Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Belgium: Notice of Amended Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 18374-18375 [E5-1658]

Download as PDF 18374 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 68 / Monday, April 11, 2005 / Notices [FR Doc. 05–7266 Filed 4–8–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (C–423–809) Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Belgium: Notice of Amended Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The United States Court of International Trade has affirmed the Department of Commerce’s redetermination pursuant to remand regarding the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on stainless steel plate in coils from Belgium covering the period September 4, 1998, through December 31, 1999. See ALZ N.V. v. United States, Slip Op. 04– 38, Court No. 01–00834 (CIT April 22, 2004). Although the Department of Commerce appealed the United States Court of International Trade’s decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Department of Commerce did not further pursue this appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed the case. As there is now a final and conclusive court decision in this case, we are amending the final results of review and we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to liquidate entries subject to this review. EFFECTIVE DATE: April 11, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melani Miller Harig or Marc Rivitz, AD/ CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 3099, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–0116 and (202) 482–1382, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Scope of the Order Imports covered by the order are shipments of certain stainless 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 VerDate jul<14>2003 17:45 Apr 08, 2005 Jkt 205001 that it maintains the specified dimensions of plate following such processing. Excluded from the scope of this review 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. In addition, certain cold–rolled stainless steel plate in coils is also excluded from the scope of this order.1 The excluded cold–rolled stainless steel plate in coils is defined as that merchandise which meets the physical characteristics described above that has undergone a cold–reduction process that reduced the thickness of the steel by 25 percent or more, and has been annealed and pickled after this cold reduction process. The merchandise covered by this order is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) at subheadings 7219.11.00.30, 7219.11.00.60, 7219.12.00.06, 7219.12.00.21, 7219.12.00.26, 7219.12.00.51, 7219.12.00.56, 7219.12.00.66, 7219.12.00.71, 7219.12.00.81, 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 headings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope is dispositive. Background On August 27, 2001, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) published its final results of administrative review of the countervailing duty order on stainless steel plate in coils from Belgium covering the period September 4, 1998 through December 31, 1999. See Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Belgium: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 66 FR 45007 (August 27, 2001) (‘‘First Review 1 We note that, although the scope of the original order was revised (see Notice of Amended Countervailing Duty Orders; Certain Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Belgium, Italy, and South Africa, 68 FR 11524 (March 11, 2003)), the revised scope did not take effect until March 11, 2003. Thus, the revised scope is not applicable to the instant proceeding because this proceeding covered a time period (September 4, 1998 through December 31, 1999) prior to that date. On March 11, 2003, the Department revised the HTSUS numbers from the original scope description to take into account changes to the HTSUS numbers themselves since that time. PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Final Results’’). This review covered one producer/exporter, ALZ N.V. In the First Review Final Results, the Department found three equity purchases to confer countervailable subsidies: 1) the Government of Belgium’s (‘‘GOB’’) purchases of the SIDMAR Group’s (‘‘Sidmar’’) common and preference shares in 1984; 2) the GOB’s purchases of ALZ N.V.’s (‘‘ALZ’’) common and preference shares in 1985; and 3) the GOB’s 1985 debt–to-equity conversion for Sidmar. On July 11, 2003, the Court of International Trade (‘‘CIT’’) remanded to the Department its determination in the First Review Final Results. See ALZ N.V. v. United States, 283 F. Supp. 2d 1302 (CIT 2003). In its remand order, the CIT directed the Department 1) to apply the equityworthiness methodology in existence at the time of the original petition to the 1984 and 1985 equity investments into Sidmar, and the 1985 equity investment into ALZ; and 2) (a) to scrutinize more closely the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the purchase of Sidmar’s common and preference shares to determine whether such document indicates a binding decision to invest; (b) to re–examine the record for any additional evidence regarding the date upon which the GOB decided to invest in Sidmar’s common shares; and (c) to explain the Department’s reasoning for choosing the date it finds to be the date the GOB decided to invest. Although we disagreed with the CIT’s instructions to apply the equityworthiness methodology in existence at the time the original petition in the investigation was filed (instead of the methodology that was in place at the time the request for administrative review in the proceeding in question was made, consistent with 19 CFR 351.702(a)(2)) to the 1984 and 1985 equity investments into Sidmar and the 1985 equity investment into ALZ, the Department complied with the CIT’s remand instructions and issued the final results of redetermination on December 10, 2003. See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand: ALZ N.V. v. United States, Slip Op. 03–81, Court No. 01–00834 (CIT July 11, 2003) (‘‘Final Results of Redetermination’’). As explained in the Final Results of Redetermination, we made changes to the Department’s findings in the First Review Final Results relating to the GOB’s 1984 and 1985 equity infusions in Sidmar and ALZ. Specifically, after applying the equityworthiness methodology in existence at the time the petition was filed and based upon our reconsideration, we determined that 1) E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM 11APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 68 / Monday, April 11, 2005 / Notices ALZ was equityworthy at the time of the 1985 investment, and the GOB’s purchase of ALZ’s common and preference shares in 1985 was not a countervailable subsidy; 2) Sidmar was equityworthy at the time of the 1984 investment, and the GOB’s