[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 3, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50397-50401]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-24750]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-834-806]


Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From Kazakhstan

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

ACTION: Notice of final determination in the less than fair value 
investigation of

[[Page 50398]]

certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from Kazakhstan.

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

SUMMARY: We determine that certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat 
products from Kazakhstan are being, or are likely to be, sold in the 
United States at less than fair value. On May 3, 2001, the Department 
of Commerce published a notice of preliminary determination of sales at 
less than fair value in the investigation of hot-rolled carbon steel 
flat products from Kazakhstan. See Notice of Preliminary Determination 
of Sales at Not Less Than Fair Value: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel 
Flat Products from Kazakhstan, 66 FR 22168 (May 3, 2001) (``Preliminary 
Determination''). This investigation covers one manufacturer/exporter 
of the subject merchandise. The period of investigation (``POI'') is 
April 1, 2000 through September 30, 2000.
    Based upon our verification of the data and analysis of the 
comments received, we have made changes in the margin calculations. 
Therefore, the final determination of this investigation differs from 
the preliminary determination. The final weighted-average dumping 
margin is listed below in the section titled ``Continuation of 
Suspension of Liquidation.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 3, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juanita H. Chen at 202-482-0409, 
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20230.

Applicable Statute and Regulations

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (``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. In addition, unless otherwise 
indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are to the 
regulations at 19 CFR part 351 (2000).

Background

    On December 4, 2000, the Department initiated an antidumping duty 
investigation of hot-rolled steel from Kazakhstan. See Notice of 
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Certain Hot-Rolled 
Carbon Steel Flat Products from Argentina, India, Indonesia, 
Kazakhstan, the Netherlands, the People's Republic of China, Romania, 
South Africa, Taiwan, Thailand, and Ukraine, 65 FR 77568 (December 12, 
2000) (``Notice of Initiation'').
    On March 16, 2001, co-petitioners Bethlehem Steel Corporation, LTV 
Steel Company, Inc., National Steel Corporation, and U.S. Steel Group, 
a unit of USX Corporation \1\ (hereinafter collectively ``Bethlehem, et 
al.'') requested that the Department initiate a middleman dumping 
investigation. On June 15, 2001, the Department issued a memorandum 
stating we are not initiating a middleman dumping investigation because 
Bethlehem, et al., have not provided specific evidence of dumping by a 
particular middleman. See Memorandum for Joseph A. Spetrini on Whether 
to Initiate a Middleman Dumping Investigation (June 15, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On July 2, 2001, U.S. Steel Group, a unit of USX 
Corporation, changed its name to United States Steel LLC. United 
States Steel LLC is a Delaware limited liability company and the 
successor by merger to USX Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 21, 2001, OJSC Ispat Karmet (``Ispat Karmet'') requested 
that the Department determine that the hot-rolled steel industry in 
Kazakhstan is a market-oriented industry (``MOI''). We address Ispat's 
request in the Issues and Decision Memorandum from Joseph A. Spetrini, 
Deputy Assistant Secretary, to Faryar Shirzad, Assistant Secretary 
(September 21, 2001).
    On May 3, 2001, the Department published a notice of preliminary 
determination of sales at less than fair value (``LTFV'') in the 
investigation of certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from 
Kazakhstan. See Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From 
Kazakhstan, 66 FR 22168 (May 3, 2001). On June 1, 2001, the Department 
published a notice of postponement of the final determination in the 
investigation, as well as an extension of provisional measures from a 
four month period to a period not to exceed six months. See 
Postponement of Final Determination for Antidumping Duty Investigation: 
Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from Kazakhstan, 66 FR 
29773 (June 1, 2001).
    On May 23, 2001, Bethlehem, et al., timely submitted a request for 
a hearing. On May 29, 2001, Ispat Karmet timely submitted a request for 
a public hearing. On June 1, 2001, co-petitioners IPSCO Steel Inc., 
Gallatin Steel Company, Nucor Corporation, Steel Dynamics, Inc., 
Weirton Steel Corporation, and the Independent Steelworkers Union, 
timely submitted a request for a hearing.
    On July 16, 2001 through July 20, 2001, the Department conducted a 
sales and factors of production verification of Ispat Karmet. See 
Report on the U.S. Sales and Factors of Production Verification of OJSC 
Ispat Karmet (August 2, 2001) (``Verification Report'').
    We invited parties to comment on our Preliminary Determination. On 
August 10, 2001, Ispat Karmet submitted a case brief which we rejected 
for containing untimely factual information. On August 16, 2001, Ispat 
Karmet submitted a revised case brief which we rejected for containing 
untimely factual information. On August 20, 2001 Ispat Karmet submitted 
its final revised case brief (``Ispat Karmet's Brief''). Petitioners 
did not submit a case brief. Co-petitioners Bethlehem, et al. submitted 
their rebuttal brief (``Petitioners'' Rebuttal'') on August 20, 2001. 
On August 23, 2001, all parties withdrew their requests for a hearing. 
Although the deadline for this determination was originally September 
17, 2001, in light of the events of September 11, 2001 and the 
subsequent closure of the Federal Government for reasons of security, 
the time frame for issuing this final determination has been extended 
by four days.
    The Department has conducted and completed the investigation in 
accordance with section 735 of the Act.

