Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Germany, Turkey, and the People's Republic of China, 72781-72787 [05-23738]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Risk Management Agency Notice of Intent To Seek Approval To Conduct an Information Collection Risk Management Agency, USDA. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. AGENCY: SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the intention of the Risk Management Agency to request approval for the collection of information in support of the agency’s mission under section 522(d) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act to develop and implement risk management tools for producers of agricultural commodities through partnership agreements. DATES: Written comments on this notice will be accepted until close of business February 6, 2006. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments to Virginia Guzman, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Research and Evaluation Division, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, Risk Management Agency, 6501 Beacon Drive, Mail Stop 813, Kansas City, MO 64133. Written comments may also be submitted electronically to: RMARED— PRA@rm.fcic.usda.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Virginia Guzman or David Fulk, at the Kansas City, MO address listed above, telephone (816) 926–6343. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title: Organic Price Project. OMB Number: 0563–NEW. Type of Request: New Information Collection. Abstract: The Risk Management Agency intends to collect price information on selected organic commodities from major regional distributors of organic products in support of a partnership agreement with the Rodale Institute to develop an organic price reporting system. Prices will be collected once each week by various means including e-mail, telephone, fax, and from Web sites in whatever form is customarily used by the distributor to post prices. The price information that is collected will be posted on an existing Web site maintained by the Rodale Institute to assist organic producers and allied interests in price discovery. We are asking the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve this information collection activity for 3 years. VerDate Aug<31>2005 13:01 Dec 06, 2005 Jkt 208001 The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public concerning the information collection activities. These comments will help us: 1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and 4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other collection technologies, e.g. permitting electronic submission of responses. Estimate of Burden: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 minute per response for a total annual burden of 53 hours. Respondents/Affected Entities: Individuals and businesses involved in the production of organic crops: academia, including individuals or representatives of universities and colleges who are involved in research and issues of American agriculture and risk management. Estimated annual number of respondents: 60. Estimated annual number of responses: 3,120 or 52 per respondent. Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 53 hours. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record. Signed in Washington, DC, on November 30, 2005. Eldon Gould, Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation. [FR Doc. E5–6987 Filed 12–6–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–08–P PO 00000 72781 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A–428–839 A–489–814 A–570–902 Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Germany, Turkey, and the People’s Republic of China Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 7, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tyler Weinhold (Germany), John Drury (Turkey), or Matthew Renkey (People’s Republic of China), AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1121, (202) 482–0195 and (202) 482–2312, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: INITIATION OF INVESTIGATIONS The Petitions On November 10, 2005, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) received Petitions (‘‘the Petitions’’) concerning imports of carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod (‘‘CASWR’’) from Germany (‘‘German Petition’’), Turkey (‘‘Turkish Petition’’), and the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’)(‘‘PRC Petition’’) filed in proper form by Connecticut Steel Corp., Gerdau Ameristeel U.S. Inc., Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc., ISG Georgetown, Inc. (Mittal Steel U.S.A. Georgetown), and Rocky Mountain Steel Mills (‘‘Petitioners’’) on behalf of the domestic industry producing CASWR. The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) for Germany and Turkey is October 1, 2004, through September 30, 2005. The POI for the PRC is April 1, 2005, through September 30, 2005. In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), Petitioners alleged that imports of CASWR from Germany, Turkey and the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring and threaten to injure an industry in the United States. Scope of Investigations The merchandise subject to this scope is certain hot–rolled products of carbon steel and alloy steel, in coils, of Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM 07DEN1 72782 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Notices approximately circular cross section, 4.75 mm or more, but less than 19.00 mm, 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; and (e) concrete reinforcing bars. Also excluded are free machining steel products (i.e., products that contain by weight one or more of the following elements: 0.03 percent or 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). All products meeting the physical description of subject merchandise that are not specifically excluded are included in this scope. The products under review are currently classifiable under subheadings 7213.91.3011, 7213.91.3015, 7213.91.3092, 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, the written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive. Comments on Scope of Investigations During our review of the Petitions, we discussed the scope with Petitioners to ensure that it accurately reflects the product for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as discussed in the preamble to the Department’s regulations, we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage. See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). The Department encourages all interested parties to submit such comments within 20 calendar days of publication of this initiation notice. Comments should be addressed to Import Administration’s Central Records Unit in Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 - Attention: Robert James. The period of scope consultations is intended to provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider all comments and consult with interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed by or on behalf VerDate Aug<31>2005 13:01 Dec 06, 2005 Jkt 208001 of the domestic industry. In order to determine whether a petition has been filed by or on behalf of the industry, the Department, pursuant to section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, determines whether a minimum percentage of the relevant industry supports the petition. A petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, the Department shall: (i) poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A), or (ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method. Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’), which is responsible for determining whether the domestic industry has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product (section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department’s determination is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may result in different definitions of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law. See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (1988), aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989), cert. denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989). Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ‘‘a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 ‘‘the article subject to an investigation,’’ (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the petition). With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioners do not offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigation. See Germany Initiation Checklist, Turkey Initiation Checklist, and PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment II (Industry Support). Based on our analysis of the information submitted in the Petitions we have determined there is a single domestic like product, carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod, and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product. Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, Supplements to the Petitions, dated November 18, 2005, and November 22, 2005, and other information readily available to the Department indicates that Petitioners have established industry support representing at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for or opposition to the Petitions, requiring no further action by the Department pursuant to section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act. In addition, the Department received no opposition to the Petitions from domestic producers of the like product. Therefore, the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, and the requirements of section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act are met. Furthermore, the domestic producers who support the Petitions account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petitions. Thus, the requirements of section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act also are met. Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. See Germany Initiation Checklist, Turkey Initiation Checklist, and PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment II (Industry Support). The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(E) and (F) of the Act and have demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping investigations that it is requesting the Department initiate. See Germany E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM 07DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Notices Initiation Checklist, Turkey Initiation Checklist, and PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment II (Industry Support). U.S. Price and Normal Value The following is a description of the allegation of sales at less than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to initiate these investigations on Germany, Turkey, and the PRC. