96-25537. Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From Brazil: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 194 (Friday, October 4, 1996)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 51904-51907]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-25537]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
    [A-351-817]
    
    
    Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From Brazil: Preliminary 
    Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
    
    AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
    Department of Commerce.
    
    ACTION: Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
    Administrative Review.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: In response to a request from the respondent, Companhia 
    Siderurgica de Tubarao (CST), the Department of Commerce (the 
    Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping 
    duty order on certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate from Brazil. 
    This review covers the above manufacturer/exporter of the subject 
    merchandise to the United States. The period of review (POR) is August 
    1, 1994, through July 31, 1995.
        We preliminarily determine the dumping margin for CST to be 2.58 
    percent during the POR. Interested parties are invited to comment on 
    these preliminary results. Parties who submit argument in this 
    proceeding should also submit with the argument (1) a statement of the 
    issue, and (2) a brief summary of the argument.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: October 4, 1996.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Helen Kramer or Linda Ludwig, 
    Enforcement Group III, Import Administration, International Trade
    
    [[Page 51905]]
    
    Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
    Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
    0405 or (202) 482-3833, respectively.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    The Applicable Statute
    
        Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are 
    references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective 
    date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act), by the 
    Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise 
    indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are to the 
    current regulations, as amended by the interim regulations published in 
    the Federal Register on May 11, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 25130).
    
    Background
    
        On July 9, 1993, the Department published in the Federal Register 
    (58 Fed. Reg. 37136) the final affirmative antidumping duty 
    determination on certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate from Brazil. 
    We published an antidumping duty order on August 19, 1993 (58 Fed. Reg. 
    44164). On August 1, 1995, the Department published the Opportunity to 
    Request an Administrative Review of this order for the period August 1, 
    1994-July 31, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 39150). The Department received a 
    request for an administrative review of CST's exports from CST, a 
    producer/exporter of the subject merchandise. We initiated the review 
    on September 8, 1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 46817). In a separate proceeding, 
    the product produced by the respondent is the subject of an ongoing 
    scope inquiry.
        Under the Act, the Department may extend the deadline for 
    completion of administrative reviews if it determines that it is not 
    practicable to complete the review within the statutory time limit of 
    365 days. On April 1, 1996, the Department extended the time limits for 
    the preliminary and final results in this case. See Extension of Time 
    Limit for Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 61 Fed. Reg. 14291 
    (1996).
        The Department is conducting this review in accordance with section 
    751 of the Act.
    
    Scope of the Review
    
        The products covered by this administrative review constitute one 
    ``class or kind'' of merchandise: certain cut-to-length carbon steel 
    plate. These products include hot-rolled carbon steel universal mill 
    plates (i.e., flat-rolled products rolled on four faces or in a closed 
    box pass, of a width exceeding 150 millimeters but not exceeding 1,250 
    millimeters and of a thickness of not less than 4 millimeters, not in 
    coils and without patterns in relief), of rectangular shape, neither 
    clad, plated nor coated with metal, whether or not painted, varnished, 
    or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances; and certain 
    hot-rolled carbon steel flat-rolled products in straight lengths, of 
    rectangular shape, hot rolled, neither clad, plated, nor coated with 
    metal, whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or 
    other nonmetallic substances, 4.75 millimeters or more in thickness and 
    of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters and measures at least twice 
    the thickness, as currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff 
    Schedule (HTS) under item numbers 7208.31.0000, 7208.32.0000, 
    7208.33.1000, 7208.33.5000, 7208.41.0000, 7208.42.0000, 7208.43.0000, 
    7208.90.0000, 7210.70.3000, 7210.90.9000, 7211.11.0000, 7211.12.0000, 
    7211.21.0000, 7211.22.0045, 7211.90.0000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 
    and 7212.50.0000. Included are flat-rolled products of nonrectangular 
    cross-section where such cross-section is achieved subsequent to the 
    rolling process (i.e., products which have been ``worked after 
    rolling'')--for example, products which have been beveled or rounded at 
    the edges. Excluded is grade X-70 plate. These HTS item numbers are 
    provided for convenience and Customs purposes. The written description 
    remains dispositive.
    
    Verification
    
        As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act, we verified 
    information provided by the respondent by using standard verification 
    procedures, including on-site inspection of the manufacturer's 
    facilities, the examination of relevant sales and financial records, 
    and selection of original documentation containing relevant 
    information. Our verification results are outlined in the verification 
    report, the public version of which is available in Import 
    Administration's Central Records Unit.
    
    Transactions Reviewed
    
        In accordance with Section 751 of the Act, the Department is 
    required to determine the normal value and export price (EP) of each 
    entry of subject merchandise during the relevant review period.
    
