[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 17, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28659-28661]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-7505]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

(A-549-817)


Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from Thailand: 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Partial 
Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order and Partial Rescission of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') has conducted 
an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain hot-
rolled carbon steel flat products from Thailand produced and/or 
exported by Sahaviriya Steel Industries Public Company Limited 
(``SSI''), Nakornthai Strip Mill Public Co., Ltd. (``Nakornthai''), and 
G Steel Public Company Limited (``G Steel'') \1\ (formerly Siam Strip 
Mill Public Co., Ltd.). The period of review (``POR'') is November 1, 
2003, through October 31, 2004. Based on our analysis of comments 
received, these final results remain unchanged from the preliminary 
results. The final results are listed below in the ``Final Results of 
Review'' section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Department notes that it erroneously referred to G Steel 
as ``G Street Public Company Limited'' in the Preliminary Results.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 17, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Bailey or Abdelali Elouaradia, 
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Ave, NW, 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-0193 and (202) 482-1374, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On December 9, 2005, the Department published the preliminary 
results and intent to revoke and partial rescission of its 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain hot-
rolled carbon steel flat products from Thailand. See Certain Hot-Rolled 
Carbon Steel Flat Products From Thailand; Preliminary Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Intent to Revoke and Rescind 
in Part, 70 FR 73197 (December 9, 2005) (Preliminary Results).
    We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On 
December 22, 2005, United States Steel Corporation (petitioner) 
requested that the Department issue a questionnaire to SSI requesting 
certain financial information for the post-POR period. On January 4, 
2006, the Department contacted Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom 
LLP, counsel to petitioner, and requested that petitioner provide a 
more thorough explanation for its December 22, 2005, request for 
certain post-POR financial information from SSI. See the Department's 
Memorandum to the File from Stephen Bailey, International Trade 
Compliance Analyst, dated January 5, 2006. On January 6, 2006, 
petitioner and Nucor Corporation (Nucor), a domestic interested party 
in this administrative review, submitted a joint letter providing a 
detailed explanation as to the relevance of the financial information 
petitioner requested the Department collect from SSI. On January 13, 
2006, the Department requested SSI submit certain financial information 
for the post-POR period, which SSI did on January 18, 2006.
    On January 17, 2006, SSI submitted a letter on the record of the 
2004-2005 administrative review \2\ requesting that the 2004-2005 
administrative review be rescinded with respect to SSI because certain 
entries into the U.S. during the 2004-2005 POR were actually sold 
pursuant to sales in the 2003-2004 POR, and these sales have already 
been examined and verified by the Department in the 2003-2004 
administrative review. On January 18, 2006, SSI submitted a letter on 
the record of the 2003-2004 administrative review requesting certain 
information contained in its January 17, 2006, letter to the Department 
be placed on the record of the 2003-2004 administrative review. 
Specifically, SSI requested that information regarding its meaningful 
participation in the market for the 2004-2005 administrative review and 
the date of entry for merchandise entered during the 04-05 
administrative review be placed on the record of the 2003-2004 
administrative review. See SSI's January 18, 2006, letter to the 
Department at page 2 and exhibit A. On January 25, 2006, the Department 
issued a memorandum from Richard Weible, Office Director, to the File 
reiterating the Department's practice of conducting administrative 
reviews based on entries of subject merchandise during the POR. 
Furthermore, we explained that we intended to exclude sales that 
entered in the 04-05 administrative review period from the 03-04 
administrative review. On January 27, 2006, SSI submitted a letter 
objecting to the Department's intention to exclude certain sales from 
the 03-04 administrative review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 70 FR 
76024 (December 22, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 25, 2006, petitioner and Nucor filed joint comments on 
SSI's post-POR financial information submission. On January 31, 2006, 
SSI filed rebuttal comments to petitioner's and Nucor's January 25, 
2006, comments regarding its post-POR financial information.
    On February 7, 2006, the Department received case briefs from 
petitioner, Nucor and SSI. On February 10, 2006, SSI submitted a letter 
claiming that Nucor had submitted new factual information in its 
February 7, 2006, case brief. On February 13, 2006, the Department 
issued a letter to Nucor requesting that certain new factual 
information be edited from its case brief. On February 14, 2006, 
petitioner, Nucor and SSI submitted rebuttal briefs, and Nucor 
submitted a revised case brief excluding the new factual information as 
requested by the Department.

