[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 218 (Wednesday, November 12, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64081-64083]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-28340]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-791-819]


Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain 
Aluminum Plate From South Africa

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

ACTION: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation.

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 12, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate Johnson at (202) 482-4929 or 
Rebecca Trainor at (202) 482-4007, Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.

[[Page 64082]]

Initiation of Investigation

The Petition

    On October 16, 2003, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received a petition filed in proper form by Alcoa Inc. (the 
petitioner). The Department received supplements to the petition on 
October 29, and November 3, 2003.
    In accordance with section 732(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the 
Act), as amended, the petitioner alleges that imports of certain 
aluminum plate from South Africa are being, or are likely to be, sold 
in the United States at less-than-fair-value (LTFV) within the meaning 
of section 731 of the Act, and that imports from South Africa are 
materially injuring, or are threatening to materially injure, an 
industry in the United States.
    The Department finds that the petitioner filed this petition on 
behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping 
investigation that it is requesting the Department to initiate. See 
infra, ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition.''

Scope of Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is 6000 series 
aluminum alloy, flat surface, rolled plate, whether in coils or cut-to-
length forms, that is rectangular in cross section with or without 
rounded corners and with a thickness of more than 6.3 millimeters. 6000 
Series Aluminum Rolled Plate is defined by the Aluminum Association, 
Inc.
    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are extruded aluminum 
products and tread plate.
    The merchandise subject to this investigation is classifiable under 
subheading 7606.12.3030 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States (HTS). Although the HTS subheadings are provided for convenience 
and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of this 
investigation is dispositive.
    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations 
(Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 
27323 (May 19, 1997)), we are setting aside a period for parties to 
raise issues regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all 
parties to submit such comments within 20 calendar days of publication 
of this notice. Comments should be addressed to Import Administration's 
Central Records Unit, Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. The period 
of scope consultations is intended to provide the Department with ample 
opportunity to consider all comments and consult with parties prior to 
the issuance of the preliminary determination.

Period of Investigation

    The anticipated period of investigation is October 1, 2002, through 
September 30, 2003.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that the Department's industry support determination, which is 
to be made before the initiation of the investigation, be based on 
whether a minimum percentage of the relevant industry supports the 
petition. A petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers 
or workers who support the petition account for: (1) At least 25 
percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (2) 
more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product 
produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or 
opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act 
provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic 
producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product, the Department shall: (i) Poll 
the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if 
there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A), or 
(ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling 
method.
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a 
petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the 
Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic 
like product. The International Trade Commission (``ITC''), which is 
responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has been 
injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product 
in order to define the industry. While both the Department and the ITC 
must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like 
product (section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different purposes 
and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, the 
Department's determination is subject to limitations of time and 
information. Although this may result in different definitions of the 
like product, such differences do not render the decision of either 
agency contrary to the law.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (Ct. 
Int'l Trade 2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v. United States, 
688 F. Supp. 639, 642-44 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1988) (``the ITC does not 
look behind ITA's determination, but accepts ITA's determination as 
to which merchandise is in the class of merchandise sold at LTFV'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation,'' i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition.
    With regard to the definition of domestic like product, the 
petitioner does not offer a definition of domestic like product 
distinct from the scope of the investigation. Based on our analysis of 
the information presented by the petitioner, we have determined that 
there is a single domestic like product, aluminum plate, which is 
defined in the ``Scope of Investigation'' section above, and we have 
analyzed industry support in terms of this domestic like product.
    The petition identifies additional U.S. companies engaged in the 
production of aluminum plate. In the October 29, 2003, supplemental 
petition submission, one of these companies, Kaiser Aluminum and 
Chemical Corporation, provides a letter indicating its support of the 
petition. In addition, the petitioner's November 3, 2003 supplemental 
petition submission contains a letter in support of the petition from 
the United Steelworkers of America, which claims to represent virtually 
all the workers engaged in the production of the domestic like product.
    Our review of the data provided in the petition indicates that the 
petitioner has established industry support representing over 50 
percent of total production of the domestic like product, requiring no 
further action by the Department pursuant to section 732(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act. In addition, the Department received no opposition to the 
petition from the remaining domestic producer of the like product. 
Therefore, the domestic producers or workers who support the petition 
account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic 
like product, and the requirements of section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the 
Act are met.

