[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 113 (Monday, June 14, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32982-32984]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-13197]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-428-830]


Stainless Steel Bar From Germany: Final Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review

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

ACTION: Notice of final results of 2001-2003 administrative review.

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

SUMMARY: On February 5, 2004, the Department of Commerce published the 
preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping 
duty order on stainless steel bar from Germany. The period of review is 
August 2, 2001, through February 28, 2003. We gave interested parties 
an opportunity to comment on the preliminary results. Based on our 
analysis of the comments received and an examination of our 
calculations, we have made certain changes for the final results. 
Consequently, the final results differ from the preliminary results. 
The final weighted-average dumping margin is listed below in the 
section entitled ``Final Results of the Review.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 14, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Smith, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,

[[Page 32983]]

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1276.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Since the February 5, 2004 publication of the preliminary results 
in this review (see Stainless Steel Bar from Germany: Preliminary 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 69 FR 5493 (February 
5, 2004) (``Preliminary Results'')), the following events have 
occurred:
    We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results of the 
review. On March 8, 2004, Carpenter Technology Corp., Crucible 
Specialty Metals Division of Crucible Materials Corp., Electralloy 
Corp., Slater Steels Corp., Empire Specialty Steel and the United 
Steelworkers of America (AFL-CIO/CLC) (collectively, ``petitioners''), 
and the respondent BGH Edelstahl Freital GmbH, BGH Edelstahl Lippendorf 
GmbH, BGH Edelstahl Lugau GmbH, and BGH Edelstahl Siegen GmbH 
(collectively, ``BGH'') filed case briefs. On March 15, 2004, BGH filed 
a rebuttal brief. On March 2, 2004, BGH requested a hearing by letter. 
On March 16, 2004, BGH withdrew its March 2, 2004, request for a 
hearing. Since BGH was the only party to request a hearing, no public 
hearing was held.

Scope of the Review

    For the purposes of this review, 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), angles, shapes 
and sections.
    The stainless steel bar subject to this review 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 the order is dispositive.

Period of Review

    The period of review (``POR'') is August 2, 2001, through February 
28, 2003.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision Memorandum'' 
from Jeffrey May, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import Administration to 
James J. Jochum, Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, dated June 
4, 2004 (``Decision Memorandum''), which is hereby adopted by this 
notice. Attached to this notice as an appendix is a list of the issues 
that 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 review and the corresponding recommendations in this public 
memorandum, which is on file in the Department's Central Records Unit, 
located in Room B-099 of the main Department building (``CRU''). In 
addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed 
directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/index.html. The paper 
copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in 
content.

Fair Value Comparisons

    To determine whether sales of stainless steel bar by BGH to the 
United States were made at less than normal value (``NV''), we compared 
export price (``EP'') to NV. Our calculations followed the 
methodologies described in the Preliminary Results, except as noted 
below and in the final results calculation memoranda cited below, which 
are on file in the CRU.

Export Price

    We calculated EP in accordance with section 772(a) of the Tariff 
Act of 1930, as amended, (``the Act'') because the merchandise was sold 
to the first unaffiliated purchaser in the United States prior to 
importation by the exporter/producer outside the United States and 
because constructed export price methodology was not otherwise 
warranted. We calculated EP based on the same general methodology 
described in the Preliminary Results.