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to the U.S. price, home–market price (Germany and Turkey), constructed value (Germany and Turkey), and the factors of production (PRC only) are also discussed in the country–specific Initiation Checklist. See Germany Initiation Checklist, Turkey Initiation Checklist, and PRC Initiation Checklist. Should the need arise to use any of this information as facts available under section 776 of the Act in our preliminary or final determinations, we will reexamine the information and revise the margin calculations, if appropriate. Turkey Export Price (‘‘EP’’) Petitioners based U.S. price on EP. Petitioners obtained a price for a sale to an end user of the subject merchandise within the POI. Petitioners provided an affidavit with the information. See Volume II of the Turkish Petition at Exhibit 5. The price quoted is for a specific grade, quality, and diameter falling within the scope of this petition. Export price was the basis for U.S. price because CASWR was offered for sale to an unaffiliated U.S. purchaser prior to the date of importation. Petitioners deducted from the offer price the expenses associated with exporting and delivering the product: foreign inland freight, foreign brokerage and handling, ocean freight and insurance, U.S. port charges, and a three percent trading company markup, which was based upon research from a market research company as customary for this type of transaction. See Volume II of the Turkish Petition at page 5, Exhibit 6, and Exhibit 9. In addition, Petitioners adjusted for differences in imputed credit expenses by subtracting home market credit expenses to the home market price and by adding U.S. imputed credit expenses to the home market price. See Volume II of the Turkish Petition at Exhibit 6, and Supplement to the Turkish Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at Revised Exhibit 10, and Supplement to the Turkish Petition, dated November 22, 2005 at 2nd Revised Exhibit 6. VerDate Aug<31>2005 13:01 Dec 06, 2005 Jkt 208001 The price quoted was delivered to the customer and included foreign inland freight, and insurance, U.S. import duties and port fees, U.S. inland freight, and an estimated trading company resale markup. See Volume II of the Turkish Petition at Exhibit 6, and Supplement to the Turkish Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at Revised Exhibit 10, and Supplement to the Turkish Petition, dated November 22, 2005, at 2nd Revised Exhibit 6. Normal Value (‘‘NV’’) To calculate NV, Petitioners provided a price quote from Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Galar Istihsal Endustrisi AS (‘‘Habas Sinai’’), a Turkish producer of CASWR. The information was obtained from a confidential market research company. The price quote is for a specific grade, quality and diameter falling within the scope of this petition, with FOB mill (i.e., ex–works) delivery terms. See Volume II of the Turkish Petition at pages 1–2 and Memorandum to the File, Telephone Call to Market Research Firm Regarding the Antidumping Petition on Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod (CASWR) from Turkey dated November 18, 2005. Petitioners made adjustments for imputed credit expenses. See Volume II of the Turkish Petition at Exhibit 3 and 4, and Supplement to the Turkish Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at Attachment 1 and Revised Exhibit 10. The Turkish HM price per metric ton was converted to short tons using the standard conversion factor. No additional adjustments were made to derive the HM price. Cost of Production Petitioners have provided information demonstrating reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of CASWR in the home market were made at prices below the fully absorbed cost of production (‘‘COP’’), within the meaning of section 773(b) of the Act, and requested that the Department conduct a country–wide sales–belowcost investigation. Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost of manufacturing (‘‘COM’’); selling, general and administrative (‘‘SG&A’’) expenses; financial expenses; and packing expenses. Petitioners calculated COM and packing expenses based on the weighted–averaged production experiences of U.S. CASWR producers during the POI, adjusted for known differences between the costs incurred to manufacture CASWR in the United States and in Turkey using publicly available data. To calculate SG&A and financial expenses, Petitioner relied on PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 72783 the fiscal year 2003 financial statements of Habas Sinai. Based upon a comparison of the prices of the foreign–like product in the home market to the calculated COP of the product, we find reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product were made below the COP, within the meaning of section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, the Department is initiating a country– wide cost investigation. See Turkey Initiation Checklist. Normal Value based on Constructed Value (‘‘CV’’) Pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, Petitioners also based NV on CV. Petitioners calculated CV using the same COM, SG&A, financial and packing figures used to compute the COP. Petitioners then calculated profit based on the FY 2003 financial statements of a Turkish CASWR producer, Habas Sinai. See Turkey Initiation Checklist. Germany Export Price To calculate EP, Petitioners obtained a price for a sale of subject merchandise, made within the POI, manufactured by B.E.S. Brandenburger Electrostahlwerke, GmbH (‘‘Brandenburger’’) and sold through Brandenburger’s affiliated trading company, Riva Stahl. Petitioners provided an affidavit with this information. See Volume II of the German Petition at page 2 and Exhibit 5. The price quoted is for a specific grade, quality, and diameter falling within the scope of this petition. The price quoted was FOB U.S. port, and included foreign inland freight charges, ocean freight and insurance from Germany, and U.S. port fees. See Volume II of the German Petition at pages 2, 3, and 4 and Exhibit 5, and Supplement to the German Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at Attachment 1. Petitioners deducted a three percent mark–up based upon the actual experience of Stemcor, an international steel trading company, as a publicly available surrogate for Riva’s experiences. See Volume II of the German Petition at pages 2 and 3 and Exhibit 8 and Supplement to the German Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at Attachment 1. Normal Value To calculate NV, Petitioners obtained a price for subject merchandise, as offered for sale by Brandenburger to an unaffiliated customer in the home market. This information was provided by a market researcher. The price quote E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM 07DEN1 72784 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Notices is for a specific grade, quality, and diameter falling within the scope of this petition. See Supplement to the German Petition, dated November 19, 2005, Foreign Market Research Declaration, and Memorandum to the File, Telephone Call to Market Research Firm Regarding the Antidumping Petition on Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod (CASWR) from Germany dated November 18, 2005. Petitioners made adjustments to home market gross price for foreign inland freight expense and imputed credit expense. See Volume II of the German Petition at pages 1 and 2 and Exhibit 2 and Supplement to the Petition, dated November 15, 2005, Foreign Market Research Declaration at Exhibit 1. To calculate the reported foreign inland freight, petitioners relied on a survey of quotes gathered by the market researcher. See Memorandum to the File, Telephone Call to Market Research Firm Regarding the Antidumping Petition on CASWR from Germany dated November 18, 2005. Cost of Production Petitioners have provided information demonstrating reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of CASWR in the home market were made at prices below the fully absorbed COP, within the meaning of section 773(b) of the Act, and requested that the Department conduct a country–wide sales–belowcost investigation. Petitioners calculated COM and packing expenses based on the weight–averaged production experiences of certain U.S. CASWR producers during the POI, adjusted for known differences between the costs incurred to manufacture CASWR in the United States and in Germany. To calculate SG&A and financial expenses, Petitioners relied on the fiscal year 2003 financial statements of Brandenburger. Based upon a comparison of the prices of the foreign like product in the home market to the calculated COP of the product, we find reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product were made below the COP, within the meaning of section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, the Department is initiating a country– wide cost investigation. See Germany Initiation Checklist. Normal Value Based on Constructed Value Pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, petitioners also based NV on CV. Petitioners calculated CV using the same COM, SG&A, financial, and packing figures used to compute the COP. See Volume II of the Petition at page 2 and Exhibit 1. VerDate Aug<31>2005 13:01 Dec 06, 2005 Jkt 208001 Petitioners then calculated profit based on the FY 2004 financial statements of two German producers of the same general class of merchandise. See Germany Initiation Checklist PRC Export Price Petitioners based their U.S. price on information regarding a Chinese quoted offer price as relayed by a U.S. customer. Petitioners based U.S. price on EP because the offer was made by an unidentified trading company to a U.S. customer. The Department deducted from the offer price the expenses associated with exporting and delivering the product: foreign inland freight, foreign brokerage and handling, ocean freight and insurance, U.S. port charges, and trading company markup. See PRC Initiation Checklist. Normal Value The Petitioners stated that the PRC is a non–market economy (‘‘NME’’) and no determination to the contrary has yet been made by the Department. In previous investigations, the Department has determined that the PRC is an NME. See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 24502 (May 10, 2005), Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Critical Circumstances: Magnesium Metal from the People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 9037 (February 24, 2005) and Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 7475 (February 14, 2005). In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the presumption of NME status remains in effect until revoked by the Department. The presumption of NME status for the PRC has not been revoked by the Department and remains in effect for purposes of the initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, because available information does not permit the NV of the merchandise to be determined under section 773(a) of the Act, the NV of the product is appropriately based on factors of production valued in a surrogate market–economy country in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. In the course of this investigation, all parties will have the opportunity to provide relevant information related to the issues of the PRC’s NME status and the granting of separate rates to individual exporters. The Petitioners identified India as the surrogate country arguing that India is PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 an appropriate surrogate, pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of the Act, because it is a market–economy country that is at a comparable level of economic development to the PRC and is a significant producer and exporter of CASWR. See Volume II of the Petition at pages 6–7. Based on the information provided by the Petitioners, we believe that its use of India as a surrogate country is appropriate for purposes of initiating this investigation. After the initiation of the investigation, the Department will solicit comments regarding surrogate country selection. Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), interested parties will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly available information to value factors of production within 40 days after the date of publication of the preliminary determination. The Petitioners explained that the production process for CASWR occurs in two stages: the melt shop and rolling mill. In the melt shop a furnace melts scrap steel or pig iron. The molten steel then enters a continuous caster which casts the liquid steel into billets. Next, in the rolling mill, the billets are reheated, rolled into CASWR, cooled, coiled and bundled for shipment. See Volume II of the Petition at page 9. The Petitioners stated that the manufacturing cost of CASWR in the United States is typical of world–wide steel making costs and, therefore, the use of the U.S. producers’ production costs and/or consumption rates represents the best information reasonably available to the Petitioners at this time. See Volume II of the Petition at page 8. In building–up the factors of production, the Petitioners started with inputs into the production of billets as the primary input in CASWR. The Petitioners provided a dumping margin calculation using the Department’s NME methodology as required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C). See Volume II of the Petition at Exhibit 18, and Supplement to the Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at Attachment 3. To determine, for each raw material, the quantities of inputs used by the PRC manufacturers to produce CASWR, the Petitioners relied on the production experience and actual consumption rates of three U.S. CASWR producers. See PRC Initiation Checklist. In accordance with section 773(c)(4) of the Act, the Petitioners valued factors of production, where possible, using reasonably available, public surrogate country data. To value certain factors of production, the Petitioners used Monthly Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India, as published by the Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM 07DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Notices Statistics of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India, and compiled by World Trade Atlas (‘‘WTA’’). See PRC Initiation Checklist. For values expressed in Indian rupees, the Department used a simple average of the daily exchange rate for the POI to convert these values from rupees to U.S. dollars in accordance with our standard practice. The Petitioners used a different source for their exchange rates since rates covering the entire POI were not yet available on Import Administration’s website at the time that the Petitioners filed the PRC Petition. However, such rates are now available at ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/ india.txt, and we have used them in our calculations. See PRC Initiation Checklist. The Department calculates and publishes the surrogate values for labor to be used in NME cases on its website. Therefore, to value labor, the Petitioners used a labor rate of $0.97 per hour, in accordance with the Department’s regulations. See 19 CFR 351.408(c)(3) and Supplement to the Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at Attachment 3. The Petitioners calculated surrogate financial ratios (overhead, SG&A, and profit) using information obtained from the Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. (‘‘Tata’’) 2004–2005 Annual Report. See Volume II of the Petition at pages 15– 17 and Exhibit 17. Tata is an Indian producer of CASWR. In this case, the Department has accepted the financial information from the Tata 2004–2005 Annual Report for the purposes of initiation, because these data appear to be the best information currently available to the Petitioners. However, the Department has made certain changes to the Petitioners’ financial ratio calculations. See PRC Initiation Checklist. Fair Value Comparisons Based on the data provided by Petitioners, there is reason to believe that imports of CASWR from Germany, Turkey and the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV, calculated in accordance with section 773(a) of the Act, and of EP to CV, the range of the revised estimated dumping margins for CASWR are 50.25 percent to 81.88 percent for Germany, and 29.23 percent to 77.76 percent for Turkey. Based on comparisons of EP to NV, calculated in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act, the estimated revised weighted– average dumping margin for CASWR from the PRC is 321.76 percent. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:31 Dec 06, 2005 Jkt 208001 Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation With regard to Germany, Turkey and the PRC, Petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with material injury, by reason of the individual and cumulated imports of the subject merchandise sold at less than NV. Petitioners contend that the industry’s injured condition is illustrated by the decline in customer base, lost sales, market share, domestic shipments, prices and profit. We have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury and causation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation. See Germany Initiation Checklist, Turkey Initiation Checklist, and PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment III (Injury). Initiation of Antidumping Investigations Based upon our examination of the Petitions on CASWR, we find that these Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating antidumping duty investigations to determine whether imports of CASWR are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the date of these initiations. Separate Rates and Quantity and Value Questionnaire The Department recently modified the process by which exporters and producers may obtain separate–rate status in NME investigations. See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate–Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations involving Non–Market Economy Countries (Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin), (April 5, 2005), available on the Department’s Website at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/ bull05–1.pdf. The process now requires the submission of a separate–rate status application. Based on our experience in processing the separate rates applications in the antidumping duty investigations of Artists Canvas, Diamond Sawblades and CLPP (see Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain Artist Canvas From the People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 21996, 21999 (April 28, 2005), Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 72785 Korea, 70 FR 35625, 35629 (June 21, 2005), and Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Certain Lined Paper Products from India, Indonesia, and the People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 58374, 58379 (October 6, 2005)), we have modified the application for this investigation to make it more administrable and easier for applicants to complete. The specific requirements for submitting the separate–rates application in this investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself, which will be available on the Department’s Website at https:// ia.ita.doc.gov on the date of publication of this initiation notice in the Federal Register. Please refer to this application for all instructions. NME Respondent Selection and Quantity and Value Questionnaire For NME investigations, it is the Department’s practice to request quantity and value information from all known exporters identified in the petition. In addition, the Department typically requests the assistance of the NME government in transmitting the Department’s quantity and value questionnaire to all companies who manufacture and export subject merchandise to the United States, as well as to manufacturers who produce the subject merchandise for companies who were engaged in exporting subject merchandise to the United States during the period of investigation. The quantity and value data received from NME exporters is used as the basis to select the mandatory respondents. Although many NME exporters respond to the quantity and value information request, at times some exporters may not have received the quantity and value questionnaire or may not have received it in time to respond by the specified deadline. The Department is now publicizing its requirement that quantity and value responses must be submitted for both the quantity and value questionnaire and the separate–rates application by the respective deadlines in order to receive consideration for separate–rate status. This new procedure will be applied to all future investigations. Appendix I of this notice contains the quantity and value questionnaire that must be submitted by all NME exporters. In addition, the Department will post the quantity and value questionnaire along with the filing instructions on the IA Website (https:// ia.ita.doc.gov). This quantity and value questionnaire is due no later than 15 calendar days from the date of publication of this notice. Consistent with Department practice, if a deadline E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM 07DEN1 72786 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Notices falls on a weekend, federal holiday, or any other day when the Department is closed, the Department will accept the response on the next business day. See Notice of Clarification: Application of ‘‘Next Business Day’’ rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005). The Department will continue to send the quantity and value questionnaire to those exporters identified in the Petition and the NME government. Use of Combination Rates in an NME Investigation The Department will calculate combination rates for certain respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin, states: {w}hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now assign in its NME investigations will be specific to those producers that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as well as the pool of non– investigated firms receiving the weighted–average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the application of ‘‘combination rates’’ because such rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more producers. The cash– deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin, at page 6. Distribution of Copies of the Petitions In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, copies of the public versions of the Petition has been provided to the Government of Germany, the Government of Turkey, and the Government of the PRC. International Trade Commission Notification We have notified the ITC of our initiations, as required by section 732(d) of the Act. Preliminary Determination by the ITC The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 25 days after the date on which it receives notice of these initiations, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of CASWR from Germany, Turkey and the PRC are causing Market material injury, or threatening to cause material injury, to a U.S. industry. See section 733(a)(2) of the Act. A negative ITC determination will result in the investigations being terminated; otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. Dated: November 30, 2005. Stephen J. Claeys, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. ATTACHMENT I Where it is not practicable to examine all known producers/exporters of subject merchandise, section 777A(c)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (as amended) permits us to investigate 1) a sample of exporters, producers, or types of products that is statistically valid based on the information available at the time of selection, or 2) exporters and producers accounting for the largest volume and value of the subject merchandise that can reasonably be examined. In the chart provided below, please provide the total quantity and total value of all your sales of merchandise covered by the scope of this investigation (see scope section of this notice), produced in the PRC, and exported/shipped to the United States during the period April 1, 2005, through September 30, 2005. Total Quantity Terms of Sale Total Value United States. 1. Export Price Sales. 2.. a. Exporter name. b. Address. c. Contact. d. Phone No.. e. Fax No.. 3. Constructed Export Price Sales. 4. Further Manufactured. Total Sales. Total Quantity: respective dates and sources. • Please report quantity on a short ton basis. If any conversions were used, please provide the conversion formula and source. Terms of Sales: • Please report all sales on the same terms (e.g., free on board). Total Value: • All sales values should be reported in U.S. Dollars. Please indicate any exchange rates used and their VerDate Aug<31>2005 13:01 Dec 06, 2005 Jkt 208001 Export Price Sales: • Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as an export price sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated person occurs before importation into the United States. • Please include any sales exported by your company directly to the United States; • Please include any sales exported by your company to a third–country market economy reseller where you PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 had knowledge that the merchandise was destined to be resold to the United States. • If you are a producer of subject merchandise, please include any sales manufactured by your company that were subsequently exported by an affiliated exporter to the United States. • Please do not include any sales of merchandise manufactured in Hong Kong in your figures. E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM 07DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Notices Constructed Export Price Sales: • Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as a constructed export price sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated person occurs after importation. However, if the first sale to the unaffiliated person is made by a person in the United States affiliated with the foreign exporter, constructed export price applies even if the sale occurs prior to importation. • Please include any sales exported by your company directly to the United States; • Please include any sales exported by your company to a third–country market economy reseller where you had knowledge that the merchandise was destined to be resold to the United States. • If you are a producer of subject merchandise, please include any sales manufactured by your company that were subsequently exported by an affiliated exporter to the United States. • Please do not include any sales of merchandise manufactured in Hong Kong in your figures. Further Manufactured: • Further manufacture or assembly costs include amounts incurred for direct materials, labor and overhead, plus amounts for general and administrative expense, interest expense, and additional packing expense incurred in the country of further manufacture, as well as all costs involved in moving the product from the U.S. port of entry to the further manufacturer. [FR Doc. 05–23738 Filed 12–6–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A–427–816) Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Cut–To-Length Carbon– Quality Steel Plate from France Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), the International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’), in its sunset review, determined that revocation of the antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’) order on certain cut–to-length carbon–quality steel plate (‘‘CTL Plate’’) from France would not be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material AGENCY: VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:07 Dec 06, 2005 Jkt 208001 injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. See Cut–to-Length Carbon–Quality Steel Plate from France, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, and Korea, 70 FR 71331 (November 28, 2005) (‘‘ITC Determination’’). Therefore, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.222(i)(1)(iii), the Department is revoking the AD order on CTL Plate from France. EFFECTIVE DATE: February 10, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Goldberger, AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4136. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On February 10, 2000, the Department published its AD order and final amended determination on CTL Plate from France. See Notice of Amendment of Final Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Cut–To- Length Carbon– Quality Steel Plate Products From France, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, and the Republic of Korea, 65 FR 6585 (February 10, 2000). In the amended final determination the Department found a margin of 10.41 percent for Usinor S.A. and for ‘‘all other’’ manufacturers/producers/exporters of CTL Plate from France. On January 3, 2005, the Department initiated, and the ITC instituted, sunset reviews of the AD order on CTL Plate from France. See Initiation of Five-year (Sunset) Reviews, 70 FR 75 (January 3, 2005). As a result of its review, the Department found that revocation of the AD order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping, and notified the ITC of the dumping rate likely to prevail if the AD order were revoked. See Certain Cut–To-Length Carbon–Quality Steel Plate from France, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, and the Republic of Korea; Final Results of the Expedited Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders, 70 FR 45655 (August 8, 2005). On November 21, 2005, the ITC determined, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, that revocation of the AD order on CTL Plate from France would not be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. See ITC Determination and USITC Publication 3816 (November 2005), entitled Cut–toLength Carbon–Quality Steel Plate From France, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 72787 and Korea: Investigation Nos. 701–TA– 388–391 and 731–TA–816–821 (Review). Scope of the Order The products covered by the AD order are certain hot–rolled carbon–quality steel: (1) Universal mill plates (i.e., flat– rolled products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 mm but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a nominal or actual thickness of not less than 4 mm, which are cut–to-length (not in coils) and without patterns in relief), of iron or non–alloy-quality steel; and (2) flat– rolled products, hot–rolled, of a nominal or actual thickness of 4.75 mm or more and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures at least twice the thickness, and which are cut–to-length (not in coils). Steel products to be included in the scope of this order are of rectangular, square, circular or other shape and of rectangular or non– rectangular cross-section where such non–rectangular cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process (i.e., products which have been ‘‘worked after rolling’’)--for example, products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges. Steel products that meet the noted physical characteristics that are painted, varnished or coated with plastic or other non–metallic substances are included within this scope. Also, specifically included in the scope of this order are high strength, low alloy (‘‘HSLA’’) steels. HSLA steels are recognized as steels with micro–alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum. Steel products included in this scope, regardless of Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) definitions, are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements, (2) the carbon content is two percent or less, by weight, and (3) none of the elements listed below is equal to or exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated: 1.80 percent of manganese, or 1.50 percent of silicon, or 1.00 percent of copper, or 0.50 percent of aluminum, or 1.25 percent of chromium, or 0.30 percent of cobalt, or 0.40 percent of lead, or 1.25 percent of nickel, or 0.30 percent of tungsten, or 0.10 percent of molybdenum, or 0.10 percent of niobium, or 0.41 percent of titanium, or 0.15 percent of vanadium, or 0.15 percent zirconium. All products that meet the written physical description, and in which the chemistry quantities do not equal or exceed any one of the levels listed above, are within the scope of this order unless otherwise E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM 07DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 234 (Wednesday, December 7, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72781-72787]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-23738]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

