[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 213 (Wednesday, November 4, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59530-59532]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-29545]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-475-822]
Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value: Stainless Steel Plate in Coils (``SSPC'') from Italy
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 4, 1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lesley Stagliano or Rick Johnson,
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0780 or (202) 482-3818,
respectively.
The Applicable Statute
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (``the Act''), are references to the provisions
effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to
the Act by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''). In addition,
unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department of Commerce
(``Department'') regulations are to the regulations at 19 CFR Part 351,
62 FR 27296 (May 19, 1997).
Preliminary Determination
We preliminarily determine that Stainless Steel Plate in Coils
(``SSPC'') from Italy are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value (``LTFV''), as provided in
section 733 of the Act. The estimated margins of sales at LTFV are
shown in the ``Suspension of Liquidation'' section of this notice.
Case History
On April 20, 1998, the Department initiated antidumping duty
investigations of imports of stainless steel plate in coils from
Belgium, Canada, Italy, South Africa, South Korea, and Taiwan (Notice
of Initiation of Antidumping Investigations: Stainless Steel Plates in
Coils From Belgium, Canada, Italy, South Africa , South Korea and
Taiwan (63 FR 20580, April 27, 1998) (``Notice of Initiation'')). Since
the initiation of this investigation the following events have
occurred:
The Department set aside a period for all interested parties to
raise issues regarding product coverage. On May 8, 1998, petitioners
Armco, Inc.; J&L Specialty Steel Inc.; Lukens, Inc.; the United
Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO/CLC; the Butler Armco Independent
Union: and the Zanesville Armco Independent Organization, Inc.
(``petitioners'') submitted comments stating that, while they believed
the scope of the investigations was accurate, they wished to clarify
certain issues concerning product coverage. On May 21, 1998,
respondents filed rebuttal comments stating their objection to the
scope comments filed by petitioners. The Department made no changes to
the scope concerning these comments.
During May 1998, the Department requested information from the U.S.
Embassy in Italy to identify producers/exporters of the subject
merchandise. The embassy identified two companies in Italy as
producers/exporters of subject merchandise, Acciai Speciali Terni SpA
(``AST'') and Arinox, Srl (``Arinox''). During May 1998, the Department
also requested and received comments from petitioners and potential
respondents in these investigations regarding the model matching
criteria.
On May 15, 1998, the United States International Trade Commission
(``ITC'') notified the Department of its affirmative preliminary injury
determination in this case.
On May 27, 1998, the Department issued antidumping duty
questionnaires to AST and to Arinox. On June 24, 1998, Arinox informed
the Department by electronic mail that the company did not produce
subject merchandise during the period of investigation, and therefore
did not respond to the Department's questionnaire.
Furthermore, AST did not respond to the Department's antidumping
questionnaire. Thus, the Department received no questionnaire responses
from identified Italian stainless steel producers/exporters.
On July 28, 1998, pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, the
petitioners made a timely request to postpone the preliminary
determination for thirty days. On August 14, 1998, the Department
postponed the preliminary determinations until no later than October
27, 1998. See Notice of Postponement of Preliminary Antidumping Duty
Investigations of Stainless Steel Plate in Coils: from Belgium, Canada,
Italy, South Africa, South Korea and Taiwan (63 FR 44840, August 21,
1998).
On August 20, 1998, petitioners amended the antidumping petitions
to include Allegheny Ludlum Corporation as an additional petitioner.
Scope of Investigation
For purposes of these investigations, the product covered is
certain stainless
[[Page 59531]]
steel plate in coils. Stainless steel is an alloy steel containing, by
weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more of
chromium, with or without other elements. The subject plate products
are flat-rolled products, 254 mm or over in width and 4.75 mm or more
in thickness, in coils, and annealed or otherwise heat treated and
pickled or otherwise descaled. The subject plate may also be further
processed (e.g., cold-rolled, polished, etc.) provided that it
maintains the specified dimensions of plate following such processing.