Scope of Investigation

    For purposes of this investigation, the products covered are 
certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products of a rectangular shape, 
of a width of 0.5 inch or greater, neither clad, plated, nor coated 
with metal and whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with 
plastics or other non-metallic substances, in coils (whether or not in 
successively superimposed layers), regardless of thickness, and in 
straight lengths of a thickness of less than 4.75 mm and of a width 
measuring at least 10 times the thickness. Universal mill plate (i.e., 
flat-rolled products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a 
width exceeding 150 mm, but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness 
of not less than 4.0 mm, not in coils and without patterns in relief) 
of a thickness not less than 4.0 mm is not included within the scope of 
these investigations.
    Specifically included within the scope of this investigation are 
vacuum degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to as 
interstitial-free (``IF'')) steels, high strength low alloy (``HSLA'') 
steels, and the substrate for motor lamination steels. IF steels are 
recognized as low carbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements 
such as titanium or niobium (also commonly referred to as columbium), 
or both, added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels 
are recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as 
chromium, copper, niobium, vanadium, and molybdenum. The substrate for 
motor lamination

[[Page 50399]]

steels contains micro-alloying levels of elements such as silicon and 
aluminum.
    Steel products to be included in the scope of this investigation, 
regardless of definitions in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (``HTSUS''), are products in which: (i) Iron 
predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; 
(ii) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; and (iii) none 
of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, 
respectively indicated:

1.80 percent of manganese, or
2.25 percent of silicon, or
1.00 percent of copper, or
0.50 percent of aluminum, or
1.25 percent of chromium, or
0.30 percent of cobalt, or
0.40 percent of lead, or
1.25 percent of nickel, or
0.30 percent of tungsten, or
0.10 percent of molybdenum, or
0.10 percent of niobium, or
0.15 percent of vanadium, or
0.15 percent of zirconium.

    All products that meet the physical and chemical description 
provided above are within the scope of this investigation unless 
otherwise excluded. The following products, by way of example, are 
outside or specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation:
    --Alloy hot-rolled steel products in which at least one of the 
chemical elements exceeds those listed above (including, e.g., American 
Society for Testing and Materials (``ASTM'') specifications A543, A387, 
A514, A517, A506).
    --Society of Automotive Engineers (``SAE'')/American Iron & Steel 
Institute (``AISI'') grades of series 2300 and higher.
    --Ball bearing steels, as defined in the HTSUS.
    --Tool steels, as defined in the HTSUS.
    --Silico-manganese (as defined in the HTSUS) or silicon electrical 
steel with a silicon level exceeding 2.25 percent.
    --ASTM specifications A710 and A736.
    --USS abrasion-resistant steels (USS AR 400, USS AR 500).
    --All products (proprietary or otherwise) based on an alloy ASTM 
specification (sample specifications: ASTM A506, A507).
    --Non-rectangular shapes, not in coils, which are the result of 
having been processed by cutting or stamping and which have assumed the 
character of articles or products classified outside chapter 72 of the 
HTSUS.
    The merchandise subject to this investigation is classified in the 
HTSUS at subheadings: 7208.10.15.00, 7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00, 
7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00, 7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60, 
7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60, 7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60, 
7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60, 7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30, 
7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15, 7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90, 
7208.40.60.30, 7208.40.60.60, 7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00, 
7208.90.00.00, 7211.14.00.90, 7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00, 
7211.19.30.00, 7211.19.45.00, 7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30, 
7211.19.75.60, and 7211.19.75.90. Certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat 
products covered by this investigation, including: vacuum degassed 
fully stabilized; high strength low alloy; and the substrate for motor 
lamination steel may also enter under the following tariff numbers: 
7225.11.00.00, 7225.19.00.00, 7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00, 
7225.40.70.00, 7225.99.00.90, 7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30, 
7226.11.90.60, 7226.19.10.00, 7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00, 
7226.91.70.00, 7226.91.80.00, and 7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise 
may also enter under 7210.70.30.00, 7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30, 
7212.40.10.00, 7212.40.50.00, and 7212.50.00.00. Although the HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and U.S. Customs purposes, the 
written description of the merchandise under investigation is 
dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs to this 
investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum from 
Joseph A. Spetrini, Deputy Assistant Secretary, to Faryar Shirzad, 
Assistant Secretary (September 21, 2001) (``Decision Memo''), which is 
hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which parties have 
raised and to which we have responded, and other issues addressed, is 
attached to this notice as an Appendix. Parties can find a complete 
discussion of all issues raised in this investigation and the 
corresponding recommendations in the Decision Memo, a public memorandum 
which is on file at the U.S. Department of Commerce, in the Central 
Records Unit, in room B-099. In addition, a complete version of the 
Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision 
Memo are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our findings at verification, and analysis of comments 
received, we have made adjustments to the calculation methodology in 
calculating the final dumping margin in this proceeding. See Analysis 
Memorandum for OJSC Ispat Karmet (September 21, 2001) (``Analysis 
Memo'').