A-428-839
A-489-814
A-570-902


Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Carbon and Certain 
Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Germany, Turkey, and the People's Republic of 
China

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 7, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tyler Weinhold (Germany), John Drury 
(Turkey), or Matthew Renkey (People's Republic of China), AD/CVD 
Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1121, (202) 482-0195 and 
(202) 482-2312, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

INITIATION OF INVESTIGATIONS

The Petitions

    On November 10, 2005, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') received Petitions (``the Petitions'') concerning imports 
of carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod (``CASWR'') from Germany 
(``German Petition''), Turkey (``Turkish Petition''), and the People's 
Republic of China (``PRC'')(``PRC Petition'') filed in proper form by 
Connecticut Steel Corp., Gerdau Ameristeel U.S. Inc., Keystone 
Consolidated Industries, Inc., ISG Georgetown, Inc. (Mittal Steel 
U.S.A. Georgetown), and Rocky Mountain Steel Mills (``Petitioners'') on 
behalf of the domestic industry producing CASWR. The period of 
investigation (``POI'') for Germany and Turkey is October 1, 2004, 
through September 30, 2005. The POI for the PRC is April 1, 2005, 
through September 30, 2005.
    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``the Act''), Petitioners alleged that imports of CASWR from 
Germany, Turkey and the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the 
United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 
of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring and threaten 
to injure an industry in the United States.

Scope of Investigations

    The merchandise subject to this scope is certain hot-rolled 
products of carbon steel and alloy steel, in coils, of

[[Page 72782]]

approximately circular cross section, 4.75 mm or more, but less than 
19.00 mm, 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; and (e) concrete reinforcing bars. Also 
excluded are free machining steel products (i.e., products that contain 
by weight one or more of the following elements: 0.03 percent or 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).
    All products meeting the physical description of subject 
merchandise that are not specifically excluded are included in this 
scope. The products under review are currently classifiable under 
subheadings 7213.91.3011, 7213.91.3015, 7213.91.3092, 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, the written description of the 
scope of this proceeding is dispositive.

Comments on Scope of Investigations

    During our review of the Petitions, we discussed the scope with 
Petitioners to ensure that it accurately reflects the product for which 
the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as discussed in the 
preamble to the Department's regulations, we are setting aside a period 
for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage. See 
Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 
27323 (May 19, 1997). The Department encourages all interested parties 
to submit such comments within 20 calendar days of publication of this 
initiation notice. Comments should be addressed to Import 
Administration's Central Records Unit in Room 1870, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 
- Attention: Robert James. The period of scope consultations is 
intended to provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider 
all comments and consult with interested parties prior to the issuance 
of the preliminary determinations.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed by 
or on behalf of the domestic industry. In order to determine whether a 
petition has been filed by or on behalf of the industry, the 
Department, pursuant to section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, determines 
whether a minimum percentage of the relevant industry supports the 
petition. A petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers 
or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least 25 
percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) 
more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product 
produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or 
opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act 
provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic 
producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product, the Department shall: (i) poll 
the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if 
there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A), or 
(ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling 
method.
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a 
petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the 
Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic 
like product. The International Trade Commission (``ITC''), which is 
responsible for determining whether the domestic industry has been 
injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product 
in order to define the industry. While both the Department and the ITC 
must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like 
product (section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different purposes 
and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, the 
Department's determination is subject to limitations of time and 
information. Although this may result in different definitions of the 
like product, such differences do not render the decision of either 
agency contrary to law. See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 
2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v. United States, 
688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989), 
cert. denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989).
    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation,'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioners do not offer 
a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of the 
investigation. See Germany Initiation Checklist, Turkey Initiation 
Checklist, and PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment II (Industry 
Support). Based on our analysis of the information submitted in the 
Petitions we have determined there is a single domestic like product, 
carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod, and we have analyzed industry 
support in terms of that domestic like product.
    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, Supplements to 
the Petitions, dated November 18, 2005, and November 22, 2005, and 
other information readily available to the Department indicates that 
Petitioners have established industry support representing at least 25 
percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and more 
than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced 
by that portion of the industry expressing support for or opposition to 
the Petitions, requiring no further action by the Department pursuant 
to section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act. In addition, the Department 
received no opposition to the Petitions from domestic producers of the 
like product. Therefore, the domestic producers (or workers) who 
support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product, and the requirements of 
section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act are met. Furthermore, the domestic 
producers who support the Petitions account for more than 50 percent of 
the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of 
the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petitions. 
Thus, the requirements of section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act also are 
met. Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petitions were 
filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 
732(b)(1) of the Act. See Germany Initiation Checklist, Turkey 
Initiation Checklist, and PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment II 
(Industry Support).
    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf 
of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined 
in section 771(9)(E) and (F) of the Act and have demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping 
investigations that it is requesting the Department initiate. See 
Germany

[[Page 72783]]

Initiation Checklist, Turkey Initiation Checklist, and PRC Initiation 
Checklist at Attachment II (Industry Support).

U.S. Price and Normal Value

    The following is a description of the allegation of sales at less 
than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to 
initiate these investigations on Germany, Turkey, and the PRC. The 
sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to the U.S. 
price, home-market price (Germany and Turkey), constructed value 
(Germany and Turkey), and the factors of production (PRC only) are also 
discussed in the country-specific Initiation Checklist. See Germany 
Initiation Checklist, Turkey Initiation Checklist, and PRC Initiation 
Checklist. Should the need arise to use any of this information as 
facts available under section 776 of the Act in our preliminary or 
final determinations, we will reexamine the information and revise the 
margin calculations, if appropriate.

