Stainless Steel Wire Rod from the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 6528-6530 [E7-2227]

Download as PDF 6528 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 28 / Monday, February 12, 2007 / Notices covered in this or any previous review, the cash deposit rate will be 6.33 percent, the ‘‘all others’’ rate established in Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: IQF Red Raspberries from Chile, 67 FR 40270 (June 12, 2002). Notification to Importers This notice also serves as a reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (‘‘APOs’’) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Comment 6: General and Administrative Expenses Rate Calculation Comment 7: Gain on Revaluation of Non–monetary Assets and Liabilities Comments Relating to Arlavan S.A. Comment 8: Application of Adverse Facts Available for Cost of Production of Arlavan’s Non-Responsive Supplier Comments Relating to Sociedad Agroindustrial Valle Frio Ltda. Comment 9: Valle Frio’s Packing Expenses Comment 10: Valle Frio’s Indirect Selling Expense Ratio Comment 11: Wages and Professional Fees in Agricola Framparque’s General and Administrative Expense Ratio Comment 12: Valle Frio’s Production Quantities Comment 13: General and Administrative Expense Ratio Calculation Comments Relating to Fruticola Olmue S.A. Comment 14: Clerical Error Concerning Certain of Olmue’s Credit Expenses Comments Relating to Vital Berry Marketing S.A. Comment 15: Clerical Errors Made by VBM Comment 16: Clerical Error Made by the Department [FR Doc. E7–2371 Filed 2–9–02; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Dated: February 5, 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration. International Trade Administration APPENDIX I Stainless Steel Wire Rod from the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review List of Comments in the Decision Memorandum sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES General Comments Comment 1: Direct Material Valuation Comment 2: Treatment of Sales Made Above Normal Value VerDate Aug<31>2005 20:45 Feb 09, 2007 Jkt 211001 Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On October 11, 2006, the Department of Commerce published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel wire rod (SSWR) from the Republic of Korea. We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the preliminary results. Based on our analysis of the comments received and an examination of our calculations, we have made certain changes for the final results. The final weighted–average dumping margins for AGENCY: Comments Relating to Santiago Comercio Exportaciones Exterior S.A. Comment 3: Valuation of IQF–Quality Fresh Raspberries Used to Produce Non–whole Frozen Raspberry Products Comment 4: By–product Cost Treatment for Other Non–whole Raspberry Products Comment 5: Affiliated Processor’s General and Administrative Expenses and Interest Expenses A–580–829 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 the respondents are listed below in the ‘‘Final Results of the Review’’ section of this notice. EFFECTIVE DATE: February 12, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Schauer at (202) 482–0410 or Richard Rimlinger at (202) 482–4477, AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On October 11, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published Stainless Steel Wire Rod from the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 59739 (October 11, 2006) (Preliminary Results), in the Federal Register. The period of review is September 1, 2004, through August 31, 2005. We have conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On November 13, 2006, Carpenter Technology Corporation, Dunkirk Specialty Steel, LLC (a subsidiary of Universal Stainless & Alloy Products), and North American Stainless (collectively, the petitioners), and respondents Changwon Specialty Steel Co., Ltd., and Dongbang Specialty Steel Co., Ltd. (collectively, the respondent),1 filed case briefs. On November 20, 2006, the petitioners and the respondent filed rebuttal briefs. Although the respondent requested a hearing on November 13, 2006, it withdrew its request on November 17, 2006. Because no other interested party requested a hearing, we did not hold one. Scope of Order For purposes of this order, the products covered are those SSWR that are hot–rolled or hot–rolled annealed and/or pickled and/or descaled rounds, squares, octagons, hexagons or other shapes, in coils, that may also be coated with a lubricant containing copper, lime or oxalate. SSWR is made of alloy steels containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or without other elements. These products are manufactured only by hot–rolling or hot–rolling annealing, and/or pickling and/or descaling, are normally sold in 1 We collapsed the two respondents into a single entity because we concluded they had a close supplier relationship. See Preliminary Results, 71 FR at 59739. E:\FR\FM\12FEN1.SGM 12FEN1 6529 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 28 / Monday, February 12, 2007 / Notices coiled form, and are of solid crosssection. The majority of SSWR sold in the United States is round in crosssectional shape, annealed and pickled, and later cold–finished into stainless steel wire or small–diameter bar. The most common size for such products is 5.5 millimeters or 0.217 inches in diameter, which represents the smallest size that normally is produced on a rolling mill and is the size that most wire–drawing machines are set up to draw. The range of SSWR sizes normally sold in the United States is between 0.20 inches and 1.312 inches in diameter. Two stainless steel grades are excluded from the scope of the order. SF20T and K–M35FL are excluded. The chemical makeup for the excluded grades is as follows: SF20T Carbon ...................................... Manganese ............................... Phosphorous ............................. Sulfur ........................................ Silicon ....................................... Chromium ................................. Molybdenum ............................. Lead–added .............................. Tellurium–added ....................... 0.05 max 2.00 max 0.05 max 0.15 max 1.00 max 19.00/21.00 1.50/2.50 (0.10/0.30) (0.03 min) K–M35FL Carbon ...................................... Silicon ....................................... Manganese ............................... Phosphorous ............................. Sulfur ........................................ Nickel ........................................ Chromium ................................. Lead .......................................... Aluminum .................................. 0.015 max 0.70/1.00 0.40 max 0.04 max 0.03 max 0.30 max 12.50/14.00 0.10/0.30 0.20/0.35 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES The products subject to the order are currently classifiable under subheadings 7221.00.0005, 7221.00.0015, 7221.00.0030, 7221.00.0045, and 7221.00.0075 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this review are addressed in the February 1, 2007, Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Stainless Steel Wire Rod from the Republic of Korea for the period September 1, 2004, through August 31, 2005 (Decision Memorandum), which is hereby adopted by this notice. Attached to this notice as an appendix is a list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded in the VerDate Aug<31>2005 20:45 Feb 09, 2007 Jkt 211001 Decision Memorandum. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Department’s Central Records Unit, Room B–099 of the main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results We have made the following changes to the margin we calculated for the respondent in the Preliminary Results: 1) We corrected a ministerial error to match models by grade properly. 2) We included the respondent’s loss on inventory obsolescence in the calculation of general and administrative expenses. Results of the Cost Test Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C)(i) of the Act, where less than 20 percent of sales of a given product were at prices less than the cost of production (COP), we did not disregard any below–cost sales of that product because we determined that the below–cost sales were not made in ‘‘substantial quantities.’’ Where 20 percent or more of a respondent’s sales of a given product during the period of review were at prices less than the COP, we determined such sales to have been made in ‘‘substantial quantities.’’ See section 773(b)(2)(C) of the Act. The sales were made within an extended period of time in accordance with section 773(b)(2)(B) of the Act because we examined below–cost sales occurring during the entire period of review. In such cases, because we compared prices to average costs for the period of review, we also determined that such sales were not made at prices which would permit recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time, in accordance with section 773(b)(2)(D) of the Act. We found that, for certain products, more than 20 percent of the comparison–market sales were at prices less than the COP and, thus, the below– cost sales were made within an extended period of time in substantial quantities by the respondent. In addition, these sales were made at prices that did not provide for the recovery of costs within a reasonable period of time. Therefore, we disregarded the below–cost sales and used the remaining sales, if any, as the basis for determining normal value, in accordance with section 773(b)(1) of the Act. PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Final Results of the Review As a result of our review, we determine that the following percentage weighted–average dumping margin exists on SSWR from the Republic of Korea for the period September 1, 2004, through August 31, 2005: Company Margin (percent) Changwon/Dongbang ... 9.06 Assessment Rates The Department will determine and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. We intend to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated an importer/customer–specific assessment rate or per–unit value for subject merchandise. The Department clarified its ‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation, codified at 19 CFR 351.212(c), on May 6, 2003. See Notice of Policy Concerning Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment– Policy Notice). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the period of review produced by the companies included in these final results of review for which the reviewed companies did not know that the merchandise it sold to the intermediary (e.g., a reseller, trading company, or exporter) was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the ‘‘All Others’’ rate if there is no rate for the intermediary involved in the transaction. See Assessment– Policy Notice for a full discussion of this clarification. a. Export Price With respect to export–price sales, we divided the total dumping margins (calculated as the difference between normal value and the export price) for the respondent’s importer or customer by the total number of units the respondent sold to that importer or customer. We will direct CBP to assess the resulting per–unit dollar amount against