    Product Comparisons
    
        In accordance with section 771(16) of the Act, we considered 
    profile slabs sold in the home market during the POR and produced by 
    the respondent to be covered by the description in the Scope of the 
    Review section above, and to be foreign like products for purposes of 
    determining appropriate product comparisons to U.S. sales. We matched 
    sales of foreign like products to U.S. sales based on the physical 
    characteristics reported by the respondent and verified by the 
    Department. To take into account the high rate of inflation in Brazil 
    during the POR, we compared foreign like products and products exported 
    to the United States which were sold in the same month. Where there 
    were no sales of identical merchandise in the home market to compare to 
    U.S. sales within the same month, we compared U.S. sales to the next 
    most similar foreign like product (on the basis of the characteristics 
    listed in Appendix III of the Department's September 14, 1995, 
    antidumping questionnaire) which was sold in the same month.
    
    Fair Value Comparisons
    
        To determine whether sales of certain cut-to-length carbon steel 
    plate by CST to the United States were made at less than fair value, we 
    compared the export price (EP) to the normal value (NV), as described 
    in the ``Export Price'' and ``Normal Value'' sections of this notice. 
    In accordance with section 777A(d)(2), we calculated monthly weighted-
    average prices for NV and compared these to individual U.S. 
    transactions.
    
    Export Price (EP)
    
        We used EP as defined in section 772(a) of the Act. We calculated 
    EP based on FOB prices to unaffiliated customers in the United States. 
    We made deductions from the starting price for foreign inland freight 
    and foreign brokerage and handling. Based on our verification of CST's 
    U.S. sales response, we made minor adjustments to CST's reported 
    foreign brokerage and handling. The material costs of stowing and 
    lashing the merchandise on vessels are the only packing costs on U.S. 
    sales, and are included in foreign brokerage and handling.
    
    Normal Value
    
        Based on a comparison of the aggregate quantity of home market and 
    U.S. sales, we determined that the quantity of the foreign like product 
    sold in the exporting country was sufficient to permit a proper 
    comparison with the sales of the subject merchandise to the United 
    States, pursuant to section 773(a) of the Act.
        On January 17, 1996, petitioners alleged that CST made home market 
    sales of the subject merchandise at
    
    [[Page 51906]]
    
    prices below the cost of production (COP) during the POR. The 
    Department has determined that when appropriate adjustments to 
    petitioners' methodology are made, there is no evidence of below cost 
    sales. (See internal memorandum to Joseph A. Spetrini from Roland L. 
    MacDonald and Christian B. Marsh, ``Petitioners' Allegation of Sales 
    Below the Cost of Production for Companhia Siderurgica de Tubarao 
    (CST).'') Therefore, in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the 
    Act, we based NV on the price at which the foreign like product was 
    first sold for consumption in the home market, in the usual commercial 
    quantities and in the ordinary course of trade.
        During verification, we found that an order acknowledgement and 
    production specification sheet are issued each time agreement is 
    reached with a customer on price, quantity and product. We therefore 
    conclude that the appropriate date of sale in the home market, when all 
    the essential terms of sale are set, is the order acknowledgement date, 
    the same as the reported date of sale in the U.S. market. Consequently, 
    we have preliminarily rejected CST's reported home market date of sale, 
    which is the invoice date.
        We have preliminarily disallowed an adjustment for credit expenses, 
    because the respondent did not provide the interest rates requested by 
    the Department for use in calculating these expenses. CST did not 
    report any packing expenses. To achieve tax neutrality, we deducted 
    value-added taxes (CONFINS, PIS and IPI) included in home market 
    prices, but not assessed on the subject merchandise, from the reported 
    gross unit price. As 95 percent of the IPI tax paid is rebated, we 
    deducted only five percent of the reported IPI tax paid from the home 
    market price. To equalize the rates of ICMS tax included in home market 
    and U.S. prices, we subtracted the amount of the ICMS tax included in 
    the home market price and added back 2.21 percent of the reported net 
    home market price (which is the rate of ICMS tax included in the price 
    of subject merchandise). We made adjustments to NV for differences in 
    cost attributable to differences in physical characteristics of the 
    merchandise, pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act.
        As set forth in section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act and in the 
    Statement of Administrative Action (SAA) at pages 829-831, to the 
    extent practicable, the Department will calculate normal values based 
    on sales at the same level of trade as the U.S. sales. When the 
    Department is unable to find sales in the comparison market at the same 
    level of trade as the U.S. sale(s), the Department may compare sales in 
    the U.S. and foreign markets at different levels of trade. See, Final 
    Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Pasta from 
    Italy, 61 FR. 30326, June 14, 1996.
        In accordance with section 773(a)(7)(A), if sales at different 
    levels of trade are compared, the Department will adjust the normal 
    value to account for the difference in level of trade if two conditions 
    are met. First, there must be differences between the actual selling 
    functions performed by the seller at the level of trade of the U.S. 
    sale and the level of trade of the normal value sale. Second, the 
    differences between the levels of trade must affect price 
    comparability, as evidenced by a pattern of consistent price 
    differences between sales at the different levels of trade in the 
    market in which normal value is determined.
        In its questionnaire responses, CST stated that there were no 
    differences in its selling activities by customer categories within 
    each market. In order independently to confirm the absence of separate 
    levels of trade within or between the U.S. and home markets, we 
    examined CST's questionnaire responses for indications that CST's 
    function as a seller differed among customer categories. Pursuant to 
    section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, and the SAA at 827, in identifying 
    levels of trade for directly observed (i.e., not constructed) export 
    price and normal values sales, we considered the selling functions 
    reflected in the starting price, before any adjustments. Where 
    possible, we further examined whether each selling function was 
    performed on a substantial portion of sales. (See Proposed Rulemaking, 
    61 Fed. Reg. at 7348).
        CST sold to trading companies in the U.S. market. In the home 
    market, CST sold to distributors and performed the same selling 
    functions with respect to sales to all its home market customers, as 
    well as with respect to U.S. customers. Thus, our analysis of the 
    questionnaire response leads us to conclude that sales within each 
    market and between markets are not made at different levels of trade. 
    At verification, we interviewed CST's sales manager, who confirmed our 
    conclusion. Accordingly, we preliminarily find that all sales in the 
    home market and the U.S. market are made at the same level of trade. 
    Therefore, all price comparisons are at the same level of trade and an 
    adjustment pursuant to section 773(a)(7)(A) is unwarranted.
    
