[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 15 (Wednesday, January 23, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3152-3155]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-1654]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-583-836]


Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Not Less Than Fair 
Value: Stainless Steel Bar From Taiwan

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

ACTION: Notice of final determination.

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

SUMMARY: We determine that stainless steel bar from Taiwan is not 
being, nor is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair 
value, as provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended. On August 2, 2001, the Department of Commerce published its 
preliminary determination of sales at not less than fair value of 
stainless steel bar from Taiwan. Based on the results of verification 
and our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes in the 
margin calculations. However, this final determination does not differ 
from the preliminary determination, in which we found that the 
respondent did not make sales in the United States at prices below 
normal value.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 23, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Blanche Ziv or Annika O'Hara, Office 
1, AD/CVD Enforcement, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4207 and (202) 482-3798, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Applicable Statute and Regulations

    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

[[Page 3153]]

made to 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 19 CFR part 351 (April 
2000).

Case History

    The preliminary determination in this investigation was issued on 
July 26, 2001. See Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Not 
Less Than Fair Value: Stainless Steel Bar from Taiwan, 66 FR 40198 
(August 2, 2001) (``Preliminary Determination''). Since the Preliminary 
Determination, the following events have occurred:
    On July 27, 2001, the Department solicited additional information 
from the respondent Gloria Material Technology Corporation, 
(``Gloria''). On August 6, 2001, we received a response, including 
revised cost of production (``COP'') and constructed value (``CV'') 
databases.
    Verification of the response submitted by Gloria took place from 
August 12 through 23, 2001 (see the ``Verification'' section below).
    On November 14, 2001, the petitioners in this case (i.e., Carpenter 
Technology Corp., Crucible Specialty Metals, Electralloy Corp., Empire 
Specialty Steel Inc., Slater Steels Corp., and the United Steelworkers 
of America) and Gloria submitted case briefs. The petitioners and 
Gloria submitted rebuttal briefs on November 19, 2001. At the request 
of the petitioners, the Department held a public hearing on November 
28, 2001.
    Although the deadline for this determination was originally 
December 17, 2001, in order to accommodate certain verifications that 
were delayed because of the events of September 11, 2001, the 
Department tolled the final determination deadline in this and the 
concurrent stainless steel bar investigations until January 15, 2002.