Turkey

Export Price (``EP'')

    Petitioners based U.S. price on EP. Petitioners obtained a price 
for a sale to an end user of the subject merchandise within the POI. 
Petitioners provided an affidavit with the information. See Volume II 
of the Turkish Petition at Exhibit 5. The price quoted is for a 
specific grade, quality, and diameter falling within the scope of this 
petition. Export price was the basis for U.S. price because CASWR was 
offered for sale to an unaffiliated U.S. purchaser prior to the date of 
importation. Petitioners deducted from the offer price the expenses 
associated with exporting and delivering the product: foreign inland 
freight, foreign brokerage and handling, ocean freight and insurance, 
U.S. port charges, and a three percent trading company markup, which 
was based upon research from a market research company as customary for 
this type of transaction. See Volume II of the Turkish Petition at page 
5, Exhibit 6, and Exhibit 9. In addition, Petitioners adjusted for 
differences in imputed credit expenses by subtracting home market 
credit expenses to the home market price and by adding U.S. imputed 
credit expenses to the home market price. See Volume II of the Turkish 
Petition at Exhibit 6, and Supplement to the Turkish Petition, dated 
November 18, 2005, at Revised Exhibit 10, and Supplement to the Turkish 
Petition, dated November 22, 2005 at 2nd Revised Exhibit 6.
    The price quoted was delivered to the customer and included foreign 
inland freight, and insurance, U.S. import duties and port fees, U.S. 
inland freight, and an estimated trading company resale markup. See 
Volume II of the Turkish Petition at Exhibit 6, and Supplement to the 
Turkish Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at Revised Exhibit 10, and 
Supplement to the Turkish Petition, dated November 22, 2005, at 2nd 
Revised Exhibit 6.

Normal Value (``NV'')

    To calculate NV, Petitioners provided a price quote from Habas 
Sinai ve Tibbi Galar Istihsal Endustrisi AS (``Habas Sinai''), a 
Turkish producer of CASWR. The information was obtained from a 
confidential market research company. The price quote is for a specific 
grade, quality and diameter falling within the scope of this petition, 
with FOB mill (i.e., ex-works) delivery terms. See Volume II of the 
Turkish Petition at pages 1-2 and Memorandum to the File, Telephone 
Call to Market Research Firm Regarding the Antidumping Petition on 
Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod (CASWR) from Turkey dated 
November 18, 2005. Petitioners made adjustments for imputed credit 
expenses. See Volume II of the Turkish Petition at Exhibit 3 and 4, and 
Supplement to the Turkish Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at 
Attachment 1 and Revised Exhibit 10. The Turkish HM price per metric 
ton was converted to short tons using the standard conversion factor. 
No additional adjustments were made to derive the HM price.

Cost of Production

    Petitioners have provided information demonstrating reasonable 
grounds to believe or suspect that sales of CASWR in the home market 
were made at prices below the fully absorbed cost of production 
(``COP''), within the meaning of section 773(b) of the Act, and 
requested that the Department conduct a country-wide sales-below-cost 
investigation. Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists 
of the cost of manufacturing (``COM''); selling, general and 
administrative (``SG&A'') expenses; financial expenses; and packing 
expenses. Petitioners calculated COM and packing expenses based on the 
weighted-averaged production experiences of U.S. CASWR producers during 
the POI, adjusted for known differences between the costs incurred to 
manufacture CASWR in the United States and in Turkey using publicly 
available data. To calculate SG&A and financial expenses, Petitioner 
relied on the fiscal year 2003 financial statements of Habas Sinai.
    Based upon a comparison of the prices of the foreign-like product 
in the home market to the calculated COP of the product, we find 
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like 
product were made below the COP, within the meaning of section 
773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, the Department is initiating a 
country-wide cost investigation. See Turkey Initiation Checklist.

Normal Value based on Constructed Value (``CV'')

    Pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, 
Petitioners also based NV on CV. Petitioners calculated CV using the 
same COM, SG&A, financial and packing figures used to compute the COP. 
Petitioners then calculated profit based on the FY 2003 financial 
statements of a Turkish CASWR producer, Habas Sinai. See Turkey 
Initiation Checklist.

Germany

Export Price

    To calculate EP, Petitioners obtained a price for a sale of subject 
merchandise, made within the POI, manufactured by B.E.S. Brandenburger 
Electrostahlwerke, GmbH (``Brandenburger'') and sold through 
Brandenburger's affiliated trading company, Riva Stahl. Petitioners 
provided an affidavit with this information. See Volume II of the 
German Petition at page 2 and Exhibit 5. The price quoted is for a 
specific grade, quality, and diameter falling within the scope of this 
petition.
    The price quoted was FOB U.S. port, and included foreign inland 
freight charges, ocean freight and insurance from Germany, and U.S. 
port fees. See Volume II of the German Petition at pages 2, 3, and 4 
and Exhibit 5, and Supplement to the German Petition, dated November 
18, 2005, at Attachment 1.
    Petitioners deducted a three percent mark-up based upon the actual 
experience of Stemcor, an international steel trading company, as a 
publicly available surrogate for Riva's experiences. See Volume II of 
the German Petition at pages 2 and 3 and Exhibit 8 and Supplement to 
the German Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at Attachment 1.

Normal Value

    To calculate NV, Petitioners obtained a price for subject 
merchandise, as offered for sale by Brandenburger to an unaffiliated 
customer in the home market. This information was provided by a market 
researcher. The price quote

[[Page 72784]]

is for a specific grade, quality, and diameter falling within the scope 
of this petition. See Supplement to the German Petition, dated November 
19, 2005, Foreign Market Research Declaration, and Memorandum to the 
File, Telephone Call to Market Research Firm Regarding the Antidumping 
Petition on Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod (CASWR) from 
Germany dated November 18, 2005.
    Petitioners made adjustments to home market gross price for foreign 
inland freight expense and imputed credit expense. See Volume II of the 
German Petition at pages 1 and 2 and Exhibit 2 and Supplement to the 
Petition, dated November 15, 2005, Foreign Market Research Declaration 
at Exhibit 1. To calculate the reported foreign inland freight, 
petitioners relied on a survey of quotes gathered by the market 
researcher. See Memorandum to the File, Telephone Call to Market 
Research Firm Regarding the Antidumping Petition on CASWR from Germany 
dated November 18, 2005.

Cost of Production

    Petitioners have provided information demonstrating reasonable 
grounds to believe or suspect that sales of CASWR in the home market 
were made at prices below the fully absorbed COP, within the meaning of 
section 773(b) of the Act, and requested that the Department conduct a 
country-wide sales-below-cost investigation. Petitioners calculated COM 
and packing expenses based on the weight-averaged production 
experiences of certain U.S. CASWR producers during the POI, adjusted 
for known differences between the costs incurred to manufacture CASWR 
in the United States and in Germany. To calculate SG&A and financial 
expenses, Petitioners relied on the fiscal year 2003 financial 
statements of Brandenburger.
    Based upon a comparison of the prices of the foreign like product 
in the home market to the calculated COP of the product, we find 
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like 
product were made below the COP, within the meaning of section 
773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, the Department is initiating a 
country-wide cost investigation. See Germany Initiation Checklist.

