Stainless Steel Wire Rod from the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 6528-6530 [E7-2227]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
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
https://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 https://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