each unit of merchandise on each of that importer’s or customer’s entries during the review period. b. Constructed Export Price For constructed export–price sales, we divided the total dumping margins for the reviewed sales by the total entered value of those reviewed sales for each importer. We will direct CBP to E:\FR\FM\12FEN1.SGM 12FEN1 6530 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 28 / Monday, February 12, 2007 / Notices assess the resulting percentage margin against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise on each of that importer’s entries during the review period. See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES Cash–Deposit Requirements The following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of this notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash–deposit rates for the reviewed company will be the rate shown above; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash–deposit rate will continue to be the company–specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less–than-fair–value (LTFV) investigation but the manufacturer is, the cash–deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; (4) the cash–deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 5.19 percent, the ‘‘All Others’’ rate from the amended final determination of the LTFV investigation published on September 15, 1998. See Notice of Amendment of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Stainless Steel Wire Rod From Korea, 63 FR 49331 (September 15, 1998). These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. This notice serves as a reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during these review periods. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:52 Feb 09, 2007 Jkt 211001 regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing these final results of review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0197, (202) 482–1395, or (202) 482–1398, respectively. Dated: February 1, 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration. Background Appendix Comments and Responses 1. Offsetting of Negative Margins 2. Model Match 3. Inland–Freight Expenses 4. Affiliated–Party Inputs 5. General and Administrative Expenses [FR Doc. E7–2227 Filed 2–9–03; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (C–533–825) Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 8, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published in the Federal Register its preliminary results of administrative review of the countervailing duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (PET–Film) from India for the period January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2004. See Notice of Preliminary Results and Rescission, in Part, of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India, 71 FR 45037 (August 8, 2006) (Preliminary Results). Based on the results of our verification and our analysis of the comments received, the Department has revised the net subsidy rates for the respondents: Jindal Polyester Limited/Jindal Poly Films Limited of India (Jindal) and Polyplex Corporation Ltd. (Polyplex). The final net subsidy rates for the reviewed companies are listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’ AGENCY: EFFECTIVE DATE: February 12, 2007. Elfi Blum, Nicholas Czajkowski, or Toni Page, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Since the publication of the Preliminary Results, the following events have occurred. As provided in 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department conducted a verification of the questionnaire responses submitted by the Government of India (GOI), Polyplex, and Jindal from October 3 through October 13, 2006. We used standard verification procedures, including on–site examination of relevant records and original source documents. Our verification results are outlined in the public and proprietary versions of the verification memoranda, which are on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room B–099 of the Main Commerce Building. See ‘‘Verification of the Questionnaire Responses Submitted by the Government of India (GOI)’’(December 13, 2006) (GOI Verification Report); ‘‘Verification of the Questionnaire Responses Submitted by Polyplex Corporation Ltd. (Polyplex)’’ (December 13, 2006) (Polyplex Verification Report); and ‘‘Verification of the Questionnaire Responses Submitted by Jindal Polyester Ltd. (Jindal)’’ (December 13, 2006) (Jindal Verification Report). On December 28, 2006, Dupont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi Polyester Film of America, and Toray Plastics (America), Inc. (collectively, the Petitioners), Polyplex and Jindal, filed case briefs. Polyplex, Jindal, and Petitioners filed rebuttal briefs on January 4, 2006. Scope of the Order For purposes of the order, the products covered are all gauges of raw, pretreated, or primed Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip, whether extruded or coextruded. Excluded are metallized films and other finished films that have had at least one of their surfaces modified by the application of a performance–enhancing resinous or inorganic layer of more than 0.00001 inches thick. Imports of PET film are classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item number 3920.62.00. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. E:\FR\FM\12FEN1.SGM 12FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 28 (Monday, February 12, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6528-6530]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-2227]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