Excluded from the scope of this petition are the following: (1) plate
not in coils, (2) plate that is not annealed or otherwise heat treated
and pickled or otherwise descaled, (3) sheet and strip, and (4) flat
bars.
The merchandise subject to this investigation is currently
classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) at subheadings: 7219.11.00.30, 7219.11.00.60, 7219.12.00.05,
7219.12.00.20, 7219.12.00.25, 7219.12.00.50, 7219.12.00.55,
7219.12.00.65, 7219.12.00.70, 7219.12.00.80, 7219.31.00.10,
7219.90.00.10, 7219.90.00.20, 7219.90.00.25, 7219.90.00.60,
7219.90.00.80, 7220.11.00.00, 7220.20.10.10, 7220.20.10.15,
7220.20.10.60, 7220.20.10.80, 7220.20.60.05, 7220.20.60.10,
7220.20.60.15, 7220.20.60.60, 7220.20.60.80, 7220.90.00.10,
7220.90.00.15, 7220.90.00.60, and 7220.90.00.80. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the
written description of the merchandise under investigation is
dispositive.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (``POI'') is January 1, 1997, through
December 31, 1997.
Facts Available
Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that if an interested party
or any other person (A) withholds information that has been requested
by the administering authority; (B) fails to provide such information
by the deadlines for the submission of the information or in the form
and manner requested, subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section
782 of the Act; (C) significantly impedes a proceeding under the
antidumping statute; or (D) provides such information but the
information cannot be verified as provided in section 782(i) of the
Act, the administering authority shall, subject to section 782(d) of
the Act, use the facts otherwise available in reaching the applicable
determination. As discussed above, AST failed to respond to the
Department's questionnaire. Accordingly, we have determined, under
section 776(a)(2)(A), that we must base our determination for that
company on the facts available.
Section 776(b) of the Act further provides that adverse inferences
may be used for a party that has failed to cooperate by not acting to
the best of its ability to comply with a request for information (see
also the Statement of Administrative Action (``SAA''), accompanying the
URAA, H.R. Rp. No. 316, 103rd Cong., 2d Sess. 870). Given their refusal
to comply with the Department's request for information, AST has failed
to cooperate to the best of its ability in this investigation.
Therefore, the Department has determined that an adverse inference is
warranted with respect to AST.
In this proceeding, we used the information from the petition to
form the basis for a dumping margin for this uncooperative respondent.
Thus, consistent with Department practice (see, e.g., Notice of
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Stainless
Steel Wire Rod From Germany), 63 FR 10847 (March 5, 1998) (``Stainless
Steel Wire Rod from Germany'')) as facts otherwise available, the
Department is assigning to AST the highest margin alleged in the
petition for any Italian producer, which is 45.09 percent (see
Initiation Checklist and the Notice of Initiation for a discussion of
the margin calculations in the petition).
Section 776(c) of the Act provides that when the Department relies
on ``secondary information,'' (e.g., the petition) as the facts
available, the Department shall, to the extent practicable, corroborate
that information with independent sources reasonably at the
Department's disposal. The SAA accompanying the URAA clarifies that the
petition is ``secondary information.'' See SAA at 870. The SAA also
clarifies that ``corroborate'' means to determine whether the
information used has probative value. Id.
We reviewed the adequacy and accuracy of the information in the
petition during our pre-initiation analysis of the petition, to the
extent appropriate information was available for this purpose (e.g.,
import statistics, foreign market research reports, and data from U.S.
producers). See Notice of Initiation and April 20, 1998, ``Import
Administration AD Investigation Initiation Checklist (``Initiation
Checklist''). Specifically, the petitioners based both export price
(``EP'') and normal value (``NV'') in the petition on foreign market
research, affidavits concerning prices and freight costs, official U.S.
import statistics, U.S. government sources and International Financial
Statistics.
