02-22243. Final Negative Countervailing Duty Determination: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago

AGENCY:

Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

ACTION:

Notice of final negative countervailing duty determination.

SUMMARY:

The Department of Commerce has made a final determination that countervailable subsidies are not being provided to producers and exporters of carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod from Trinidad and Tobago.

EFFECTIVE DATE:

August 30, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Melani Miller, S. Anthony Grasso, or Daniel J. Alexy, Office of Antidumping/Countervailing Duty Enforcement, Group 1, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, room 3099, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: [phone], and [phone], respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are references to the provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act effective January 1, 1995 (“the Act”). In addition, unless other wise indicated, all citations to the Department of Commerce's (“the Department”) regulations are to 19 CFR Part 351 (April 2001).

Petitioners

The petitioners in this investigation are Co-Steel Raritan, Inc., GS Industries, Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc., and North Star Steel Texas, Inc. (collectively, “petitioners”).

Case History

The following events have occurred since the publication of the preliminary determination in the Federal Register. See Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Preliminary Negatigve Critical Circumstances Determination: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago, 67 FR 6001 (February 8, 2002) (“Preliminary Determination”).

On March 19, 2002, we published a Federal Register notice aligning the final determination in this proceeding with the earliest final determination in the companion antidumping duty investigations. See Countervailing Duty Investigations of Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Brazil, Canada, Germany, Trinidad and Tobago, and Turkey: Notice of Alignment With Final Antidumping Duty Determinations, 67 FR 12524 (March 19, 2002).

On April 15, 2002, the Government of Trinidad and Tobago (“GOTT”) and Caribbean Ispat Limited (“CIL”), the sole respondent company in this investigation, submitted supplemental factual information.

From April 22, 2002 to April 25, 2002, we conducted a verification of the questionnaire responses submitted by the GOTT and CIL.

On July 19, 2002 we received a combined case brief from GOTT and CIL, and a case brief from the petitioners. On July 24, 2002, we received a combined rebuttal brief from the GOTT and CIL, as well as a rebuttal brief from the petitioners.

Period of Investigation

The period for which we are measuring subsidies, or the period of investigation (“POI”), is calendar year 2000.

Scope of Investigation

The merchandise covered by these investigations is certain hot-rolled products of carbon steel and alloy steel, in coils, of approximately round cross section, 5.00 mm or more, but less than 19.00 mm, in solid cross-sectional diameter (“subject merchandise” or “wire rod”).

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; and (e) concrete reinforcing bars and rods. Also excluded are (f) free machining steel products (i.e., products that contain by weight one or more of the following elements; 0.03 percent of more of lead, 0.05 percent or more of bismuth, 0.08 percent or more of sulfur, more than 0.04 percent of phosphorus, more than 0.05 percent of selenium, or more than 0.01 percent of tellurium).

Also excluded from the scope are 1080 grade tire cord quality wire rod and 1080 grade tire bead quality wire rod. Grade 1080 tire cord quality rod is defined as: (i) Grade 1080 tire cord quality wire rod measuring 5.0 mm or more but not more than 6.0 mm in cross-sectional diameter; (ii) with an average partial decarburization of no more than 70 microns in depth (maximum individual 200 microns); (iii) having no inclusions greater than 20 microns; (iv) having a carbon segregation per heat average of 3.0 or better using European Method NFA 04-114; (v) having a surface quality with no surface defects of a length greater than 0.15 mm; (vi) capable of being drawn to a diameter of 0.30 mm or less with 3 or fewer breaks per ton; and (vii) containing by weight the following elements in the proportions shown; (1) 0.78 percent or more of carbon, (2) less than 0.01 percent of aluminum, (3) 0.040 percent or less, in the aggregate, of phosphorus and sulfur, (4) 0.006 percent or less of nitrogen, and (5) not more than 0.15 percent, in the aggregate, of copper, nickel and chromium.

Grade 1080 tire bead quality rod is defined as: (i) Grade 1080 tire bead quality wire rod measuring 5.5 mm or more but not more than 7.0 mm in cross-sectional diameter; (ii) with an average partial decarburization of no more than 70 microns in depth (maximum individual 200 microns); (iii) having no inclusions greater than 20 microns; (iv) having a carbon segregation per heat average of 3.0 or better using European Method NFA 04-114; (v) having a surface quality with no surface defects of a length greater than 0.2 mm; (vi) capable of being drawn to a diameter of 0.78 mm or larger with 0.5 or fewer breaks per ton; and (vii) containing by weight the following elements in the proportions shown: (1) 0.78 percent or more of carbon, (2) less than 0.01 percent of soluble aluminum, (3) 0.040 percent or less, in the aggregate, of phosphorus and sulfur, (4) 0.008 percent or less of nitrogen, and (5) either not more than 0.15 percent, in the aggregate, of copper, nickel and chromium (if chromium is not specified), or not more than 0.10 percent in the aggregate of copper and nickel and a chromium content of 0.24 to 0.30 percent (if chromium is specified).

The designation of the products as “tire cord quality” or “tire bead quality” indicates the acceptability of the product for use in the production of tire cord, tire bead, or wire for use in other rubber reinforcement applications such as hose wire. These quality designations are presumed to indicate that these products are being used in tire cord, tire bead, and other rubber reinforcement applications, and such merchandise intended for the tire cord, tire bead, or other rubber reinforcement applications is not included in the scope. However, should petitioners or other interested parties provide a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that there exists a pattern of importation of such products for other than those applications, end-use certification for the importation of such products may be required. Under such circumstances, only the importers of record would normally be required to certify the end use of the imported merchandise.