    Review Limited to CST
    
        On April 3, 1996, petitioners alleged that CST failed to disclose 
    significant interlocking directorships and other business relationships 
    between CST and two other companies included in the original 
    investigation, Companhia Siderurgica Paulista (COSIPA) and Usinas 
    Siderurgica de Minas Gerais S.A. (USIMINAS). COSIPA and USIMINAS are 
    not respondents in this proceeding. The Department has determined that 
    although CST, COSIPA and USIMINAS are affiliated parties, as defined in 
    section 351.102 (b) of the Proposed Regulations, they should not be 
    treated as a single enterprise for margin calculation purposes. (See 
    the Department's internal memorandum from Richard O. Weible to Joseph 
    A. Spetrini dated September 10, 1996.) Thus, we have based EP and NV 
    solely on CST's own sales.
    
    Currency Conversion
    
        For purposes of the preliminary results, we made currency 
    conversions based on the official exchange rates in effect on the dates 
    of the U.S. sales as certified by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. 
    Section 773A(a) directs the Department to use a daily exchange rate in 
    order to convert foreign currencies into U.S. dollars, unless the daily 
    rate involves a ``fluctuation.'' In accordance with the Department's 
    practice, we have determined as a general matter that a fluctuation 
    exists when the daily exchange rate differs from a benchmark by 2.25 
    percent. The benchmark is defined as the rolling average of rates for 
    the past 40 business days. When we determine a fluctuation exists, we 
    substituted the benchmark for the daily rate. However, for the 
    preliminary results in this review we have not determined that a 
    fluctuation exists, and we have not substituted the benchmark for the 
    daily rate.
    
    Preliminary Results of the Review
    
        As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine that the 
    following weighted-average dumping margin exists:
    
    [[Page 51907]]
    
    
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Margin 
               Manufacturer/exporter                  Period       (percent)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Companhia Siderurgica de Tubarao...........    8/1/94-7/31/95       2.58
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure within five days 
    of the date of publication of this notice. Any interested party may 
    request a hearing within 10 days of publication. Any hearing, if 
    requested, will be held 44 days after the date of publication or the 
    first business day thereafter. Case briefs and/or other written 
    comments from interested parties may be submitted not later than 30 
    days after the date of publication. Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals to 
    written comments, limited to issues raised in those comments, may be 
    filed not later than 37 days after the date of publication of this 
    notice. The Department will publish the final results of this 
    administrative review, including its analysis of issues raised in any 
    written comments or at a hearing, not later than 180 days after the 
    date of publication of this notice.
        The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
    publication of the final results of this antidumping duty review for 
    all shipments of certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate from Brazil 
    entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 
    publication date, as provided by section 751(a) of the Tariff Act: (1) 
    The cash deposit rate for the reviewed company will be the rate 
    established in the final results of this administrative review; (2) for 
    exporters not covered in this review, but covered in the LTFV 
    investigation, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-
    specific rate from the LTFV investigation; (3) if the exporter is not a 
    firm covered in this review, or the original 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; (4) 
    the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will 
    continue to be 75.54 percent, the ``All Others'' rate made effective by 
    the LTFV investigation. These requirements, when imposed, shall remain 
    in effect until publication of the final results of the next 
    administrative review.
        This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their 
    responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 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 double antidumping duties.
        This administrative review and notice are published in accordance 
    with section 751(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 353.22.
    
        Dated: September 25, 1996.
    Robert S. LaRussa,
    Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
    [FR Doc. 96-25537 Filed 10-3-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
10/4/1996
Published:
10/04/1996
Department:
Commerce Department
Entry Type:
Notice
Action:
Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review.
Document Number:
96-25537
Dates:
October 4, 1996.
Pages:
51904-51907 (4 pages)
Docket Numbers:
A-351-817
PDF File:
96-25537.pdf