[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 68 (Tuesday, April 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17834-17837]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6749]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-401-806]


Stainless Steel Wire Rod from Sweden: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 6, 2006, the Department of Commerce published the 
preliminary results of the 2004-2005 administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on stainless steel wire rod from Sweden. The 
review covers one manufacturer/exporter, Fagersta Stainless AB 
(``FSAB''). The period of review (``POR'') is September 1, 2004, 
through August 31, 2005.
    Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made 
changes to the margin calculations. 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.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 10, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian C. Smith, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1766.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The review covers one manufacturer/exporter: Fagersta Stainless AB 
(``FSAB''). The period of review is September 1, 2004, through August 
31, 2005.
    On October 6, 2006, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') 
published the preliminary results of this administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on stainless steel wire rod from Sweden. See 
Stainless Steel Wire Rod from Sweden: Preliminary Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 59082 (October 6, 2006) 
(``Preliminary Results''). We invited interested parties to comment on 
the preliminary results of review.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In the Preliminary Results, we determined it appropriate to 
treat FSAB and its affiliates, AB Sandvik Materials Technology 
(``SMT'') and Kanthal AB (``Kanthal''), as one entity for margin 
calculation purposes because they met the regulatory criteria for 
collapsing affiliated producers. See April 13, 2006, Memorandum from 
the Team to The File, entitled ``Stainless Steel Wire Rod from 
Sweden: Whether to Collapse FSAB, SMT, and Kanthal.'' No party 
objected to this preliminary determination. Therefore, we have 
continued to treat these affiliated companies as one entity in the 
final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FSAB filed its case brief on November 27, 2006, and the 
petitioners\2\ filed their rebuttal brief on December 4, 2006. Per 
FSAB's November 3, 2006, request, we held a hearing on December 6, 
2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The petitioners include the following companies: Carpenter 
Technology Corporation; Crucible Specialty Metals Division, Crucible 
Materials Corporation; and Electroalloy Corporation, a Division of 
G.O. Carlson, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 11, 2007, we extended the time limit for the final 
results in this review until April 4, 2007. See Notice of Extension of 
Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: 
Stainless Steel

[[Page 17835]]

Wire Rod from Sweden, 72 FR 2261 (January 18, 2007).
    We have conducted this administrative review in accordance with 
section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'').

Scope of the Order

    For purposes of this order, SSWR comprises products that are hot-
rolled or hot-rolled annealed and/or pickled and/or descaled rounds, 
squares, octagons, hexagons or other shapes, in coils, that may also be 
coated with a lubricant containing copper, lime or oxalate. SSWR is 
made of alloy steels containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less of 
carbon and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or without other 
elements. These products are manufactured only by hot-rolling or hot-
rolling annealing, and/or pickling and/or descaling, are normally sold 
in coiled form, and are of solid cross-section. The majority of SSWR 
sold in the United States is round in cross-sectional shape, annealed 
and pickled, and later cold-finished into stainless steel wire or 
small-diameter bar. The most common size for such products is 5.5 
millimeters or 0.217 inches in diameter, which represents the smallest 
size that normally is produced on a rolling mill and is the size that 
most wire-drawing machines are set up to draw. The range of SSWR sizes 
normally sold in the United States is between 0.20 inches and 1.312 
inches in diameter.
    Certain stainless steel grades are excluded from the scope of the 
order. SF20T and K-M35FL are excluded. The following proprietary grades 
of Kanthal AB are also excluded: Kanthal A-1, Kanthal AF, Kanthal A, 
Kanthal D, Kanthal DT, Alkrothal 14, Alkrothal 720, and Nikrothal 40. 
The chemical makeup for the excluded grades is as follows:

