[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 16, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33630-33632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-13495]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-421-807]


Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From the 
Netherlands; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

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

ACTION: Notice of final results of antidumping duty administrative 
review of certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from the 
Netherlands.

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

SUMMARY: On December 8, 2003, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel 
flat products from the Netherlands. See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel 
Flat Products from the Netherlands; Preliminary Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review, 68 FR 68341 (December 8, 2003) (Preliminary 
Results). This review covers imports of subject merchandise from Corus 
Staal BV (Corus Staal) to the United States during the period May 3, 
2001 to October 31, 2002. Based on our analysis of the comments 
received, we have made changes to the margin calculation. Therefore, 
the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final 
weighted-average dumping margin for the reviewed firm is listed below 
in the section entitled ``Final Results of Review.''

DATES: Effective Date: July 16, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Scott or Robert James, AD/CVD 
Enforcement, Group III, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-
2657 or (202) 482-0649, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On December 8, 2003, the Department published in the Federal 
Register the Preliminary Results of the administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products 
from the Netherlands for the period May 3, 2001 to October 31, 2002. In 
response to the Department's invitation to comment on the preliminary 
results of this review, Corus (respondent) and United States Steel 
Corporation (USSC) and Nucor Corporation (Nucor) (collectively, 
petitioners) filed their case briefs on January 14, 2004. Corus, USSC, 
and Nucor submitted rebuttal briefs on January 23, 2004. On February 
12, 2004, we published in the Federal Register our notice of the 
extension of time limits for this review. See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon 
Steel Flat Products from the Netherlands; Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; Extension of Time Limit, 69 FR 6939 (February 
12, 2004). This extension established the deadline for this final as 
June 5, 2004. Since this date falls on a Saturday, i.e., a non-business 
day, the signature date for this final is June 7, 2004.

Period of Review

    The period of review (POR) is May 3, 2001 to October 31, 2002.

Scope of the Review

    For purposes of this order, 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 this 
review. Specifically included within the scope of this order 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 
steels contains micro-alloying levels of elements such silicon and 
aluminum.
    Steel products to be included in the scope of this order, 
regardless of definitions in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTS), 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 order unless otherwise 
excluded. The following products, by way of example, are outside or 
specifically excluded from the scope of this order:
     Alloy hot-rolled steel products in which at least one of 
the chemical elements exceeds those listed above (including, e.g., ASTM 
specifications A543, A387, A514, A517, A506).
     Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)/American Iron and 
Steel Institute (AISI) grades of series 2300 and higher.
     Ball bearings steels, as defined in the HTS.
     Tool steels, as defined in the HTS.
     Silico-manganese (as defined in the HTS) 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

[[Page 33631]]

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 HTS.
    The merchandise subject to this order is classified in the HTS 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 flat-rolled carbon 
steel flat products covered by this order, 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 HTS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and U.S. Customs purposes, the 
written description of the scope of this order is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this administrative review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum'' (Decision Memorandum) from Joseph A. Spetrini, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to James J. Jochum, 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated June 7, 2004, 
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which 
parties have raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in 
the Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an appendix. 
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 Central Records Unit, room B-099, of the main 
Department building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision 
Memorandum can be accessed directly via the Internet at http://www.ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper copy and electronic version of the 
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made the 
following changes to the margin calculation:
     We have modified the weighting factor for the quality 
field in our model match hierarchy so that it consists of two digits 
rather than one.
     We have excluded entries which occurred between October 
30, 2001 and November 28, 2001, inclusive (``gap period''), from the 
calculation of the dumping margin. We have also revised the calculation 
of the assessment rate to exclude the gap period entries from the 
numerator.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We note that gap period entries had already been excluded 
from the denominator of the assessment rate for the preliminary 
results, and continue to be excluded from the denominator of the 
assessment rate for the final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     We have amended our margin calculation program so that for 
sales which occurred prior to importation, the entry date was used to 
define the transactions used in our analysis.
     We have revised the adjustment made to the cost of 
manufacturing for the unexplained difference found in Corus' cost 
reconciliation. The difference in the reconciliation was due to both a 
change in finished goods inventory and a small unexplained difference 
in the cost reconciliation. We have continued to adjust the cost of 
manufacture for the change in finished goods inventory but have no 
longer adjusted for the minor unexplained difference in the cost 
reconciliation.
     We have amended our calculation of variable costs of 
manufacture (VCOMH/U) to reflect the revised start-up costs (RSTARTUP).
    These changes are discussed in the relevant sections of the 
Decision Memorandum.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following weighted-average percentage margin 
exists for the period May 3, 2001 to October 31, 2002:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Weighted
                                                               average
                   Manufacturer/exporter                      percentage
                                                                margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corus......................................................         4.94
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment

    The Department shall determine and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries. As a result of the Court of International Trade's decision in 
Corus Staal BV et al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 02-00003, 
Slip Op. 03-127 (CIT September 29, 2003), we will not assess duties on 
merchandise that entered between October 30, 2001 and November 28, 
2001, inclusive. For more information, see Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon 
Steel Flat Products From The Netherlands: Notice of Final Court 
Decision and Suspension of Liquidation, 68 FR 60912 (October 24, 2003). 
Thus, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate an 
importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate for merchandise based on 
the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the 
examined sales made during the POR \2\ to the total customs value of 
the sales used to calculate those duties. Where the importer-specific 
assessment rate is above de minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess 
duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise by that 
importer. This rate will be assessed uniformly on all entries of that 
particular importer made during the periods May 3, 2001 through October 
29, 2001 and November 29, 2001 through October 31, 2002. The Department 
will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP within 
15 days of publication of the final results of review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Since we have not included entries which occurred between 
October 30, 2001 and November 28, 2001 in the calculation of the 
dumping margin (see ``Changes Since the Preliminary Results''), the 
``total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined 
sales made during the POR'' does not include sales of merchandise 
which entered during that same period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of these final results for all shipments of the subject 
merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or 
after the publication date of these final results of administrative 
review, as provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act: (1) The 
cash deposit rate for the reviewed company will be the rate listed 
above; (2) if the exporter is not a firm covered

[[Page 33632]]

in this review, a prior review, or the original less than fair value 
(LTFV) 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 (3) the cash deposit rate for all 
other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be the ``all others'' 
rate of 2.59 percent, which is the ``All Others'' rate established in 
the LTFV investigation. See Notice of Amended Final Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value; Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 
Products From The Netherlands, 66 FR 55637 (November 2, 2001). These 
deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until 
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice also 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 the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.
    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, that continues to govern 
business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. 
Timely written notification of the return or 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 issued and published in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act.

    Dated: June 7, 2004.
James J. Jochum,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix--Issues in Decision Memorandum

Comment 1. Conventional Hot-Rolled Material vs. Direct Sheet Product
Comment 2. Quality Code
Comment 3. Treatment of Section 201 Tariffs
Comment 4. Treatment of Non-dumped Sales
Comment 5. Gap Period Entries
Comment 6. Cost of Manufacturing
Comment 7. General Expense Ratio
Comment 8. Variable Cost of Manufacturing
Comment 9. CEP Profit Rate
Comment 10. Use of Sale Date vs. Entry Date to Identify EP Sales
Comment 11. Reporting Period for U.S. Sales

[FR Doc. 04-13495 Filed 6-15-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P