[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 35 (Monday, February 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8946-8948]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-4538]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-307-813]
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Steel Wire Rod from Venezuela
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Final determination of sales at less than fair value.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department has made a final affirmative determination in
this antidumping duty investigation. Because the respondent, C.V.G.
Siderurgica del Orinoco, C.A., did not permit verification of its
questionnaire responses, the margin in this determination is based on
the facts available, in accordance with section 776(a)(2) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended. As facts available, we have applied the
highest margin derived from the petition.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 23, 1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David J. Goldberger or Daniel Manzoni,
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4136 or (202) 482-1121,
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's
regulations are references to the provisions codified at 19 CFR Part
353 (April 1997). Although the Department's new regulations, codified
at 19 CFR 351 (62 FR 27296: May 19, 1997), do not govern this
investigation, citations to those regulations are provided, where
appropriate, to explain current Departmental practice.
Final Determination
We determine that steel wire rod (``SWR'') from Venezuela is being,
or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value
(``LTFV''), as provided in section 735(b) of the Act. The estimated
margin is shown in the ``Suspension of Liquidation'' section of this
notice.
[[Page 8947]]
Case History
Since the preliminary determination in this investigation
(Preliminary Determination and Postponement of Final Determination:
Steel Wire Rod from Venezuela, 62 FR 51584, October 1, 1997),
(Preliminary Determination) the following events have occurred:
On October 2, 1997, we issued a supplemental questionnaire
regarding the cost of production questionnaire response to the
respondent, C.V.G. Siderurgica del Orinoco, C.A. (``Sidor'').
On October 28, 1997, Sidor advised the Department that it would not
respond to the Department's October 2, 1997, supplemental questionnaire
and it would not participate in verification of its questionnaire
responses.
On January 5, 1998, the petitioners submitted a case brief and on
January 12, 1998, Sidor submitted a rebuttal brief.
Scope of Investigation
The products covered by this investigation are certain hot-rolled
carbon steel and alloy steel products, in coils, of approximately round
cross section, between 5.00 mm (0.20 inch) and 19.0 mm (0.75 inch),
inclusive, in solid cross-sectional diameter. Specifically excluded are
steel products possessing the above noted physical characteristics and
meeting the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'')
definitions for (a) stainless steel; (b) tool steel; (c) high nickel
steel; (d) ball bearing steel; (e) free machining steel that contains
by weight 0.03 percent or more of lead, 0.05 percent or more of
bismuth, 0.08 percent or more of sulfur, more than 0.4 percent of
phosphorus, more than 0.05 percent of selenium, and/or more than 0.01
percent of tellurium; or (f) concrete reinforcing bars and rods. The
following products are also excluded from the scope of this
investigation:
Coiled products 5.50 mm or less in true diameter with an
average partial decarburization per coil of no more than 70 microns in
depth, no inclusions greater than 20 microns, containing by weight the
following: carbon greater than or equal to 0.68 percent; aluminum less
than or equal to 0.005 percent; phosphorous plus sulfur less than or
equal to 0.040 percent; maximum combined copper, nickel and chromium
content of 0.13 percent; and nitrogen less than or equal to 0.006
percent. This product is commonly referred to as ``Tire Cord Wire
Rod.''
Coiled products 7.9 to 18 mm in diameter, with a partial
decarburization of 75 microns or less in depth and seams no more than
75 microns in depth, containing 0.48 to 0.73 percent carbon by weight.
This product is commonly referred to as ``Valve Spring Quality Wire
Rod.''
Coiled products 11 mm to 12.5 mm in diameter, with an
average partial decarburization per coil of no more than 70 microns in
depth, no inclusions greater than 20 microns, containing by weight the
following: carbon greater than or equal to 0.72 percent; manganese
0.50-1.10 percent; phosphorus less than or equal to 0.030 percent;
sulfur less than or equal to 0.035 percent; and silicon 0.10-0.35
percent. This product is free of injurious piping and undue
segregation. The use of this excluded product is to fulfill contracts
for the sale of Class III pipe wrap wire in conformity with ASTM
specification A648-95 and imports of this product must be accompanied
by such a declaration on the mill certificate and/or sales invoice.