                                                      SF20T
Carbon..............................................            0.05 max            Chromium         19.00/21.00
Manganese...........................................            2.00 max          Molybdenum           1.50/2.50
Phosphorous.........................................            0.05 max                Lead   added (0.10/0.30)
Sulfur..............................................            0.15 max           Tellurium    added (0.03 min)
Silicon.............................................            1.00 max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                     K-M35FL
Carbon..............................................           0.015 max              Nickel            0.30 max
Silicon.............................................           0.70/1.00            Chromium         12.50/14.00
Manganese...........................................            0.40 max                Lead           0.10/0.30
Phosphorous.........................................            0.04 max            Aluminum           0.20/0.35
Sulfur..............................................            0.03 max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                   Kanthal A-1
Carbon..............................................            0.08 max            Aluminum  5.30 min, 6.30 max
Silicon.............................................            0.70 max                Iron             balance
Manganese...........................................            0.40 max            Chromium    20.50 min, 23.50
                                                                                                             max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                   Kanthal AF
Carbon..............................................            0.08 max            Aluminum  4.80 min, 5.80 max
Silicon.............................................            0.70 max                Iron             balance
Manganese...........................................            0.40 max
Chromium............................................    20.50 min, 23.50
                                                                     max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                    Kanthal A
Carbon..............................................            0.08 max            Aluminum  4.80 min, 5.80 max
Silicon.............................................            0.70 max                Iron             balance
Manganese...........................................            0.50 max
Chromium............................................    20.50 min, 23.50
                                                                     max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                    Kanthal D
Carbon..............................................            0.08 max            Aluminum  4.30 min, 5.30 max
Silicon.............................................            0.70 max                Iron             balance
Manganese...........................................            0.50 max
Chromium............................................    20.50 min, 23.50
                                                                     max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                   Kanthal DT
Carbon..............................................            0.08 max            Aluminum  4.60 min, 5.60 max
Silicon.............................................            0.70 max                Iron             balance
Manganese...........................................            0.50 max

[[Page 17836]]

 
Chromium............................................    20.50 min, 23.50
                                                                     max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                  Alkrothal 14
Carbon..............................................            0.08 max            Aluminum  3.80 min, 4.80 max
Silicon.............................................            0.70 max                Iron             balance
Manganese...........................................            0.50 max
Chromium............................................    14.00 min, 16.00
                                                                     max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                  Alkrothal 720
Carbon..............................................            0.08 max            Aluminum  3.50 min, 4.50 max
Silicon.............................................            0.70 max                Iron             balance
Manganese...........................................            0.70 max
Chromium............................................    12.00 min, 14.00
                                                                     max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                  Nikrothal 40
Carbon.........................................            0.10 max              Nickel     34.00 min, 37.00 max
Silicon........................................  1.60 min, 2.50 max                Iron                  balance
Manganese......................................            1.00 max
Chromium.......................................    18.00 min, 21.00
                                                                max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The subject merchandise is currently classifiable under subheadings 
7221.00.0005, 7221.00.0015, 7221.00.0030, 7221.00.0045, and 
7221.00.0075 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 this order is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs submitted by the 
parties to this antidumping duty administrative review are addressed in 
the ``Issues and Decision Memorandum'' (Decision Memo) from Stephen J. 
Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to David 
M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated April 
4, 2006, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues 
that parties have raised and to which we have responded, all of which 
are in the Decision Memo, 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 
Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. 
The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are 
identical in content.

Changes from the Preliminary Results

    Based on the information submitted and our analysis of the comments 
received, we have made certain changes to the margin calculations for 
FSAB as follows.
    (1) We matched products of identical grade first before matching 
products of the next most similar grade and, where appropriate, 
attempted to match products beyond the top three most similar grades 
before resorting to constructed value (``CV''), consistent with our 
intent in the preliminary results and in accordance with the 
Department's practice. See Comment 2 for further discussion.
    (2) We included in our final margin analysis a U.S. sales 
transaction made by FSAB's U.S. affiliate, Fagersta Stainless Inc. 
(``FSI''), for which the entry date was within the POR but the sale 
date preceded the POR, in accordance with the Department's normal 
practice to review sales associated with entries made during the review 
period. See Comment 3 for further discussion.
    (3) We corrected a clerical error by applying the general and 
administrative (``G&A'') expenses and further manufacturing costs, 
which were recalculated in the Preliminary Results, to only the U.S. 
sales of FSAB's other U.S. affiliate, Sandvik Metallurgical Technology 
U.S. (``SMT U.S.''), for which SMT U.S. reported an amount for further 
manufacturing. See Comment 4 for further discussion.
    (4) For SMT U.S.' sales of merchandise that was further 
manufactured but for which SMT U.S. did not report a further 
manufacturing cost, we applied as facts available under section 
776(a)(1) of the Act, a weighted average of the costs reported by SMT 
U.S. for its other U.S. sales of further-manufactured merchandise, as 
recalculated for purposes of the Preliminary Results, and deducted this 
amount from the prices of the U.S. sales at issue. See Comment 4 for 
further discussion.
    (5) We used SMACC's\3\ cost of producing billets reported in the 
August 18, 2006, Section D supplemental questionnaire response to 
compare to the market price of billets and to the transfer price FSAB 
paid to SMACC for billets used to make the merchandise under 
consideration. We also excluded an additional G&A expense relevant to 
Outokumpu Oyj\4\ which had been

