[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 239 (Wednesday, December 13, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74900-74901]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-21205]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

(A-449-804)


Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review: Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Latvia

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 8, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published the preliminary results of its fourth administrative review 
of the antidumping duty order on steel concrete reinforcing bars 
(rebar) from Latvia. The review covers one producer of the subject 
merchandise. The period of review (POR) is September 1, 2004, through 
August 31, 2005. Based on our analysis of comments received, these 
final results differ from the preliminary results. The final results 
are listed below in the Final Results of Review section.

EFFECTIVE DATE:  December 13, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Saliha Loucif at (202) 482-1779 or 
Julie Santoboni at (202) 482-4194; AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14\th\ Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 
20230.

Supplementary Information:

Background

    On August 8, 2006, the Department published in the Federal Register 
the preliminary results of the fourth administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on rebar from Latvia. See Notice of Preliminary 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Steel Concrete 
Reinforcing Bars from Latvia, 71 FR 45031 (August 8, 2006) (Preliminary 
Results). We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On 
September 7, 2006, we received case briefs from the sole respondent, 
Joint Stock Company Liepajas Metalurgs (LM), and from the petitioners, 
the Rebar Trade Action Coalition (RTAC) and its individual members.\1\ 
No interested party requested a hearing during this review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Commercial Metals Company, Gerdau Ameristeel Corporation, 
and Nucor Corporation are the members of RTAC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The product covered by this order is all steel concrete reinforcing 
bars sold in straight lengths, currently classifiable in the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers 
7214.20.00, 7228.30.8050, 7222.11.0050, 7222.30.0000, 7228.60.6000, 
7228.20.1000, or any other tariff item number. Specifically excluded 
are plain rounds (i.e., non-deformed or smooth bars) and rebar that has 
been further processed through bending or coating. HTSUS subheadings 
are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written 
description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    The issues raised in the briefs by parties to this administrative 
review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum to David M. 
Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from Stephen J. 
Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary (Decision Memorandum), dated 
December 6, 2006, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the 
issues addressed in the Decision Memorandum is appended to this notice. 
The Decision Memorandum is on file in Room B-099 of the main Department 
building, and can also 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.

[[Page 74901]]

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of comments received, we adjusted the 
calculation methodology used in the Preliminary Results. First, we 
calculated general and administrative expenses (G&A) and interest 
expenses based on LM's financial statements for the Fiscal Year 2005, 
which is the time period that most closely corresponds to the POR. 
Second, we moved expenses for LM's football and hockey clubs from G&A 
expenses to indirect selling expenses because these clubs provide 
indirect advertising benefits to the company. Finally, we adjusted the 
calculation of the variable cost of manufacturing in the margin 
calculation program to account for a clerical error. These adjustments 
are discussed in detail in the Decision Memorandum.

Final Results of Review

    As a result of our review, we determine that the following 
weighted-average margin exists for the period of September 1, 2004, 
through August 31, 2005:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Weighted-Average
                     Producer                        Margin (Percentage)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joint Stock Company Liepajas Metalurgs............                  5.94
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment

    The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries, pursuant to 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. Where the assessment rate is above de minimis, we will 
instruct CBP to assess duties on all entries of subject merchandise by 
that importer. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions 
to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of 
review.
    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 POR produced by companies included in 
these preliminary results of review for which the reviewed companies 
did not know their merchandise was destined for the United States. In 
such instances, the Department 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 Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 
2003).

Cash Deposits

    Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective 
upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for 
all shipments of rebar from Latvia 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 Tariff Act of 1930, 
as amended (the Act): (1) For LM, the cash deposit rate will be 5.94 
percent; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not 
covered in this review but covered in a previous segment of this 
proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-
specific rate published in the most recent final results in which that 
producer or exporter participated; (3) if the exporter is not a firm 
covered in this review or in any previous segment of this proceeding, 
but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be that established for 
the producer of the merchandise in these final results of review or in 
the most recent final results in which that producer participated; and 
(4) if neither the exporter nor the producer is a firm covered in this 
review or in any previous segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit 
rate will be 17.21 percent, the ``All Others'' rate established in the 
less-than-fair-value investigation. These deposit requirements shall 
remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next 
administrative review.
    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 in the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.
    This notice also is the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable 
violation.
    We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: December 6, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.

Appendix

Comment 1: Use of Monthly Cost Comparison Periods
Comment 2: Date of Sale
Comment 3: General and Administrative Expense Ratio Calculation
Comment 4: Clerical Error
Comment 5: Treatment of Non-Dumped Sales
Comment 6: Financial Statements Used for General and Administrative 
Expenses and Interest Expenses
[FR Doc. E6-21205 Filed 12-12-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S