A-580-829


Stainless Steel Wire Rod from the Republic of Korea: Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 11, 2006, the Department of Commerce published the 
preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping 
duty order on stainless steel wire rod (SSWR) from the Republic of 
Korea. We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the 
preliminary results. Based on our analysis of the comments received and 
an examination of our calculations, we have made certain changes for 
the final results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the 
respondents are listed below in the ``Final Results of the Review'' 
section of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 12, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Schauer at (202) 482-0410 or 
Richard Rimlinger at (202) 482-4477, AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, 
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14\th\ Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On October 11, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published Stainless Steel Wire Rod from the Republic of Korea: 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 
59739 (October 11, 2006) (Preliminary Results), in the Federal 
Register. The period of review is September 1, 2004, through August 31, 
2005. We have conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a) 
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
    We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On 
November 13, 2006, Carpenter Technology Corporation, Dunkirk Specialty 
Steel, LLC (a subsidiary of Universal Stainless & Alloy Products), and 
North American Stainless (collectively, the petitioners), and 
respondents Changwon Specialty Steel Co., Ltd., and Dongbang Specialty 
Steel Co., Ltd. (collectively, the respondent),\1\ filed case briefs. 
On November 20, 2006, the petitioners and the respondent filed rebuttal 
briefs. Although the respondent requested a hearing on November 13, 
2006, it withdrew its request on November 17, 2006. Because no other 
interested party requested a hearing, we did not hold one.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We collapsed the two respondents into a single entity 
because we concluded they had a close supplier relationship. See 
Preliminary Results, 71 FR at 59739.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of Order

    For purposes of this order, the products covered are those SSWR 
that are hot-rolled or hot-rolled annealed and/or pickled and/or 
descaled rounds, squares, octagons, hexagons or other shapes, in coils, 
that may also be coated with a lubricant containing copper, lime or 
oxalate. SSWR is made of alloy steels containing, by weight, 1.2 
percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or 
without other elements. These products are manufactured only by hot-
rolling or hot-rolling annealing, and/or pickling and/or descaling, are 
normally sold in

[[Page 6529]]

coiled form, and are of solid cross-section. The majority of SSWR sold 
in the United States is round in cross-sectional shape, annealed and 
pickled, and later cold-finished into stainless steel wire or small-
diameter bar. The most common size for such products is 5.5 millimeters 
or 0.217 inches in diameter, which represents the smallest size that 
normally is produced on a rolling mill and is the size that most wire-
drawing machines are set up to draw. The range of SSWR sizes normally 
sold in the United States is between 0.20 inches and 1.312 inches in 
diameter.
    Two stainless steel grades are excluded from the scope of the 
order. SF20T and K-M35FL are excluded. The chemical makeup for the 
excluded grades is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           SF20T
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon.....................................................     0.05 max
Manganese..................................................     2.00 max
Phosphorous................................................     0.05 max
Sulfur.....................................................     0.15 max
Silicon....................................................     1.00 max
Chromium...................................................  19.00/21.00
Molybdenum.................................................    1.50/2.50
Lead-added.................................................  (0.10/0.30)
Tellurium-added............................................   (0.03 min)
------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          K-M35FL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon.....................................................    0.015 max
Silicon....................................................    0.70/1.00
Manganese..................................................     0.40 max
Phosphorous................................................     0.04 max
Sulfur.....................................................     0.03 max
Nickel.....................................................     0.30 max
Chromium...................................................  12.50/14.00
Lead.......................................................    0.10/0.30
Aluminum...................................................    0.20/0.35
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The products subject to the order are currently classifiable under 
subheadings 7221.00.0005, 7221.00.0015, 7221.00.0030, 7221.00.0045, and 
7221.00.0075 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience 
and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the order 
is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this review are addressed in the February 1, 2007, Issues and Decision 
Memorandum for the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Stainless 
Steel Wire Rod from the Republic of Korea for the period September 1, 
2004, through August 31, 2005 (Decision Memorandum), which is hereby 
adopted by this notice. Attached to this notice as an appendix is a 
list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have 
responded in the Decision Memorandum. Parties can find a complete 
discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding 
recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the 
Department's Central Records Unit, Room B-099 of the main Department 
building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum 
can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The 
paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are 
identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    We have made the following changes to the margin we calculated for 
the respondent in the Preliminary Results:
1) We corrected a ministerial error to match models by grade properly.
2) We included the respondent's loss on inventory obsolescence in the 
calculation of general and administrative expenses.