Normal Value

    We used the same general methodology as that described in the 
Preliminary Results to determine the cost of production and the NV, 
except that we reclassified the level of trade for certain home market 
sales. We continue to find that certain sales by BGH were made at 
separate and distinct levels of trade. Specifically, for these final 
results, based upon our determination to rely upon actual ``other 
revenue'' charged, rather than quantity sold, as a benchmark for 
defining service center selling functions, we have revised our level of 
trade findings. The category home market level of trade 1 (``LOTH 1'') 
is now comprised of distribution channels 1 and 2, as well as 
distribution channels 3 and 4 sales made from inventory for which no 
additional ``other revenue'' charges were reported on the sales 
invoice. These distribution channel 3 and 4 sales from warehouse with 
no additional ``other revenue'' charges are similar to BGH's 
distribution channel 1 and 2 sales with respect to sales process, 
freight services, and warranty service. The category home market level 
of trade 2 (``LOTH 2'') differs from our Preliminary Results in that it 
now only includes distribution channel 3 and 4 sales from inventory 
with service center selling functions, as indicated by the ``other 
revenue'' charges. Because of the presence of these service center 
selling functions, LOTH 2 differs significantly from LOTH 1 with 
respect to sales process and inventory maintenance. Based upon our 
overall analysis in the home market, we find that LOTH 1 and LOTH 2 
constitute two different levels of trade.
    We continue to find that LOTH 1 is similar to the category U.S. 
market level of trade 1 (``LOTU 1'') with respect to sales process, 
freight services, warehouse/inventory maintenance and warranty service. 
Consequently, we matched the U.S. LOTU 1 sales to sales at the same 
level of trade in the home market (LOTH 1). Where no matches at the 
same level of trade were possible, we matched to sales in LOTH 2 and 
made a level of trade adjustment. See section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act.

Changes From the Preliminary Results

    Based on our review of the comments received, we have made certain 
changes

[[Page 32984]]

to the calculations for the final results. These changes are discussed 
in the Decision Memorandum and in the final referenced calculation 
memorandum. See ``Final Results Calculation Memorandum for the BGH 
Group of Companies'' dated June 4, 2004 which is on file in the CRU; 
see also Decision Memorandum.

Final Results of the Review

    We determine that the following percentage margin exists for the 
period August 2, 2001, through February 28, 2003:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
                   Exporter/manufacturer                        margin
                                                              percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BGH........................................................         0.52
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    The Department shall determine, and United States Customs and 
Border Protection (``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have 
calculated exporter/importer (or customer)-specific assessment rates 
for merchandise subject to this review. To determine whether the duty 
assessment rates were de minimis, in accordance with the requirement 
set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we calculated importer (or 
customer)-specific ad valorem rates by aggregating the dumping margins 
calculated for all U.S. sales to that importer (or customer) and 
dividing this amount by the total value of the sales to that importer 
(or customer). Where an importer (or customer)-specific ad valorem rate 
was greater than de minimis, we calculated a per-unit assessment rate 
by aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales to 
that importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the total 
quantity sold to that importer (or customer).
    The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions 
directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of 
review.

Cash Deposit Rates

    The following antidumping duty deposits will be required on all 
shipments of stainless steel bar from Germany entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption, effective on or after the publication 
date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by 
section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for the 
reviewed company will be the rate listed above (except no cash deposit 
will be required if a company's weighted-average margin is de minimis, 
i.e., less than 0.5 percent); (2) for previously reviewed or 
investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will 
continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent 
period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, the 
previous review, or the original investigation, but the manufacturer 
is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most 
recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) if 
neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or 
any previous reviews, the cash deposit rate will be 16.96 percent, the 
``all others'' rate established in Notice of Final Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Stainless Steel Bar from Germany, 67 FR 
3159 (January 23, 2002) and Notice of Amended Final Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Stainless 
Steel Bar from Germany, 67 FR 10382 (March 7, 2002).
    These cash deposit requirements shall remain in effect until 
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.

Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) 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 doubled antidumping duties.

Notification Regarding APOs

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (``APOs'') of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues 
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the 
proceeding. 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 terms of an APO 
is a violation which is subject to sanction.
    We are issuing and publishing these results and this notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: June 14, 2004.
James J. Jochum,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I--List of Comments in the Issues and Decision Memorandum

Comment 1: Level of Trade Adjustment
Comment 2: Indirect Selling Expenses
Comment 3: U.S. Commissions
Comment 4: Gross Unit Price Clerical Error
Comment 5: Adjustment in Quantity Clerical Error
Comment 6: Arm's Length Test Matching Criteria

[FR Doc. 04-13197 Filed 6-10-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P