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we verified the 
information submitted by the respondent for use in our final 
determination. We used standard verification procedures including 
examination of relevant accounting and production records, and original 
source documents provided by the respondent. For changes from the 
Preliminary Determination as a result of verification, see Analysis 
Memo.

Use of Partial Adverse Facts Available

    In accordance with section 776 of the Act, we have determined that 
the use of partial adverse facts available is appropriate for certain 
portions of our analysis of Ispat Karmet. For a discussion of our 
determination with respect to this matter, see Decision Memo.

Nonmarket Economy Country

    For this final determination, the Department is continuing to treat 
Kazakhstan as a non-market economy (``NME'') country, as described in 
the ``Nonmarket Economy Country'' section of our Preliminary 
Determination.

Separate Rates

    For this final determination, the Department has determined a 
separate rate for Ispat. As discussed in the ``Separate Rates'' section 
of our Preliminary Determination, in a NME proceeding, the Department 
presumes that all companies within the country are subject to 
governmental control and assigns a single rate unless the producer can 
demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be entitled a 
separate rate. The separate rates analysis pertains to the export 
activities of the producer, and because we determined that Ispat is 
wholly foreign owned, and because we have no evidence indicating that 
it is under the control of the Republic of Kazakhstan, specifically 
with regard to export activities, we determine that Ispat qualifies for 
a separate rate. See Brake Rotors from the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of the Fourth New Shipper 
Review and Rescission of the Third Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 66 FR 1303

[[Page 50400]]

(January 8, 2001); Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value: Creatine Monohydrate from the People's Republic of China, 
64 FR 71104 (December 20, 1999).

Kazakhstan-Wide Rate

    As discussed in our Preliminary Determination, Ispat Karmet has 
qualified for a separate rate. See ``Kazakhstan-Wide Rate'' section of 
our Preliminary Determination. There has been no other evidence 
submitted since the Preliminary Determination to change Ispat Karmet's 
qualification. Accordingly, we have calculated a Kazakhstan-wide rate 
for this investigation based on the weighted-average margin determined 
for Ispat Karmet. This Kazakhstan-wide rate applies to all entries of 
subject merchandise except for entries of subject merchandise exported 
by Ispat Karmet.

Ministerial Error

    After the Preliminary Determination, the Department issued a 
ministerial error memorandum discussing two issues which Ispat Karmet 
alleged as requiring corrections. See Ministerial Error Memorandum for 
the Preliminary Determination of Sales at Not Less Than Fair Value 
(August 17, 2000) (``Ministerial Error Memo''). We agreed with Ispat 
Karmet on one of the two allegations, i.e., that we should modify 
freight costs for scrap to apply only to scrap purchased from outside 
sources. See Ministerial Error Memo at 3. However, as correcting the 
ministerial error would not have resulted in a change of at least five 
absolute percentage points in the weighted-average dumping margin, nor 
a change of not less than 25 percent of the weighted-average dumping 
margin, we did not amend our Preliminary Determination, but stated we 
would include the correction, as appropriate, in our final 
determination. Id. Our determination has not changed since issuance of 
the Ministerial Error Memo. We agree with Ispat Karmet that we should 
correct the ministerial error. Without this correction, we cannot 
properly calculate the margin. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(e), the 
Department will, ``if appropriate, correct any significant ministerial 
error by amending the preliminary determination, or correct any 
ministerial error by amending the final determination . . . [and] 
publish notice of such corrections in the Federal Register.'' 
Accordingly, we have incorporated the correction of the ministerial 
error in our final determination.