This excluded product is commonly referred to as ``Semifinished Class
III Pipe Wrap Wire.''
The products under investigation are currently classifiable under
subheadings 7213.91.3000, 7213.91.4500, 7213.91.6000, 7213.99.0030,
7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0000, and 7227.90.6050 of the HTSUS. Although the
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes,
our written description of the scope of this investigation is
dispositive.
Exclusion of Pipe Wrap Wire
As stated in the Preliminary Determination, North American Wire
Products Corporation (``NAW''), an importer of the subject merchandise
from Germany, requested that the Department exclude steel wire rod used
to manufacture Class III pipe wrapping wire from the scope of the
investigations of steel wire rod from Canada, Germany, Trinidad and
Tobago, and Venezuela. On December 22, 1997, NAW submitted to the
Department a proposed exclusion definition. On December 30, 1997, and
January 7, 1998, the petitioners submitted letters concurring with the
definition of the scope exclusion and requesting exclusion of this
product from the scope of the investigation. We have reviewed NAW's
request and petitioners' comments and have excluded steel wire rod for
manufacturing Class III pipe wrapping wire from the scope of this
investigation (see Memorandum to Richard W. Moreland dated January 9,
1998, and instructions to Customs dated January 13, 1998).
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (``POI'') is January 1, 1996, through
December 31, 1996.
Facts Available
Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that if an interested party
(1) withholds information that has been requested by the Department,
(2) fails to provide such information in a timely manner or in the form
or manner requested, (3) significantly impedes an antidumping
investigation, or (4) provides such information but the information
cannot be verified, the Department is required to use facts otherwise
available to make its determination (subject to subsections 782(c) (1)
and (e)).
In addition, section 776 (b) of the Act provides that, in selecting
from among the facts available, the Department may employ adverse
inferences against an interested party if that party failed to
cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with
requests for information. See also ``Statement of Administrative
Action'' accompanying the URAA, H.R. Rep. No. 316, 103rd Cong., 2d
Sess. 870 (``SAA''). The statute also provides that such an adverse
inference may be based on secondary information, including information
drawn from the petition.
Sidor's decision not to respond to the Department's October 2,
1997, supplemental cost of production questionnaire and refusal to
permit the Department to verify the information it submitted for the
record in this investigation demonstrates that it failed to act to the
best of its ability in this investigation. Therefore, the Department
has determined that, in selecting from among the facts available, an
adverse inference is appropriate. Consistent with Department practice
in cases where a respondent withdraws its participation in an
investigation, as adverse facts available, we have applied a margin
based on information in the petition (see, e.g., Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Vector Supercomputers From Japan, 62 FR
45623, August 28, 1997, (``Vector Supercomputers'')). See also Comment
1.
Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies
on secondary information (such as information contained in the
petition) as facts available, it must, to the extent practicable,
corroborate that information from independent sources that are
reasonably at its disposal. Corroborate means determine that the
secondary information to be used has probative value. See SAA at 870.
[[Page 8948]]
The petitioners calculated the highest margin in the petition,
66.75 percent, based on a comparison of the petitioners' estimate of
ex-factory export price to the petitioners' estimate of the constructed
value (``CV''), as shown at Exhibit D of the petitioners' March 11,
1997, submission. The petitioners derived export price based on price
quotations to U.S. purchasers. Because Sidor's questionnaire response
data is unverified, we did not rely on this data for purposes of
corroboration. Therefore, we have compared the petitioners' export
price estimate to IM-145 Import Statistics. Our comparison of these
prices showed them to be reasonably consistent (see Memorandum to the
file dated February 6, 1998). Accordingly, we determine that this
export price calculation set forth in the petition has probative value.
To calculate CV, the petitioners used manufacturing costs based on
one petitioner's own production experience and publicly available
industry data. When analyzing the petition, the Department reviewed all
of the data the petitioners relied upon in calculating the estimated
CV, and adjusted those calculations where necessary. For purposes of
corroboration, we re-examined the data submitted by the petitioners and
found it to be reasonable and of probative value. In addition, we note
that no party has presented to the Department any information to
support a challenge to the appropriateness of the information contained
in the petition as the basis for a facts available margin for Sidor.