[[Page 17837]]

incorrectly added to SMACC's cost of production for purposes of the 
Preliminary Results. In addition, we included the total net foreign 
exchange gain or loss in the calculation of Outokumpu Oyj's 
consolidated financial expense rate that was applied to SMACC's cost of 
producing the billets, in accordance with Department practice. See 
Comment 5 for further discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ SMACC or Outokumpu Stainless Ltd. Sheffield is affiliated 
with FSAB.
    \4\ Outokumpu Oyj is the consolidated parent of SMACC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (6) We corrected a clerical error by subtracting the adjustment to 
SMT's\5\ transfer price from FSAB's cost of billets prior to 
calculating FSAB's total cost of manufacturing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ AB Sandvik Materials Technology or SMT is affiliated with 
FSAB and is also the parent company of SMT U.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (7) We corrected a clerical error by converting FSAB's U.S. 
affiliate's reported U.S. inventory carrying costs from SEK/kg. to USD/
lb. in the margin calculations.
    See April 4, 2007, Memorandum from Case Analyst to The File, 
entitled ``Calculation Memorandum for the Final Results for Fagersta 
Stainless AB; and April 4, 2007, Memorandum to Neal M. 
Halper from Michael P. Harrison, entitled ``Cost of Production, 
Constructed Value and Further Manufacturing Calculation Adjustments for 
the Final Results - Fagersta Stainless AB,'' for further details.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentage 
exists:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Manufacturer/exporter                  Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fagersta Stainless AB/AB Sandvik Materials                         20.42
 Technology/Kanthal AB..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). The 
Department will issue appropriate appraisement instructions for the 
company subject to this review directly to CBP 15 days after 
publication of these final results of review. In accordance with 19 CFR 
351.106(c), we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries covered by this review if any importer-specific 
assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above 
de minimis (i.e., is not less than 0.50 percent ad valorem). For 
entries made by FSAB on behalf of its U.S. affiliate, FSI, we 
calculated the importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rate based 
on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for 
the examined sales to the total entered value of those sales. However, 
for shipments of subject merchandise produced by FSAB and imported by 
its U.S. affiliate, SMT U.S., where the respondent was unable to 
provide the entered value, we calculated the importer-specific per-unit 
duty assessment rate by aggregating the total amount of antidumping 
duties calculated for the examined sales and divided this amount by the 
total quantity of those sales. To determine whether the per-unit duty 
assessment rate is de minimis, in accordance with the requirement set 
forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we calculated an importer-specific ad 
valorem ratio based on the estimated entered value.
    The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on 
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This 
clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the 
POR produced by the company included in these final results of review 
for which the reviewed company did not know that the merchandise it 
sold to the intermediary (e.g., reseller, trading company, or exporter) 
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 intermediary 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 Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all 
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption 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 FSAB/SMT/Kanthal 
will be the rate indicated above; (2) for previously 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, a prior review, or 
the original less-than-fair-value (``LTFV'') investigation, but the 
manufacturer is, then the cash deposit rate will be the rate 
established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the 
merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers 
or exporters will continue to be 5.71 percent. This rate is the ``All 
Others'' rate from the LTFV investigation. These deposit requirements 
shall remain in effect until further notice.
    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 antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
    This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written 
notification of 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 this determination and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.221.

    Dated: April 4, 2007,
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix List of Issues

Comment 1: Whether to Include Electroslag Refining As a Model-Matching 
Criterion
Comment 2: Grade-Matching Methodology
Comment 3: Treatment of One U.S. Sale Entered During the POR But Sold 
Prior to the POR
Comment 4: Application of Further Manufacturing G&A Expenses to Sales 
of Non-Further Manufactured Merchandise
Comment 5: Calculation of Affiliated Supplier's Billet Cost
[FR Doc. E7-6749 Filed 4-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S