All products meeting the physical description of subject merchandise that are not specifically excluded are included in this scope.

The products under investigation are currently classifiable under subheadings 7213.91.3010, 7213.91.3090, 7213.91.4510, 7213.91.4590, 7213.91.6010, 7213.91.6090, 7213.99.0031, 7213.99.0038, 7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0010, 7227.20.0020, 7227.20.0090, 7227.20.0095, 7227.90.6051, 7227.90.6053, 7227.90.6058, and 7227.90.6059 of the HTSUS. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive.

Scope Comments

On April 2, 2002, in conjunction with the preliminary determinations in the companion antidumping duty proceedings, the scope in both the companion countervailing duty and antidumping duty proceedings was revised. See Memorandum to Faryar Shirzad, dated April 2, 2002, “Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod: Requests for exclusion of various tire cord quality wire rod and tire bead quality wire rod products from the scope of Antidumping Duty (Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Germany, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, and Venezuela) and Countervailing Duty (Brazil, Canada, Germany, Trinidad and Tobago, and Turkey) Investigations,” which is on file in the Department's Central Records Unit in Room B-099 of the main Department building (“CRU”).

Since April 2, 2002, a number of parties have filed requests asking the Department to exclude various products from the scope of the concurrent antidumping duty (Brazil, Canada, Germany, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago and Ukraine) and countervailing duty (Brazil, Canada, Germany, Trinidad and Tobago, and Turkey) investigations. On May 6, 2002, Ispat Hamburger Stahlwerke GmbH and Ispat Walzdraht Hochfeld GmbH (collectively, “Ispat Germany”) requested on exclusion for “super clean valve spring wire.” Two parties filed additional exclusion requests on June 14, 2002: Bluff City Steel asked that the Department exclude “clean-steel precision bar,” and Lincoln Electric Company sought the exclusion of its EW 2512 grade of metal inert gas welding wire. On June 28, 2002, the petitioners filed objections to a range of scope exclusion requests including: (i) Bluff City Steel's request for clean precision bar; (ii) Lincoln Electric Company's request for EW 2512 grade wire rod; (iii) Ispat Germany's request for “super clean valve spring wire;” (iv) Tokusen USA's January 22, 2002 request for 1070 grade tire cord and tire bead quality wire rod (tire cord wire rod); and (v) various parties' request for 1090 grade tire cord wire rod.

In addition, Moldova Steel Works requested the exclusion of various grades of tire cord wire rod on July 17, 2002. The Rubber Manufacturers Association (“RMA”), Ispat Germany, Lincoln Electric and Bluff City filed rebuttals to petitioners' June 28 submission on July 8, 11, 17, and 29, 2002, respectively. The RMA field additional comments on July 30, 2002.^[1]

The Department has analyzed these requests and the petitioners' objections and we find no modifications to the scope are warranted. See Memorandum from Richard Weible to Faryar Shirzad, “Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod; Antidumping Duty (Brazil, Canada, Germany, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine) and Countervailing Duty (Brazil, Canada, Germany, Trinidad and Tobago, and Turkey) Investigations: Requests for Scope Exclusion” dated August 23, 2002, which is on file in the CRU.

Critical Circumstances

The petitioners have alleged that critical circumstances within the meaning of section 703(e) of the Act exist with respect to the subject merchandise. In the Preliminary Determination, we found that critical circumstances did not exist with respect to subject merchandise from Trinidad and Tobago because no subsidies inconsistent with the World Trade Organization Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures existed in Trinidad and Tobago.

Because our final determination in this case is negative, we need not further address the issue of whether critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of subject merchandise from Trinidad and Tobago.

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this investigation are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum” from Richard W. Moreland, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import Administration to Faryar Shirzad, Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, dated August 23, 2002 (“Decision Memorandum”), which is hereby adopted by this notice. Attached to this notice as Appendix I is a list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded in the “Decision Memorandum”. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this investigation and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on file in the CRU. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/​frn/​ under the heading “Trinidad and Tobago.” The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Suspension of Liquidation

In accordance with our Preliminary Determination, we instructed the Customs Service (“Customs”) to suspend liquidation of all entries of wire rod from Trinidad and Tobago, which were entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after February 8, 2002, the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register. In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed Customs to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for merchandise for countervailing duty purposes entered on or after June 8, 2002, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of entries made from February 8, 2002 through June 7, 2002.

Because we have made a final determination that countervailable subsidies are not being provided to producers and exporters of wire rod from Trinidad and Tobago, we are instructing Customs to terminate the suspension of liquidation for all shipments wire rod from Trinidad and Tobago entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after February 8, 2002, but before June 8, 2002, and to release any bond or other security and refund any cash deposit.

ITC Notification

In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the International Trade Commission of our determination.

Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (“APO”) of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Failure to comply is a violation of the APO.

This determination is published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

Dated: August 23, 2002.

Faryar Shirzad,

Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I

List of Comments and Issues in the Decision Memorandum

Comment 1: Change-in-Ownership Methodology

Comment 2: Change-in-Ownership Same Person Analysis

Comment 3: Sale of Iron and Steel Company of Trinidad and Tobago's (“ISCOTT”) Assets at Fair Market Value in an Arm's-Length Transaction

Comment 4: ISCOTT Debt Forgiveness

Comment 5: Equity Infusions into ISCOTT

Comment 6: Provision of Electricity

Comment 7: Petitioners' New Subsidy Allegation

Footnotes

1.  On August 9, 2002, Bekaert Corporation requested an exclusion for certain high chrome/high silicon steel wire rod from the scope of these investigations. This request was field too late to be considered for the final determinations in these investigations.