[[Page 64083]]

Furthermore, the domestic producers or workers who support the petition 
account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for 
or opposition to the petition. Thus, the requirements of section 
732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act also are met. Accordingly, the Department 
determines that the petition was filed on behalf of the domestic 
industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. See also 
Import Administration AD/CVD Enforcement Initiation Checklist 
(``Initiation Checklist''), Industry Support section, dated November 5, 
2003, on file in the Central Records Unit of the main Department of 
Commerce building.

Export Price and Normal Value

    The following is a description of the allegation of sales at LTFV 
upon which the Department based its decision to initiate this 
investigation. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments 
relating to U.S. price and normal value (NV) are discussed in greater 
detail in the Initiation Checklist. Should the need arise to use any of 
this information as facts available under section 776 of the Act in our 
preliminary or final determination, we may re-examine the information 
and revise the margin calculations, if appropriate.

Export Price

    The petitioner alleged that the subject aluminum plate produced in 
South Africa by Hulett Aluminum (Pty) Limited (Hulett) (i.e., the only 
company that has exported subject merchandise to the United States from 
South Africa during the most recent twelve months) was sold to Empire 
Resources, Inc., an unaffiliated U.S. trading company, prior to 
importation of the merchandise into the United States. Therefore, the 
petitioner based U.S. price on export price (EP). The petitioner based 
EP prices for aluminum plate on a price quote for Alloy 6061 T651 
aluminum plate adjusted for inland freight charges from Hulett's plant 
in Pietermaritzburg, South Africa to the port of Durban, international 
freight expenses from Durban, South Africa to U.S. East Coast ports, as 
well as a U.S. importer/distributor markup and a U.S. reseller markup.

Normal Value

    The petitioner based NV on two price quotes for Alloy 6082 T6 from 
a South African distributor of aluminum products. The petitioner 
alleged that, while Hulett does not sell identical grades of 
merchandise to the United States and home markets, grade Alloy 6082 T6, 
sold to the home market, and grade Alloy 6061 T651, sold to the United 
States, are functionally equivalent, have minimal differences in 
chemistry, and have no meaningful differences in production costs. The 
petitioner adjusted the NV for movement charges in the home market and 
differences in direct selling expenses (imputed credit) between the 
United States and the home market. The petitioner did not adjust NV for 
packing expenses because it is the petitioner's understanding that the 
packing form and materials are the same in both markets.
    The estimated dumping margins in the petition based on a comparison 
between EP and NV range from 80.19 percent to 106.77 percent.

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to 
believe that imports of certain aluminum plate from South Africa are 
being, or are likely to be, sold at LTFV.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the 
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened 
with material injury, by reason of imports from South Africa of the 
subject merchandise sold at less than NV.
    The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
evident in the sales volume and market share lost to unfair imports, as 
well as rapidly declining and depressed U.S. prices. The allegations of 
injury and causation are supported by relevant evidence including U.S. 
import data, lost sales, and pricing information. We have assessed the 
allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury and 
causation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly 
supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for 
initiation. See the Initiation Checklist.

Initiation of Antidumping Investigation

    Based upon our examination of the petition on certain aluminum 
plate from South Africa, we have found that it meets the requirements 
of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an antidumping 
duty investigation to determine whether imports of certain aluminum 
plate from South Africa are being, or are likely to be, sold in the 
United States at LTFV. Unless this deadline is extended pursuant to 
section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act, we will make our preliminary 
determination no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, a copy of the 
public version of the petition has been provided to the representatives 
of the Government of South Africa. We will attempt to provide a copy of 
the public version of the petition to each exporter named in the 
petition, as provided for under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    We have notified the ITC of our initiation as required by section 
732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine no later than December 1, 
2003, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of certain 
aluminum plate from South Africa are causing material injury, or 
threatening to cause material injury, to a U.S. industry. A negative 
ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated, 
otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to statutory and 
regulatory time limits.
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.

    Dated: November 5, 2003.
James J. Jochum,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 03-28340 Filed 11-10-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P