Suspension Agreement

    On May 4, 2001, the government of Kazakhstan submitted a proposal 
for a suspension agreement (which was received by the Department on May 
8, 2001), in accordance with the Department's regulations at 19 CFR 
351.208. On July 30, 2001, the Department invited the Minister of 
Economy and Trade for Kazakhstan to Washington DC to hear the details 
of the government of Kazakhstan's proposal. On August 2, 2001, 
Bethlehem, et al. submitted comments on the negotiations between the 
Department and the Government of Kazakhstan, arguing that negotiation 
or conclusion of an agreement is untimely and not in compliance with 
the Department's regulations. On August 10, 2001, the Department 
submitted a memorandum to the file, explaining that the ``Department's 
regulations allow for flexibility, especially with regard to procedural 
deadlines where the Secretary determines there is good cause.'' See 
Memorandum to the file from Joe Spetrini, Deputy Assistant Secretary, 
to Faryar Shirzad, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration 
(August 10, 2001), at 2. On August 17, 2001, the Department and the 
Government of Kazakhstan initialed a proposed suspension agreement and 
the Department gave interested parties until September 6, 2001 to 
comment on the proposed agreement. On September 6, 2001, we received 
comments from Petitioners arguing that the statutory requirements for 
suspending an investigation have not been met, and that the proposed 
agreement needs substantial revisions. Specifically, Petitioners argue 
that: (1) The Department has not explained how the proposed agreement 
complies with the requirements of the Tariff Act, in conformation with 
19 CFR 351.208; (2) effective monitoring of the proposed agreement is 
not practicable; (3) the proposed agreement will not prevent the 
suppression or undercutting of price levels of domestic products; and 
(4) it is in the public interest to enter an antidumping order. Also on 
September 6, 2001, Petitioners requested the antidumping duty 
investigation be continued, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.208(h). The 
Department and the Government of Kazakhstan did not sign a suspension 
agreement on hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from Kazakhstan by 
the deadline date of September 21, 2001. Consequently, Petitioners' 
comments are moot.

Fair Value Comparisons

    To determine whether sales of hot-rolled steel products from 
Kazakhstan were made in the United States at LTFV, we compared EP to a 
normal value (``NV''), as described in the ``Export Price'' and 
``Normal Value'' sections of the Preliminary Determination.

Surrogate Country

    For purposes of the final determination, we continue to find that 
Egypt remains the appropriate primary surrogate country for Kazakhstan. 
For further discussion and analysis regarding the surrogate country 
selection for Kazakhstan, see the ``Surrogate Country'' section of our 
Preliminary Determination.

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we are 
directing the U.S. Customs Service (``Customs'') to continue to suspend 
liquidation of all imports of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of 
the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register. We will instruct 
Customs to continue to require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond 
equal to the weighted-average amount by which the NV exceeds the EP, as 
indicated below. These suspension of liquidation instructions will 
remain in effect until further notice. The weighted-average dumping 
margins are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
                   Exporter/Manufacturer                       margin
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OJSC Ispat Karmet.........................................       243.46
Kazakhstan-Wide...........................................       243.46
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    The Department will disclose calculations performed, within five 
days of the date of publication of this notice, to the parties in this 
investigation, in accordance with section 351.224(b) of the 
Department's regulations.

International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the 
ITC of our affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. As our final 
determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine within 45 days 
after our final determination whether imports of hot-rolled steel from 
Kazakhstan are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the 
U.S. industry. If the ITC

[[Page 50401]]

determines that material injury, or threat of material injury does not 
exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted will 
be refunded or cancelled. If the ITC determines that such injury does 
exist, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing 
Customs officials to assess antidumping duties on all imports of the 
subject merchandise entered for consumption on or after the effective 
date of the suspension of liquidation.
    This determination is issued and published in accordance with 
sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: September 21, 2001.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I

A. Market Oriented Industry Issue

Comment 1: Market Oriented Industry

B. General Issues

Comment 2: Aberrational Surrogate Values
Comment 3: Choice of Surrogate Values
Comment 4: Double Counting Values

C. Verification Issues

Comment 5: Factors of Production Based on Thickness
Comment 6: Dubai Sales Office
Comment 7: Nominal Thickness
Comment 8: Coil Protectors
Comment 9: Inland Freight Distance
Comment 10: Manganese Ore
Comment 11: Packing Bands
Comment 12: Sales to Ispat Sidbec
Comment 13: Technical Water
Comment 14: Silico-manganese
[FR Doc. 01-24750 Filed 10-2-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P