Partial Rescission

    In our Preliminary Results, we announced our preliminary decision 
to rescind the review with respect to Nakornthai and G Steel because 
these companies had no entries of hot-rolled steel from Thailand during 
the POR. See Preliminary Results. We have received no new information 
contradicting this decision. Therefore, we are rescinding the 
administrative review with respect to Nakornthai and G Steel.

Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order

    The products covered by this antidumping duty order are certain 
hot-

[[Page 28660]]

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 
order.
    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 as 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 (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 review 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., 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 review 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 review, 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 CBP purposes, the written 
description of the merchandise is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    The Department has received case and rebuttal briefs from 
petitioner, Nucor and SSI. All case and rebuttal briefs for the final 
results are addressed in the memorandum ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, Partial Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order and Partial 
Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Hot-
Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from Thailand'' from Stephen J. 
Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, to David M. 
Spooner, Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, dated May 8, 2006 
(Decision Memorandum), which is hereby adopted by this notice. Attached 
to this notice as an Appendix is a list of the issues that petitioner, 
Nucor, and SSI 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 
the Decision Memorandum, which is on file in the Department's Central 
Records Unit, located at 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Room 
B-099. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can 
be accessed directly on the Import Administration Web site at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ under the heading Federal Register Notices. The paper 
copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in 
content.
    The Department notes that SSI included in its rebuttal briefs a 
response to certain allegations of affiliation made by Nucor in its 
original February 7, 2006, case brief. Because the Department 
ultimately rejected Nucor's case brief with respect to its affiliation 
argument as new factual information, SSI's rebuttal argument will not 
be considered. See the Department's February 13, 2006, letter to Nucor 
rejecting its affiliation argument as new factual information.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of comments received and findings at 
verification, we made the following changes from the preliminary 
results:
    (1) We excluded certain United States sales form the analysis that 
entered after the POR;
    (2) We adjusted SSI's general and administrative (G&A) to exclude

[[Page 28661]]

revenue earned on the sale of scrap to offset G&A expenses, excluded 
the cost of scrap from the denominator of both the G&A and financial 
expense ratio calculations, and excluded revenue earned from the early 
redemption of a bond from the numerator of the G&A expense ratio 
calculation;
    (3) We adjusted our computer programs to reflect a single level of 
trade in the home market and the United States market; and
    (4) We excluded certain costs associated with SSI's hot-finishing 
line to avoid double counting in the cost calculation.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following dumping margins exist for the 
period November 1, 2003 through October 31, 2004:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Manufacturer/Exporter                  Margin (Percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SSI.................................................                0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries, pursuant to section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act 
of 1930 (``the Act''), and 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department calculated 
importer-specific duty assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of 
the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined 
sales to the total entered value of the examined sales for that 
importer. The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' 
regulation on May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification will apply 
to entries of subject merchandise during the period of review produced 
by companies included in these final results of reviews for which the 
reviewed companies did not know their merchandise was destined for the 
United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate 
unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the 
intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full 
discussion of this clarification, see Notice of Policy Concerning 
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). 
Antidumping duties for the rescinded companies, Nakornthai and G Steel, 
shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated 
antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from 
warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(I). 
The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly 
to CBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all 
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these 
final results, as provided by section 751(a) of the Act: (1) Because 
the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat 
products is being revoked with respect to SSI, no deposit will be 
required; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not 
covered in this review but covered in the investigation, the cash 
deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate from the 
most recent review; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this 
review, a prior review, or the investigation, but the producer is, the 
cash deposit rate will be that established for the most recent period 
for the producer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for 
all other producers or exporters will be 3.86 percent, the ``all 
others'' rate established in the less-than-fair-value investigation (66 
FR 49622, September 28, 2001). These deposit requirements shall remain 
in effect until publication of the final results of the next 
administrative review.

Notification of Interested Parties

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 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.
    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (``APO'') 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 this determination and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: May 8, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.

Appendix

List of Comments and Issues in the Decision Memorandum

Comment 1: Revocation
Comment 2: Excluded Sales
Comment 3: Calculation of General and Administrative and Interest 
Expenses
Comment 4: Level of Trade
Comment 5: Variable Cost of Manufacture
[FR Doc. E6-7505 Filed 5-16-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S