bond equal to the dumping margin 
indicated in the chart below. These suspension-of-liquidation 
instructions will remain in effect until further notice. The dumping 
margins are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                                                               (Percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exporter/Manufacturer:
  Kawasaki Steel Corporation................................       95.29
  Nippon Steel Corporation..................................       95.29
  NKK Corporation...........................................       95.29
  Toyo Kohan................................................       95.29
  All Others................................................       32.52
------------------------------------------------------------------------

ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we have notified the 
ITC of our determination. If our final determination is affirmative, 
the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of 
this preliminary determination, or 45 days after our final 
determination, whether these imports are materially injuring, or 
threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

Public Comment

    Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration no later than thirty days 
after the date of publication of this notice, and rebuttal briefs, 
limited to issues raised in case briefs, no later than thirty-five days 
after publication of this notice. A list of authorities used and an 
executive summary of issues should accompany

[[Page 19740]]

any briefs submitted to the Department. Such summary should be limited 
to five pages total, including footnotes. In accordance with section 
774 of the Act, we will hold a public hearing, if requested, to afford 
interested parties an opportunity to comment on arguments raised in 
case or rebuttal briefs. Tentatively, the hearing will be held thirty-
seven days after publication of this notice, time and room to be 
determined, at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. Parties should confirm 
by telephone the time, date, and place of the hearing 48 hours before 
the scheduled time.
    Interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or to participate 
if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant 
Secretary for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 
1870, within 30 days of the publication of this notice. Requests should 
contain: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the 
number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues to be discussed. 
Oral presentations will be limited to issues raised in the briefs. If 
this investigation proceeds normally, we will make our final 
determination no later than 75 days after this preliminary 
determination.
    This determination is issued and published in accordance with 
sections 733(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: April 5, 2000.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-9106 Filed 4-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P