purchase of Sidmar’s common and preference shares in 1984 was not a countervailable subsidy; and 3) Sidmar was equityworthy in 1985, but the conversion of Sidmar’s debt to equity (convertible profit–sharing bonds to parts beneficiaires) was a countervailable subsidy because the price paid by the GOB exceeded the adjusted market value of Sidmar’s common stock. As a result of the Final Results of Redetermination, we recalculated the margin for ALZ. On April 22, 2004, the CIT issued an order without an opinion affirming the Department’s Final Results of Redetermination. See ALZ N.V. v. United States, Slip Op. 04–38, Court No. 01–00834 (CIT April 22, 2004) (‘‘ALZ v. United States’’). On May 11, 2004, consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (‘‘Federal Circuit’’) in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F. 2d 337 (Federal Circuit 1990), the Department notified the public that the CIT’s decision in ALZ v.United States was ‘‘not in harmony’’ with the First Review Final Results. See Stainless Steel Plate in Coils From Belgium: Notice of Decision of the Court of International Trade, 69 FR 26075 (May 11, 2004). On June 24, 2004, the Department appealed the CIT’s decision to the Federal Circuit. The Department did not further pursue this appeal, and the Federal Circuit dismissed the case on October 28, 2004. As there is now a final and conclusive court decision in this action, we are amending our final results of review and we will instruct the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to liquidate entries subject to this review. Amended Final Results Pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act effective January 1, 1995 (‘‘the Act’’), we are now amending the final results of administrative review of the countervailing duty order on stainless steel plate in coils from Belgium for the period September 4, 1998 through December 31, 1999. In the First Review Final Results, we calculated individual subsidy rates for ALZ, the only producer/exporter subject to this administrative review. As noted in the First Review Final Results, because it is the Department’s practice VerDate jul<14>2003 17:45 Apr 08, 2005 Jkt 205001 to calculate subsidy rates on an annual basis, we calculated a 1998 rate and a 1999 rate for ALZ. The rate calculated for 1998 will be applicable only to entries, or withdrawals from warehouse, for consumption made on or after September 4, 1998 and on or before December 31, 1998. The amended individual subsidy rates for ALZ for the First Review Final Results are as follows: 18375 Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: NMFS issues this notice to owners and leaseholders of all vessels listed in this document to submit a Historical Catcher Vessel Economic Data Report (EDR) for each vessel that made at least one crab landing in the Crab Rationalization (CR) fisheries in any of the calendar years 1998, 2001, or 2004. A Historical Catcher Vessel EDR must Producer/Exporter (ApplicaNet Subsidy ble Year) Rate be submitted for each year 1998, 2001 and 2004, pursuant to the MagnusonALZ N.V. (1998) ................... 1.36 percent Stevens Fishery Conservation and ALZ N.V. (1999) ................... 0.97 percent Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and applicable regulations. The The Department will issue intent of this action is to provide notice appraisement instructions directly to for an evaluation of the economic effects the CBP. The Department will instruct of the CR. the CBP to assess appropriate DATES: The completed Historical countervailing duties on the relevant Catcher Vessel EDR for each vessel entries of the subject merchandise identified in Table A in this notice must covered by this review. In accordance be received by July 11, 2005. with section 703(d) of the Act, ADDRESSES: Submit the completed countervailing duties will not be Historical Catcher Vessel EDR to the assessed on entries made during the period January 2, 1999 through May 10, Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, 205 SE Spokane, Suite 1999. 100, Portland, OR 97202. A copy of the We will also instruct the CBP to Historical Catcher Vessel EDR may be collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties at the 1999 rate on downloaded at https:// www.fakr.noaa.gov/sustainablefisheries/ the f.o.b. value of all shipments of the crab/crfaq.htm. You are advised to subject merchandise from ALZ entered, carefully follow all instructions on the or withdrawn from warehouse, for Historical Catcher Vessel EDR. consumption on or after the date of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: publication of this notice. The cash deposit rates for all other companies not Geana Tyler by e-mail at: alaskalcrab@psmfc.org, or toll free at covered by this review are not changed 1–877–741–8913. by the amended final results of this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The final review. This notice is issued and published in rule implementing the CR Program was accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2005 (70 FR 10174). It requires Act. submission of historical economic data Dated: April 4, 2005. from owners and leaseholders of Joseph A. Spetrini, selected catcher vessels that made Acting Assistant Secretary for Import landings in Bering Sea and Aleutian Administration. Islands (BSAI) CR Fisheries from 1998 [FR Doc. E5–1658 Filed 4–8–05; 8:45 am] to 2004. This collection of historical BILLING CODE: 3510–DS–S data is for the purpose of evaluating the economic effects of the CR Program. The regulations implementing the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE final rule at 50 CFR 680.6(a) states that these catcher vessels will be identified National Oceanic and Atmospheric by notice in the Federal Register, and Administration owners and leaseholders of the identified vessels are required to submit [I.D. 040505B] the Historical Catcher Vessel EDR based on selected years. Pursuant to the final Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic rule, NMFS has selected calendar years Zone Off Alaska; Notice of 1998, 2001 and 2004 for submission of Requirement to Submit a Historical Catcher Vessel Economic Data Report, a Historical Catcher Vessel EDR. These years are selected to coincide with the Under the Crab Rationalization three historical EDR years that will be Program submitted by BSAI crab catcher AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries processors, inshore stationary floating Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and processors, and shoreside processors. In PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM 11APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 68 (Monday, April 11, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18374-18375]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-1658]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

