[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 134 (Thursday, July 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36105-36108]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-17227]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-428-816]
Certain Cut-To-Length Carbon Steel Plate From Germany:
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 by one respondent, 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
Germany (A-428-816). This review covers one manufacturer/exporter of
the subject merchandise to the United States during the period of
review (POR) February 4, 1993, through July 31, 1994.
We have preliminarily determined that sales have been made below
the foreign market value (FMV). If these preliminary results are
adopted in our final results of administrative review, we will instruct
U.S. Customs to assess antidumping duties equal to the difference
between the United States price (USP) and the FMV.
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary
results.
[[Page 36106]]
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 13, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Decker, Bruce Harsh or Linda
Ludwig, Office of Agreements Compliance, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230, telephone:
(202) 482-3793.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Applicable Statute and Regulations
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute and to the
Department's regulations are references to the provisions as they
existed on December 31, 1994.
Background
On July 9, 1993, the Department published in the Federal Register
(58 FR 37136) the final affirmative antidumping duty determination on
certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate from Germany, for which we
published an antidumping duty order on August 19, 1993 (58 FR 44170).
On August 3, 1994, the Department published the notice of ``Opportunity
to Request an Administrative Review'' of this order for the period
February 4, 1993, through July 31, 1994 (59 FR 39543). The respondent,
AG der Dillinger Huttenwerke (Dillinger), requested an administrative
review. We initiated the review on September 8, 1994 (59 FR 46391). The
Department is conducting this review, in accordance with section 751 of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Tariff 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 bevelled 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.
The POR is February 4, 1993, through July 31, 1994. This review
covers sales of certain cut-to-length plate by Dillinger.
United States Price
All of Dillinger's U.S. sales were based on the price to the first
unrelated purchaser in the United States. The Department determined
that purchase price, as defined in section 772 of the Tariff Act, was
the appropriate basis for calculating USP. All sales were made through
Francosteel, a related sales agent in the United States, to unrelated
purchasers. Whenever sales are made prior to the date of importation
through a related sales agent in the United States, we typically
determine that purchase price is the most appropriate determinant of
the USP based upon the following factors: (1) The merchandise in
question was shipped directly from the manufacturer to the unrelated
buyer, without being introduced into the inventory of the related
shipping agent; (2) direct shipment from the manufacturer to the
unrelated buyers was the customary commercial channel for sales of this
merchandise between the parties involved; and (3) the related selling
agent in the United States acted only as a processor of sales-related
documentation and a communication link with the unrelated U.S. buyers.
See Certain Stainless Steel Wire Rods from France: Final Determination
of Sales at Less than Fair Value, 58 FR 68865, 68868 (December 29,
1993); Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Japan: Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 58 FR 50343, 50344
(September 27, 1993). In the present review, we found that: the
essential terms of sale were set prior to importation; the merchandise
was shipped immediately to the customer upon importation into the
United States, without being introduced into the inventory of the
related shipping agent; direct shipment from the manufacturer to the
unrelated buyers was the customary commercial channel for sales of this
merchandise; the merchandise was not warehoused by Francosteel during
the normal course of business; and the related selling agent in the
United States acted only as a processor of sales-related documentation
and a communication link with the unrelated U.S. buyers. We made
adjustments to purchase price, where appropriate, for foreign inland
freight, ocean freight, marine insurance, U.S. and foreign brokerage
and handling, U.S. duty, and U.S. inland freight.
We also adjusted USP for taxes in accordance with our practice as
outlined in various determinations, including Silicomanganese from
Venezuela; Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 59 FR
55435, 55439 (November 7, 1994). No other adjustments were claimed or
allowed.
Foreign Market Value
Based on a comparison of the volume of home market and third
country sales, we determined that the home market was viable.
Therefore, in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act,
we based FMV on the packed, delivered price to unrelated purchasers in
the home market, using date of shipment as date of sale (see Analysis
Memorandum to the File, May 25, 1995).
Based on a review of Dillinger's submissions, the Department
determined that only a small percentage of Dillinger's U.S. sales were
the same grades of steel as the home market sales made by Dillinger's
related parties to the first unrelated party (downstream sales).
Accordingly, the Department determined that Dillinger need not report
its home market downstream sales because they could provide potential
matches to only a very small portion of the company's reported U.S.
sales.
Based on the Department's previous determination of sales made at
below the cost of production (COP) in the original less-than-fair-value
(LTFV) investigation, in accordance with section 773(b) of the Tariff
Act, we determined that there were reasonable grounds to believe or
suspect that, for this review period, Dillinger made sales of subject
merchandise in the home market at prices less than the COP. As a
result, we investigated whether Dillinger sold such or similar
[[Page 36107]]
merchandise in the home market at prices below the COP. In accordance
with 19 CFR 353.51(c), we calculated COP for Dillinger as the sum of
reported materials, labor, factory overhead, and general expenses. We
compared COP to home market prices, net of price adjustments,
discounts, and movement expenses.
In accordance with section 773(b) of the Tariff Act, in determining
whether to disregard home market sales made at prices below the COP, we
examined whether such sales were made in substantial quantities over an
extended period of time, and whether such sales were made at prices
which permitted recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of
time in the normal course of trade.