Scope of Investigation

    For purposes of this investigation, the term ``stainless steel 
bar'' includes articles of stainless steel in straight lengths that 
have been either hot-rolled, forged, turned, cold-drawn, cold-rolled or 
otherwise cold-finished, or ground, having a uniform solid cross 
section along their whole length in the shape of circles, segments of 
circles, ovals, rectangles (including squares), triangles, hexagons, 
octagons, or other convex polygons. Stainless steel bar includes cold-
finished stainless steel bars that are turned or ground in straight 
lengths, whether produced from hot-rolled bar or from straightened and 
cut rod or wire, and reinforcing bars that have indentations, ribs, 
grooves, or other deformations produced during the rolling process.
    Except as specified above, the term does not include stainless 
steel semi-finished products, cut length flat-rolled products (i.e., 
cut length rolled products which if less than 4.75 mm in thickness have 
a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness, or if 4.75 mm or 
more in thickness having a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures at 
least twice the thickness), products that have been cut from stainless 
steel sheet, strip or plate, wire (i.e., cold-formed products in coils, 
of any uniform solid cross section along their whole length, which do 
not conform to the definition of flat-rolled products), and angles, 
shapes and sections.
    The stainless steel bar subject to this investigation is currently 
classifiable under subheadings 7222.11.00.05, 7222.11.00.50, 
7222.19.00.05, 7222.19.00.50, 7222.20.00.05, 7222.20.00.45, 
7222.20.00.75, and 7222.30.00.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
the United States (``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS subheadings are 
provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description 
of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.
    Prior to the preliminary determination in this investigation, the 
respondent in this and the companion SSB investigations filed comments 
seeking to exclude certain products from the scope of these 
investigations. The specific products identified in their exclusion 
requests were: stainless steel tool steel, welding wire, special-
quality oil field equipment steel (SQOFES), and special profile wire.
    In the preliminary determinations, we concluded that all of these 
products, except for special profile wire, are within the scope of 
these investigations. Specifically, regarding stainless steel tool 
steel, welding wire, and SQOFES, after considering the respondents' 
comments and the petitioners' objections to the exclusion requests, we 
preliminarily determined that the scope is not overly broad. Therefore, 
stainless steel tool steel, welding wire, and SQOFES are within the 
scope of these SSB investigations. In addition, we preliminarily 
determined that SQOFES does not constitute a separate class or kind of 
merchandise from SSB. Regarding special profile wire, we preliminarily 
determined that this product does not fall within the scope as it is 
written because its cross section is in the shape of a concave polygon. 
Therefore, we did not include special profile wire in these 
investigations. (For details, see the Memorandum to Susan Kuhbach and 
Louis Apple from the Stainless Steel Bar Team, dated July 26, 2001, 
entitled ``Scope Exclusion Requests,'' and the Memorandum to Louis 
Apple from the Stainless Steel Bar Team, dated July 26, 2001, entitled 
``Whether Special Profile Wire Product is Included in the Scope of the 
Investigation.'')
    Finally, we note that in the concurrent countervailing duty 
investigation of stainless steel bar from Italy, the Department 
preliminarily determined that hot-rolled stainless steel bar is within 
the scope of these investigations. (See Preliminary Affirmative 
Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Countervailing 
Duty Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination: Stainless 
Steel Bar from Italy, 66 FR 30414 (June 6, 2001).)
    With the exception of one respondent in the Germany investigation 
which filed comments on the Department's preliminary scope decision 
with respect to SQOFES which the Department disagrees with and has 
addressed in the January 15, 2002, Decision Memorandum in that case, no 
other parties filed comments on our preliminary scope decisions. 
Furthermore, no additional information has otherwise come to our 
attention to warrant a change in our preliminary scope decisions. 
Therefore, we have made no changes for purposes of the final 
determinations.

Period of Investigation

    The period of this investigation (``POI'') is October 1, 1999, 
through September 30, 2000.

Fair Value Comparisons

    To determine whether sales of stainless steel bar from Taiwan to 
the United States were made at less than fair value, we compared export 
price (``EP'') to normal value (``NV''). Our calculations followed the 
methodologies described in the Preliminary Determination, except as 
noted below and in the Final Determination Calculations for Gloria 
Material Technology Corporation and Golden Win Steel Corporation 
(``Golden Win'') Memorandum dated January 15, 2002 (``Calculation 
Memorandum''), which is on file in the Import Administration's Central 
Records Unit (``CRU''), Room B-099 of the main Department of Commerce 
building.

Export Price

    For sales to the United States, we used EP as defined in section 
772(a) of the Act. We calculated EP based on the same methodologies 
described in the

[[Page 3154]]

Preliminary Determination, with the following exceptions:
    Based on our findings at verification, we made revisions to 
Gloria's U.S. sales database related to its reported date of sale, U.S. 
credit expenses, domestic inland freight, brokerage and handling, and 
gross unit price. See Gloria's Calculation Memorandum, Gloria's Sales 
and Cost Verification Report and Comment 2 and 6 of the January 15, 
2002 Decision Memorandum. Finally, we have included the additional U.S. 
sales provided by Gloria at verification in our final calculations. See 
Comment 7 of the January 15, 2002 Decision Memorandum.