(C-423-809)


Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Belgium: Notice of Amended 
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: The United States Court of International Trade has affirmed 
the Department of Commerce's redetermination pursuant to remand 
regarding the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on 
stainless steel plate in coils from Belgium covering the period 
September 4, 1998, through December 31, 1999. See ALZ N.V. v. United 
States, Slip Op. 04-38, Court No. 01-00834 (CIT April 22, 2004). 
Although the Department of Commerce appealed the United States Court of 
International Trade's decision to the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Federal Circuit, the Department of Commerce did not further 
pursue this appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the 
Federal Circuit dismissed the case. As there is now a final and 
conclusive court decision in this case, we are amending the final 
results of review and we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection to liquidate entries subject to this review.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 11, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melani Miller Harig or Marc Rivitz, 
AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, Room 3099, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-0116 and (202) 482-1382, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Scope of the Order

    Imports covered by the order are shipments of certain stainless 
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 review 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. 
In addition, certain cold-rolled stainless steel plate in coils is also 
excluded from the scope of this order.\1\ The excluded cold-rolled 
stainless steel plate in coils is defined as that merchandise which 
meets the physical characteristics described above that has undergone a 
cold-reduction process that reduced the thickness of the steel by 25 
percent or more, and has been annealed and pickled after this cold 
reduction process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We note that, although the scope of the original order was 
revised (see Notice of Amended Countervailing Duty Orders; Certain 
Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Belgium, Italy, and South 
Africa, 68 FR 11524 (March 11, 2003)), the revised scope did not 
take effect until March 11, 2003. Thus, the revised scope is not 
applicable to the instant proceeding because this proceeding covered 
a time period (September 4, 1998 through December 31, 1999) prior to 
that date. On March 11, 2003, the Department revised the HTSUS 
numbers from the original scope description to take into account 
changes to the HTSUS numbers themselves since that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The merchandise covered by this order is currently classifiable in 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') at 
subheadings 7219.11.00.30, 7219.11.00.60, 7219.12.00.06, 7219.12.00.21, 
7219.12.00.26, 7219.12.00.51, 7219.12.00.56, 7219.12.00.66, 
7219.12.00.71, 7219.12.00.81, 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 headings are 
provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description 
of the scope is dispositive.