See Vector Supercomputers, where the Department applied facts available
margin in closely similar circumstances. In accordance with section
776(c) of the Act, we have corroborated the highest margin in the
petition, which is secondary information upon which we have relied as
facts available.
Interested Party Comment
Comment: Facts Available Rate for Sidor
The petitioners contend that, because Sidor refused to allow the
Department to verify its questionnaire responses and refused to respond
to the Department's October 2, 1997, supplemental questionnaire, the
Department must assign Sidor a margin based on adverse facts available.
Accordingly, the petitioners claim that the Department should assign
the higher of the highest non-aberrational dumping margin calculated
from Sidor's questionnaire responses, or the highest estimated dumping
margin listed in the petition.
Sidor contends that the Department should apply the rate of 51.21
percent calculated for the preliminary determination as the appropriate
facts available rate for this proceeding. However, Sidor has provided
no support for its position.
DOC Position
We agree with the petitioners that the highest rate alleged in the
petition, and as corroborated by the Department, is the appropriate
facts available rate in this determination. Under section 782(i)(1) of
the Act, the Department must rely on verified information for making a
final determination in an antidumping duty investigation. Sidor's
refusal to permit verification of its questionnaire responses prevents
the Department from using Sidor's information for our final
determination. Therefore, we did not use the margin calculated in the
preliminary determination because it is based on unverified
questionnaire response information. Using Sidor's unverified
information as the basis for the final margin could possibly reward the
respondent by assigning a margin lower than what would have been
calculated using verified information. As noted above, in cases such as
this one, the Department relies on the facts otherwise available,
normally data from the petition, for making its determination. We have
no basis in this instance to depart from this practice. Normally, the
all-others rate is to be amount equal to the weighted average of the
estimated weighted average dumping margins for exporters and producers
individually investigated, excluding margins based entirely on facts
available. Section 735(c)(5)(A). However, if all of the estimated
dumping margins are based entirely on facts available, the statute
permits the Department to use any reasonable method to establish the
all others rate. Section 735(c)(5)(B). As discussed above, Sidor was
the only respondent in this investigation and its margin was based
entirely on facts available. The margin calculated for Sidor for
purposes of the preliminary results of this investigation cannot serve
as a reasonable all others rate because, as discussed above, it has not
been verified. Further, there is no other information on which to base
an all others rate. Accordingly, we have based the all others rate on
Sidor's rate.
Suspension of Liquidation
On February 13, 1998, pursuant to section 734(b) the Act, the
Department signed a suspension agreement, with SIDOR. Pursuant to
section 734(f)(2)(A) of the Act, we are instructing Customs to
terminate the suspension of liquidation of all entries of steel wire
rod from Venezuela. Any cash deposits of entries of steel wire rod from
Venezuela shall be refunded and any bonds released.
On February 13, 1998, we received a request from Sidor requesting
that we continue the investigation. As a result of this request, we
have continued and completed the investigation in accordance with
section 734(g) of the Act. We have found the following margins of
dumping:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Exporter/manufacturer percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CVG Siderurgica Del Orinoco C.A. (``Sidor'')............... 66.75
All Others................................................. 66.75
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ITC Notification
In Accordance with section 734(d) of the Act, we have notified the
ITC of our determination. If our determination is affirmative, the ITC
will determine, within 45 days, whether these imports are causing
material injury, or threat of material injury, to an industry in the
United States. If the ITC's injury determination is negative, the
agreement will have no force or effect. See section 734(f)(3)(A) of the
Act. If the ITC's injury determination is affirmative, the Department
will not issue an antidumping duty order as long as the suspension
agreement remains in force, the agreement continues to meet the
requirements of subsections (b) and (d) of section 734 of the Act, and
the parties to the agreement carry out their obligations under the
agreement in accordance with its terms. See section 734(f)(3)(B) of the
Act.
This determination is published pursuant to section 735(d) of the
Act.
Dated: February 13, 1998.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-4538 Filed 2-20-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