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value

    Pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, 
petitioners also based NV on CV. Petitioners calculated CV using the 
same COM, SG&A, financial, and packing figures used to compute the COP. 
See Volume II of the Petition at page 2 and Exhibit 1. Petitioners then 
calculated profit based on the FY 2004 financial statements of two 
German producers of the same general class of merchandise. See Germany 
Initiation Checklist

PRC

Export Price

    Petitioners based their U.S. price on information regarding a 
Chinese quoted offer price as relayed by a U.S. customer. Petitioners 
based U.S. price on EP because the offer was made by an unidentified 
trading company to a U.S. customer. The Department deducted from the 
offer price the expenses associated with exporting and delivering the 
product: foreign inland freight, foreign brokerage and handling, ocean 
freight and insurance, U.S. port charges, and trading company markup. 
See PRC Initiation Checklist.

Normal Value

    The Petitioners stated that the PRC is a non-market economy 
(``NME'') and no determination to the contrary has yet been made by the 
Department. In previous investigations, the Department has determined 
that the PRC is an NME. See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's 
Republic of China, 70 FR 24502 (May 10, 2005), Notice of Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Critical 
Circumstances: Magnesium Metal from the People's Republic of China, 70 
FR 9037 (February 24, 2005) and Notice of Final Determination of Sales 
at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Tissue Paper Products from the 
People's Republic of China, 70 FR 7475 (February 14, 2005). In 
accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the presumption of 
NME status remains in effect until revoked by the Department. The 
presumption of NME status for the PRC has not been revoked by the 
Department and remains in effect for purposes of the initiation of this 
investigation. Accordingly, because available information does not 
permit the NV of the merchandise to be determined under section 773(a) 
of the Act, the NV of the product is appropriately based on factors of 
production valued in a surrogate market-economy country in accordance 
with section 773(c) of the Act. In the course of this investigation, 
all parties will have the opportunity to provide relevant information 
related to the issues of the PRC's NME status and the granting of 
separate rates to individual exporters.
    The Petitioners identified India as the surrogate country arguing 
that India is an appropriate surrogate, pursuant to section 773(c)(4) 
of the Act, because it is a market-economy country that is at a 
comparable level of economic development to the PRC and is a 
significant producer and exporter of CASWR. See Volume II of the 
Petition at pages 6-7. Based on the information provided by the 
Petitioners, we believe that its use of India as a surrogate country is 
appropriate for purposes of initiating this investigation. After the 
initiation of the investigation, the Department will solicit comments 
regarding surrogate country selection. Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(3)(i), interested parties will be provided an opportunity to 
submit publicly available information to value factors of production 
within 40 days after the date of publication of the preliminary 
determination.
    The Petitioners explained that the production process for CASWR 
occurs in two stages: the melt shop and rolling mill. In the melt shop 
a furnace melts scrap steel or pig iron. The molten steel then enters a 
continuous caster which casts the liquid steel into billets. Next, in 
the rolling mill, the billets are reheated, rolled into CASWR, cooled, 
coiled and bundled for shipment. See Volume II of the Petition at page 
9. The Petitioners stated that the manufacturing cost of CASWR in the 
United States is typical of world-wide steel making costs and, 
therefore, the use of the U.S. producers' production costs and/or 
consumption rates represents the best information reasonably available 
to the Petitioners at this time. See Volume II of the Petition at page 
8. In building-up the factors of production, the Petitioners started 
with inputs into the production of billets as the primary input in 
CASWR.
    The Petitioners provided a dumping margin calculation using the 
Department's NME methodology as required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C). 
See Volume II of the Petition at Exhibit 18, and Supplement to the 
Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at Attachment 3. To determine, for 
each raw material, the quantities of inputs used by the PRC 
manufacturers to produce CASWR, the Petitioners relied on the 
production experience and actual consumption rates of three U.S. CASWR 
producers. See PRC Initiation Checklist.
    In accordance with section 773(c)(4) of the Act, the Petitioners 
valued factors of production, where possible, using reasonably 
available, public surrogate country data. To value certain factors of 
production, the Petitioners used Monthly Statistics of the Foreign 
Trade of India, as published by the Directorate General of Commercial 
Intelligence and

[[Page 72785]]

Statistics of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of 
India, and compiled by World Trade Atlas (``WTA''). See PRC Initiation 
Checklist.
    For values expressed in Indian rupees, the Department used a simple 
average of the daily exchange rate for the POI to convert these values 
from rupees to U.S. dollars in accordance with our standard practice. 
The Petitioners used a different source for their exchange rates since 
rates covering the entire POI were not yet available on Import 
Administration's website at the time that the Petitioners filed the PRC 
Petition. However, such rates are now available at ia.ita.doc.gov/
exchange/india.txt, and we have used them in our calculations. See PRC 
Initiation Checklist.
    The Department calculates and publishes the surrogate values for 
labor to be used in NME cases on its website. Therefore, to value 
labor, the Petitioners used a labor rate of $0.97 per hour, in 
accordance with the Department's regulations. See 19 CFR 351.408(c)(3) 
and Supplement to the Petition, dated November 18, 2005, at Attachment 
3.
    The Petitioners calculated surrogate financial ratios (overhead, 
SG&A, and profit) using information obtained from the Tata Iron and 
Steel Company Ltd. (``Tata'') 2004-2005 Annual Report. See Volume II of 
the Petition at pages 15-17 and Exhibit 17. Tata is an Indian producer 
of CASWR. In this case, the Department has accepted the financial 
information from the Tata 2004-2005 Annual Report for the purposes of 
initiation, because these data appear to be the best information 
currently available to the Petitioners. However, the Department has 
made certain changes to the Petitioners' financial ratio calculations. 
See PRC Initiation Checklist.

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by Petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of CASWR from Germany, Turkey and the PRC are 
being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair 
value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV, calculated in accordance with 
section 773(a) of the Act, and of EP to CV, the range of the revised 
estimated dumping margins for CASWR are 50.25 percent to 81.88 percent 
for Germany, and 29.23 percent to 77.76 percent for Turkey. Based on 
comparisons of EP to NV, calculated in accordance with section 773(c) 
of the Act, the estimated revised weighted-average dumping margin for 
CASWR from the PRC is 321.76 percent.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    With regard to Germany, Turkey and the PRC, Petitioners allege that 
the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being 
materially injured, or is threatened with material injury, by reason of 
the individual and cumulated imports of the subject merchandise sold at 
less than NV. Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition 
is illustrated by the decline in customer base, lost sales, market 
share, domestic shipments, prices and profit. We have assessed the 
allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury and 
causation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly 
supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for 
initiation. See Germany Initiation Checklist, Turkey Initiation 
Checklist, and PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment III (Injury).

Initiation of Antidumping Investigations

    Based upon our examination of the Petitions on CASWR, we find that 
these Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. 
Therefore, we are initiating antidumping duty investigations to 
determine whether imports of CASWR are being, or are likely to be, sold 
in the United States at less than fair value. Unless postponed, we will 
make our preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the 
date of these initiations.