Background

    On August 27, 2001, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') 
published its final results of administrative review of the 
countervailing duty order on stainless steel plate in coils from 
Belgium covering the period September 4, 1998 through December 31, 
1999. See Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from Belgium: Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 66 FR 45007 (August 27, 
2001) (``First Review Final Results''). This review covered one 
producer/exporter, ALZ N.V. In the First Review Final Results, the 
Department found three equity purchases to confer countervailable 
subsidies: 1) the Government of Belgium's (``GOB'') purchases of the 
SIDMAR Group's (``Sidmar'') common and preference shares in 1984; 2) 
the GOB's purchases of ALZ N.V.'s (``ALZ'') common and preference 
shares in 1985; and 3) the GOB's 1985 debt-to-equity conversion for 
Sidmar.
    On July 11, 2003, the Court of International Trade (``CIT'') 
remanded to the Department its determination in the First Review Final 
Results. See ALZ N.V. v. United States, 283 F. Supp. 2d 1302 (CIT 
2003). In its remand order, the CIT directed the Department 1) to apply 
the equityworthiness methodology in existence at the time of the 
original petition to the 1984 and 1985 equity investments into Sidmar, 
and the 1985 equity investment into ALZ; and 2) (a) to scrutinize more 
closely the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the 
purchase of Sidmar's common and preference shares to determine whether 
such document indicates a binding decision to invest; (b) to re-examine 
the record for any additional evidence regarding the date upon which 
the GOB decided to invest in Sidmar's common shares; and (c) to explain 
the Department's reasoning for choosing the date it finds to be the 
date the GOB decided to invest.
    Although we disagreed with the CIT's instructions to apply the 
equityworthiness methodology in existence at the time the original 
petition in the investigation was filed (instead of the methodology 
that was in place at the time the request for administrative review in 
the proceeding in question was made, consistent with 19 CFR 
351.702(a)(2)) to the 1984 and 1985 equity investments into Sidmar and 
the 1985 equity investment into ALZ, the Department complied with the 
CIT's remand instructions and issued the final results of 
redetermination on December 10, 2003. See Final Results of 
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand: ALZ N.V. v. United States, 
Slip Op. 03-81, Court No. 01-00834 (CIT July 11, 2003) (``Final Results 
of Redetermination''). As explained in the Final Results of 
Redetermination, we made changes to the Department's findings in the 
First Review Final Results relating to the GOB's 1984 and 1985 equity 
infusions in Sidmar and ALZ. Specifically, after applying the 
equityworthiness methodology in existence at the time the petition was 
filed and based upon our reconsideration, we determined that 1)

[[Page 18375]]

ALZ was equityworthy at the time of the 1985 investment, and the GOB's 
purchase of ALZ's common and preference shares in 1985 was not a 
countervailable subsidy; 2) Sidmar was equityworthy at the time of the 
1984 investment, and the GOB's purchase of Sidmar's common and 
preference shares in 1984 was not a countervailable subsidy; and 3) 
Sidmar was equityworthy in 1985, but the conversion of Sidmar's debt to 
equity (convertible profit-sharing bonds to parts beneficiaires) was a 
countervailable subsidy because the price paid by the GOB exceeded the 
adjusted market value of Sidmar's common stock. As a result of the 
Final Results of Redetermination, we recalculated the margin for ALZ.
    On April 22, 2004, the CIT issued an order without an opinion 
affirming the Department's Final Results of Redetermination. See ALZ 
N.V. v. United States, Slip Op. 04-38, Court No. 01-00834 (CIT April 
22, 2004) (``ALZ v. United States''). On May 11, 2004, consistent with 
the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal 
Circuit (``Federal Circuit'') in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F. 2d 
337 (Federal Circuit 1990), the Department notified the public that the 
CIT's decision in ALZ v.United States was ``not in harmony'' with the 
First Review Final Results. See Stainless Steel Plate in Coils From 
Belgium: Notice of Decision of the Court of International Trade, 69 FR 
26075 (May 11, 2004).
    On June 24, 2004, the Department appealed the CIT's decision to the 
Federal Circuit. The Department did not further pursue this appeal, and 
the Federal Circuit dismissed the case on October 28, 2004. As there is 
now a final and conclusive court decision in this action, we are 
amending our final results of review and we will instruct the U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to liquidate entries subject to 
this review.

Amended Final Results

    Pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act effective January 1, 1995 (``the 
Act''), we are now amending the final results of administrative review 
of the countervailing duty order on stainless steel plate in coils from 
Belgium for the period September 4, 1998 through December 31, 1999.
    In the First Review Final Results, we calculated individual subsidy 
rates for ALZ, the only producer/exporter subject to this 
administrative review. As noted in the First Review Final Results, 
because it is the Department's practice to calculate subsidy rates on 
an annual basis, we calculated a 1998 rate and a 1999 rate for ALZ. The 
rate calculated for 1998 will be applicable only to entries, or 
withdrawals from warehouse, for consumption made on or after September 
4, 1998 and on or before December 31, 1998.
    The amended individual subsidy rates for ALZ for the First Review 
Final Results are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Net Subsidy
           Producer/Exporter (Applicable Year)                 Rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALZ N.V. (1998).........................................    1.36 percent
ALZ N.V. (1999).........................................    0.97 percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to the 
CBP. The Department will instruct the CBP to assess appropriate 
countervailing duties on the relevant entries of the subject 
merchandise covered by this review. In accordance with section 703(d) 
of the Act, countervailing duties will not be assessed on entries made 
during the period January 2, 1999 through May 10, 1999.
    We will also instruct the CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated 
countervailing duties at the 1999 rate on the f.o.b. value of all 
shipments of the subject merchandise from ALZ entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of 
this notice. The cash deposit rates for all other companies not covered 
by this review are not changed by the amended final results of this 
review.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 
751(a)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: April 4, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E5-1658 Filed 4-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE: 3510-DS-S

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.