Normal Value

    We used the same methodology as that described in the Preliminary 
Determination to determine the COP, whether comparison market sales 
were at prices below the COP, and the NV, with the following 
exceptions:

1. Cost of Production Analysis

    Based on information provided by Gloria since the Preliminary 
Determination, we revised Gloria's costs to include the verified COP 
and CV data based on Gloria's August 6, 2001 supplemental questionnaire 
response. We have combined Gloria's raw material costs into a single 
weight-averaged cost for each grade designation under the Department's 
model matching methodology for the final determination. See Comment 1 
of the January 15, 2002 Decision Memorandum. We revised Gloria's grade 
designation by collapsing into a single grade designation the direct 
material costs for three grades Gloria incorrectly reported separately. 
See Comment 2 of the January 15, 2002 Decision Memorandum.
    Based on our findings at the cost verification, we made revisions 
to Gloria's COP database to correct errors related to its reported 
costs for SG&A, research and development, and interest expenses. 
Because we verified the information in the CV and COP databases 
submitted by Gloria, we have removed the upward adjustments made at the 
preliminary determination for direct materials, direct labor, variable 
and fixed overhead. We have recalculated Golden Win's G&A expense ratio 
based on its financial statements and excluded the ``bad debt loss'' 
from accounts receivable noted in the CPA adjustment from our 
calculation. See Comment 4 of the January 15, 2002 Decision Memorandum. 
We have reduced Gloria's reported COM by the amount of packing expenses 
reported in the sales database. See Comment 7 of the January 15, 2002 
Decision Memorandum.
    For the products Gloria reported sold but not purchased or produced 
during the POI, we have reassigned costs based on a more appropriate 
match to the next most similar grade than those reported by Gloria. We 
have dropped costs associated with products purchased but not produced 
by Gloria. See Comment 3 of the January 15, 2002 Decision Memorandum.

2. Calculation of NV

    We recalculated credit expenses using the last payment date 
reported. See Comment 6 of the January 15, 2002 Decision Memorandum. 
Furthermore, we excluded from Gloria's home market sales database, the 
sales of products for which Gloria reported a zero production quantity 
because these products were produced by other manufacturers. See 
Comment 7 of the January 15, 2002 Decision Memorandum.
    In addition, we corrected several errors related to Gloria's 
reported return quantity, warranty, warehousing, and inland freight 
expense fields, which were presented by Gloria at the onset of the 
sales verification. See Gloria's Calculation Memorandum and Gloria's 
Sales and Cost Verification Report.

Currency Conversions

    We made currency conversions in accordance with section 773A of the 
Act in the same manner as in the Preliminary Determination.

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i)(1) of the Act, we verified the 
information submitted by Gloria for our final determination. We used 
standard verification procedures, including examination of relevant 
accounting and production records, as well as original source documents 
provided by the respondent.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this investigation are addressed in the January 15, 2002 Decision 
Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. Attached to this 
notice as an appendix is a list of the issues which parties have raised 
and to which we have responded in the Decision Memorandum. Parties can 
find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this investigation 
and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which 
is on file in the Department's CRU. In addition, a complete version of 
the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/frnhome.htm. The paper copy and electronic version 
of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Final Determination

    We determine that the following weighted-average percentage margins 
exist for the period October 1, 1999, through September 30, 2000:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
                   Exporter/manufacturer                        margin
                                                              percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gloria.....................................................         0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Suspension of Liquidation

    Because the estimated weighted-average dumping margin of the 
examined company is 0.00 percent, we are not directing the Customs 
Service to suspend liquidation of entries of stainless steel bar from 
Taiwan.

Notification of the International Trade Commission

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the 
International Trade Commission of our determination. 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(a)(3). Timely written 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 determination is published pursuant to sections 735(d) and 
777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: January 15, 2002.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix

    Comment 1: Gloria's Direct Material Costs.
    Comment 2: Gloria's Grade Designations.
    Comment 3: Cost Data with Zero Production Quantities.
    Comment 4: Golden Win's G&A.
    Comment 5: Interest Expense Calculation.
    Comment 6: Credit Expenses.
    Comment 7: Additional U.S. Sales.
    Comment 8: Packing.
    Comment 9: Variable and Fixed Overhead Adjustment.

[FR Doc. 02-1654 Filed 1-22-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P