In accordance with our normal practice, for each model for which
less than 10 percent, by quantity, of the home market sales during the
POR were made at prices below COP, we included all sales of that model
in the computation of FMV. For each model for which 10 percent or more,
but less than 90 percent, of the home market sales during the POR were
priced below COP, we excluded those sales priced below COP, provided
that they were made over an extended period of time. For each model for
which 90 percent or more of the home market sales during the POR were
priced below COP and were made over an extended period of time, we
disregarded all sales of that model in our calculation and, in
accordance with section 773(b) of the Tariff Act, we used the
constructed value (CV) of those models, as described below. See, e.g.,
Mechanical Transfer Presses from Japan, Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 59 FR 9958 (March 2, 1994).
In accordance with section 773(b)(1) of the Tariff Act, to
determine whether sales below cost had been made over an extended
period of time, we compared the number of months in which sales below
cost occurred for a particular model to the number of months in which
that model was sold. If the model was sold in fewer than three months,
we did not disregard below-cost sales unless there were below-cost
sales of that model in each month sold. If a model was sold in three or
more months, we did not disregard below-cost sales unless there were
sales below cost in at least three of the months in which the model was
sold. We used CV as the basis for FMV when an insufficient number of
home market sales were made at prices above COP. See Tapered Roller
Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From Japan and
Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and
Components Thereof, From Japan; Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews, 58 FR 64720, 64729 (December 8, 1993).
Because Dillinger provided no indication that its below-cost sales
of models within the ``greater than 90 percent'' and the ``between 10
and 90 percent'' categories were at prices that would permit recovery
of all costs within a reasonable period of time and in the normal
course of trade, we disregarded those sales of models within the ``10
to 90 percent'' category which were made below cost over an extended
period of time. In addition, as a result of our COP test for home
market sales of models within the ``greater than 90 percent'' category,
we based FMV on CV for all U.S. sales for which there were insufficient
sales of the comparison home market model at or above COP. Finally,
where we found, for certain of Dillinger's models, home market sales
for which less than 10 percent were made below COP, we used all home
market sales of these models in our comparisons.
We also used CV as FMV for those U.S. sales for which there was no
sale of such or similar merchandise in the home market. We calculated
CV in accordance with section 773(e) of the Tariff Act. We included the
cost of materials, labor, and factory overhead in our calculations.
Where the general expenses were less than the statutory minimum of 10
percent of the cost of manufacture (COM), we calculated general
expenses as 10 percent of the COM. Where the actual profits were less
than the statutory minimum of 8 percent of the COM plus general
expenses, we calculated profit as 8 percent of the sum of COM plus
general expenses. Based on our verification of Dillinger's cost
response, we adjusted Dillinger's reported COP and CV to reflect
certain adjustments to the cost of manufacturing, general and
administrative expenses, indirect selling expenses and the calculation
of profit.
In accordance with section 773 of the Tariff Act, for those U.S.
models for which we were able to find a home market such or similar
match that had sufficient above-cost sales, we calculated FMV based on
the packed, F.O.B., ex-factory, or delivered prices to unrelated
purchasers in the home market. We made adjustments, where applicable,
for post-sale inland freight, and for home market direct expenses, such
as certain rebates tied to specific sales, credit and discounts. In
addition, we adjusted FMV for differences in physical characteristics,
U.S. direct selling expenses, and the German value-added tax. Also,
after deducting home market packing, we added packing expenses incurred
in Germany for U.S. sales to FMV. No adjustment was made for home
market related party commissions because Dillinger did not demonstrate
that these commissions were at arm's length, but we offset an addition
to FMV for U.S. commissions with home market indirect selling expenses.
Due to discrepancies in Dillinger's reporting of certain customers
and level of trade, we are not in a position to know which sales
reported as end-user sales were in fact end-user sales and which were
sales to service centers/distributors. The only known difference in
terms of sale to service centers/distributors and end-users was that
service centers/distributors received a trader discount. Consequently,
in matching home market sales to sales to U.S. end-users, we adjusted
FMV to account for this discount (see Analysis Memorandum to the File,
May 25, 1995).
Preliminary Results of Review
As a result of our comparison of USP to FMV we preliminarily
determine that the following margin exists for the period February 4,
1993, through July 31, 1994:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dillinger..................................................... 2.02%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties may request disclosure within 5 days of the date
of publication of this notice and 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 written comments from interested parties may be submitted
no 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 these administrative reviews including the results of its
analysis of issues raised in any such written comments or at a hearing.
The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Individual
differences between the USP and FMV may vary from the percentages
stated above.
Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective
for all shipments of the subject merchandise
[[Page 36108]]
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the
publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as
provided for by section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act. A cash deposit of
estimated antidumping duties shall be required on shipments of certain
cut-to-length carbon steel plate from Germany as follows: (1) The cash
deposit rate for the reviewed company will be the rate established in
the final results of this review; (2) for previously reviewed or
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, 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; and (4) if neither the
exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this review, the
cash deposit rate will be 36.00 percent. This is the ``all others''
rate from the LTFV investigation. See Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cut-To-Length Carbon Steel Plate from
Germany, 58 FR 37136 (July 9, 1993).
This notice also 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 Department's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
This administrative review and this notice are in accordance with
section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR
353.22.
Dated: July 6, 1995.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 95-17227 Filed 7-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