Separate Rates and Quantity and Value Questionnaire

    The Department recently modified the process by which exporters and 
producers may obtain separate-rate status in NME investigations. See 
Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and Application of 
Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market 
Economy Countries (Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin), 
(April 5, 2005), available on the Department's Website at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf. The process now requires the 
submission of a separate-rate status application. Based on our 
experience in processing the separate rates applications in the 
antidumping duty investigations of Artists Canvas, Diamond Sawblades 
and CLPP (see Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain 
Artist Canvas From the People's Republic of China, 70 FR 21996, 21999 
(April 28, 2005), Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: 
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's Republic of China 
and the Republic of Korea, 70 FR 35625, 35629 (June 21, 2005), and 
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Certain Lined Paper 
Products from India, Indonesia, and the People's Republic of China, 70 
FR 58374, 58379 (October 6, 2005)), we have modified the application 
for this investigation to make it more administrable and easier for 
applicants to complete. The specific requirements for submitting the 
separate-rates application in this investigation are outlined in detail 
in the application itself, which will be available on the Department's 
Website at https://ia.ita.doc.gov on the date of publication of this 
initiation notice in the Federal Register. Please refer to this 
application for all instructions.

NME Respondent Selection and Quantity and Value Questionnaire

    For NME investigations, it is the Department's practice to request 
quantity and value information from all known exporters identified in 
the petition. In addition, the Department typically requests the 
assistance of the NME government in transmitting the Department's 
quantity and value questionnaire to all companies who manufacture and 
export subject merchandise to the United States, as well as to 
manufacturers who produce the subject merchandise for companies who 
were engaged in exporting subject merchandise to the United States 
during the period of investigation. The quantity and value data 
received from NME exporters is used as the basis to select the 
mandatory respondents. Although many NME exporters respond to the 
quantity and value information request, at times some exporters may not 
have received the quantity and value questionnaire or may not have 
received it in time to respond by the specified deadline.
    The Department is now publicizing its requirement that quantity and 
value responses must be submitted for both the quantity and value 
questionnaire and the separate-rates application by the respective 
deadlines in order to receive consideration for separate-rate status. 
This new procedure will be applied to all future investigations. 
Appendix I of this notice contains the quantity and value questionnaire 
that must be submitted by all NME exporters. In addition, the 
Department will post the quantity and value questionnaire along with 
the filing instructions on the IA Website (https://ia.ita.doc.gov). This 
quantity and value questionnaire is due no later than 15 calendar days 
from the date of publication of this notice. Consistent with Department 
practice, if a deadline

[[Page 72786]]

falls on a weekend, federal holiday, or any other day when the 
Department is closed, the Department will accept the response on the 
next business day. See Notice of Clarification: Application of ``Next 
Business Day'' rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines Pursuant 
to the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005). The 
Department will continue to send the quantity and value questionnaire 
to those exporters identified in the Petition and the NME government.

Use of Combination Rates in an NME Investigation

    The Department will calculate combination rates for certain 
respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this 
investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin, 
states:
    {w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates 
only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now 
assign in its NME investigations will be specific to those producers 
that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, 
however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the 
producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period of 
investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory respondents 
receiving an individually calculated separate rate as well as the pool 
of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-average of the 
individually calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the 
application of ``combination rates'' because such rates apply to 
specific combinations of exporters and one or more producers. The cash-
deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply only to merchandise 
both exported by the firm in question and produced by a firm that 
supplied the exporter during the period of investigation.
    Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin, at page 6.

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, copies of the 
public versions of the Petition has been provided to the Government of 
Germany, the Government of Turkey, and the Government of the PRC.

International Trade Commission Notification

    We have notified the ITC of our initiations, as required by section 
732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 25 days after the date 
on which it receives notice of these initiations, whether there is a 
reasonable indication that imports of CASWR from Germany, Turkey and 
the PRC are causing material injury, or threatening to cause material 
injury, to a U.S. industry. See section 733(a)(2) of the Act. A 
negative ITC determination will result in the investigations being 
terminated; otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.

    Dated: November 30, 2005.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

ATTACHMENT I

    Where it is not practicable to examine all known producers/
exporters of subject merchandise, section 777A(c)(2) of the Tariff Act 
of 1930 (as amended) permits us to investigate 1) a sample of 
exporters, producers, or types of products that is statistically valid 
based on the information available at the time of selection, or 2) 
exporters and producers accounting for the largest volume and value of 
the subject merchandise that can reasonably be examined.
    In the chart provided below, please provide the total quantity and 
total value of all your sales of merchandise covered by the scope of 
this investigation (see scope section of this notice), produced in the 
PRC, and exported/shipped to the United States during the period April 
1, 2005, through September 30, 2005.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Market                            Total Quantity     Terms of Sale       Total Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States..........................................
--------------------------------------------------------
1. Export Price Sales..................................
2......................................................
        a. Exporter name...............................
        b. Address.....................................
        c. Contact.....................................
        d. Phone No....................................
        e. Fax No......................................
3. Constructed Export Price Sales......................
4. Further Manufactured................................
Total Sales............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Quantity:

     Please report quantity on a short ton basis. If any 
conversions were used, please provide the conversion formula and 
source.

Terms of Sales:

     Please report all sales on the same terms (e.g., free on 
board).

Total Value:

     All sales values should be reported in U.S. Dollars. 
Please indicate any exchange rates used and their respective dates and 
sources.

Export Price Sales:

     Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as an export price 
sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated person occurs before 
importation into the United States.
     Please include any sales exported by your company directly 
to the United States;
     Please include any sales exported by your company to a 
third-country market economy reseller where you had knowledge that the 
merchandise was destined to be resold to the United States.
     If you are a producer of subject merchandise, please 
include any sales manufactured by your company that were subsequently 
exported by an affiliated exporter to the United States.
     Please do not include any sales of merchandise 
manufactured in Hong Kong in your figures.

[[Page 72787]]

Constructed Export Price Sales:

     Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as a constructed 
export price sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated person occurs 
after importation. However, if the first sale to the unaffiliated 
person is made by a person in the United States affiliated with the 
foreign exporter, constructed export price applies even if the sale 
occurs prior to importation.
     Please include any sales exported by your company directly 
to the United States;
     Please include any sales exported by your company to a 
third-country market economy reseller where you had knowledge that the 
merchandise was destined to be resold to the United States.
     If you are a producer of subject merchandise, please 
include any sales manufactured by your company that were subsequently 
exported by an affiliated exporter to the United States.
     Please do not include any sales of merchandise 
manufactured in Hong Kong in your figures.

Further Manufactured:

     Further manufacture or assembly costs include amounts 
incurred for direct materials, labor and overhead, plus amounts for 
general and administrative expense, interest expense, and additional 
packing expense incurred in the country of further manufacture, as well 
as all costs involved in moving the product from the U.S. port of entry 
to the further manufacturer.
[FR Doc. 05-23738 Filed 12-6-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S