As certain information included in the margin calculation in the
petition is from public sources concerning for the most part the POI
(e.g., international freight and insurance, U.S. harbor maintenance and
U.S. merchandise processing fees, SG&A and profit), we find, for the
purpose of the preliminary determination, that the information is
sufficiently corroborated. However, with respect to certain data
included in the margin calculations included in the petition (e.g.,
gross U.S. and home market unit prices), the Department was provided no
information by the respondents or other interested parties, and is
aware of no other independent sources of information, that would enable
it to further corroborate the remaining components of the margin
calculation in the petition. The implementing regulation to section 776
of the Act, at 19 CFR 351.308(c), states ``[t]he fact that
corroboration may not be practicable in a given circumstance will not
prevent the Secretary from applying an adverse inference as appropriate
and using the secondary information in question.'' Additionally, we
note that the SAA at 870 specifically states that, where
``corroboration may not be practicable in a given circumstance'', the
Department may nevertheless apply an adverse inference. We note further
that the Department has used as the facts available margins developed
in the petition that are based in part on foreign market research in
other cases. See, e.g., Stainless Steel Wire Rod From Germany, and
Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
and Postponement of Final Determination: Melamine Institutional
Dinnerware Products From Indonesia, 61 FR 43333 (August 22, 1996).
The All-Others Rate
All foreign manufacturers/exporters in this investigation are being
assigned dumping margins on the basis of facts otherwise available.
Section 735(c)(5) of the Act provides that, where the dumping margins
established for all exporters and producers individually investigated
are determined entirely under section 776 of the Act, the Department
may use any reasonable method to establish the estimated all-others
rate for exporters and producers not individually investigated,
including weight averaging the zero, de minimus, and the margins based
on facts available. In this case, the margin assigned to the only
company investigated is based on adverse facts available. Therefore,
consistent with the
[[Page 59532]]
SAA, at 873, we are using an alternative method. As our alternative, we
are basing the all others rate on a simple average of all the margins
in the petition, both price-to-price comparison and constructed value
(``CV''). As a result, the all-others rate is 39.69 percent.
Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 733(d) of the Act, we are directing the
U.S. Customs Service (``Customs'') to suspend liquidation of all
imports of subject merchandise that are entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this
notice in the Federal Register. We will instruct Customs to require a
cash deposit or the posting of a bond equal to the percentage margins
as indicated in the chart below. These suspension-of-liquidation
instructions will remain in effect until further notice. The dumping
margins are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-average
Exporter/manufacturer margin percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acciai Speciali Terni SpA.......................... 45.09
All Others......................................... 39.69
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The all-others rate, which we derived from the average of the
margins calculated in the petition, applies to all entries of subject
merchandise other than those exported by the named respondent.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we are notifying the
ITC of our determination. If our final determination is affirmative,
the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of
this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final determination
whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material
injury to, the U.S. industry.
Public Comment
Case briefs or other written comments in at least ten copies must
be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration no
later than 50 days after the publication of the preliminary
determination, and rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case
briefs, no later than 55 days after the publication of the preliminary
determination. A list of authorities used and an executive summary of
issues should accompany any briefs submitted to the Department. Such
summary should be limited to five pages total, including footnotes. In
accordance with section 774 of the Act, we will hold a public hearing,
if requested, to afford interested parties an opportunity to comment on
arguments raised in case or rebuttal briefs. Tentatively, the hearing
will be held on December 28, 1998, time and room to be determined, at
the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230. Parties should confirm by telephone the
time, date, and place of the hearing 48 hours before the scheduled
time.
Interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or to participate
if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room
1870, within 30 days of the publication of this notice. Requests should
contain: (1) the party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the
number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues to be discussed.
Oral presentations will be limited to issues raised in the briefs. If
this investigation proceeds normally, we will make our final
determination by January 10, 1999.
This determination is issued and published in accordance with
sections 733(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: October 27, 1998.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-29545 Filed 11-3-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