Results of the Cost Test

    Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C)(i) of the Act, where less than 20 
percent of sales of a given product were at prices less than the cost 
of production (COP), we did not disregard any below-cost sales of that 
product because we determined that the below-cost sales were not made 
in ``substantial quantities.'' Where 20 percent or more of a 
respondent's sales of a given product during the period of review were 
at prices less than the COP, we determined such sales to have been made 
in ``substantial quantities.'' See section 773(b)(2)(C) of the Act. The 
sales were made within an extended period of time in accordance with 
section 773(b)(2)(B) of the Act because we examined below-cost sales 
occurring during the entire period of review. In such cases, because we 
compared prices to average costs for the period of review, we also 
determined that such sales were not made at prices which would permit 
recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time, in accordance 
with section 773(b)(2)(D) of the Act.
    We found that, for certain products, more than 20 percent of the 
comparison-market sales were at prices less than the COP and, thus, the 
below-cost sales were made within an extended period of time in 
substantial quantities by the respondent. In addition, these sales were 
made at prices that did not provide for the recovery of costs within a 
reasonable period of time. Therefore, we disregarded the below-cost 
sales and used the remaining sales, if any, as the basis for 
determining normal value, in accordance with section 773(b)(1) of the 
Act.

Final Results of the Review

    As a result of our review, we determine that the following 
percentage weighted-average dumping margin exists on SSWR from the 
Republic of Korea for the period September 1, 2004, through August 31, 
2005:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Company                         Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changwon/Dongbang...................................                9.06
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    The Department will determine and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries. We intend to issue appropriate assessment instructions 
directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of 
review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated an 
importer/customer-specific assessment rate or per-unit value for 
subject merchandise.
    The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation, 
codified at 19 CFR 351.212(c), on May 6, 2003. See Notice of Policy 
Concerning Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) 
(Assessment-Policy Notice). This clarification will apply to entries of 
subject merchandise during the period of review produced by the 
companies included in these final results of review for which the 
reviewed companies did not know that the merchandise it sold to the 
intermediary (e.g., a reseller, trading company, or exporter) was 
destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP 
to liquidate unreviewed entries at the ``All Others'' rate if there is 
no rate for the intermediary involved in the transaction. See 
Assessment-Policy Notice for a full discussion of this clarification.

a. Export Price

    With respect to export-price sales, we divided the total dumping 
margins (calculated as the difference between normal value and the 
export price) for the respondent's importer or customer by the total 
number of units the respondent sold to that importer or customer. We 
will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-unit dollar amount against 
each unit of merchandise on each of that importer's or customer's 
entries during the review period.

b. Constructed Export Price

    For constructed export-price sales, we divided the total dumping 
margins for the reviewed sales by the total entered value of those 
reviewed sales for each importer. We will direct CBP to

[[Page 6530]]

assess the resulting percentage margin against the entered customs 
values for the subject merchandise on each of that importer's entries 
during the review period. See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).

Cash-Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review 
for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, 
consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash-deposit 
rates for the reviewed company will be the rate shown above; (2) for 
previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the 
cash-deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate 
published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm 
covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair-
value (LTFV) investigation but the manufacturer is, the cash-deposit 
rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the 
manufacturer of the merchandise; (4) the cash-deposit rate for all 
other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 5.19 percent, the 
``All Others'' rate from the amended final determination of the LTFV 
investigation published on September 15, 1998. See Notice of Amendment 
of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping 
Duty Order: Stainless Steel Wire Rod From Korea, 63 FR 49331 (September 
15, 1998).
    These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication 
of the final results of the next administrative review.
    This notice serves as a reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding 
the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the 
relevant entries during these review periods. Failure to comply with 
this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of the 
return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial 
protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the 
regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
    We are issuing and publishing these final results of review in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: February 1, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.

Appendix

Comments and Responses

1. Offsetting of Negative Margins
2. Model Match
3. Inland-Freight Expenses
4. Affiliated-Party Inputs
5. General and Administrative Expenses
[FR Doc. E7-2227 Filed 2-9-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S