Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 9922-9924 [E7-3892]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
9922
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 6, 2007 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Final Results of Review
[A–274–804]
Pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act,
we determine that revocation of the
antidumping duty order on CPF from
Thailand would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of dumping
at the following weighted–average
margins:
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and
electronic version of the Final Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from
Trinidad and Tobago: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
International Trade Administration
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 7, 2006, the
Weighted
Manufacturers/Exporters/
Average
Department of Commerce (the
Producers
Margin
Department) published the preliminary
(percent)
results of the antidumping (AD)
administrative review on carbon and
Siam Agro Industry Pineapple
and Others Co., Ltd. (SAICO)
51.16 alloy steel wire rod (wire rod) from
Trinidad and Tobago. The period of
Malee Sampran Factory Public
Co., Ltd. (Malee) .....................
41.74 review (POR) is October 1, 2004,
The Thai Pineapple Public Co.,
through September 30, 2005. See
Ltd.(TIPCO) .............................
Revoked 1 Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from
Dole Food Company, Inc., Dole
Trinidad and Tobago: Preliminary
Packaged Foods Company,
Results of Antidumping Duty
and Dole Thailand, Ltd. (collectively, Dole) .........................
Revoked 2 Administrative Review, 71 FR 65077
Siam Food Products, Ltd. (SFP)
Revoked 3 (November 7, 2006) (Preliminary
Results). This review covers Mittal Steel
Kuibiri Fruit Canning Company,
Ltd. (KFC) ...............................
Revoked 4 Point Lisas Limited (MSPL),
All Others ....................................
24.64 manufacturer of the subject
merchandise, and its affiliates Mittal
1 Notice of Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review and Final Deter- Steel North America Inc. (MSNA) and
mination To Revoke Order in Part: Canned Mittal Walker Wire Inc. (collectively,
Pineapple Fruit from Thailand, 69 FR 50164 Mittal). Neither the petitioners nor the
(August 13, 2004).
respondent commented on the
2 Id.
preliminary results.
3 See Final Results of Antidumping Duty AdThe Department has made some
ministrative Review, Rescission of Administrative Review in Part, and Final Determination to minor corrections to the margin program
Revoke Order in Part: Canned Pineapple Fruit used for the preliminary results. See
from Thailand, 67 FR 76719 (August 13,
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
2004).
4 See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping
section below. Although we have made
Duty Administrative Review and Final Deter- certain changes since the preliminary
mination To Revoke Order in Part: Canned results, these final results do not differ
Pineapple Fruit from Thailand, 69 FR 50164
from the preliminary results. The final
(August 13, 2004).
results are listed below in the Final
This notice serves as the only
Results of Review section.
reminder to parties subject to
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 6, 2007.
administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
of their responsibility concerning the
Stephanie Moore or Dennis McClure,
disposition of proprietary information
AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import
disclosed under APO in accordance
Administration, International Trade
with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely
Administration, U.S. Department of
notification of return/ destruction of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
APO materials or conversion to judicial
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
protective order is hereby requested.
telephone: (202) 482–3692 or (202) 482–
Failure to comply with the regulations
5973, respectively.
and the terms of an APO is a violation
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing the
Background
final results of this full sunset review in
On November 7, 2006, the Department
accordance with sections 751(c), 752,
published the preliminary results of the
and 777(1)(i) of the Act.
administrative review of the AD order
Dated: February 27, 2007.
on wire rod from Trinidad and Tobago.
David M. Spooner,
See Preliminary Results, 71 FR 65077.
Assistant Secretary for Import
This review covers imports of wire rod
Administration.
from Mittal during the POR, October 1,
[FR Doc. E7–3891 Filed 3–5–07; 8:45 am]
2004, through September 30, 2005. We
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
invited interested parties to comment on
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:10 Mar 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the Preliminary Results. As noted above,
the Department did not receive any
comments.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to this order
is certain hot–rolled products of carbon
steel and alloy steel, in coils, of
approximately round cross section, 5.00
mm or more, but less than 19.00 mm, in
solid cross-sectional diameter.
Specifically excluded are steel
products possessing the above–noted
physical characteristics and meeting the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) definitions for
(a) stainless steel; (b) tool steel; (c) high
nickel steel; (d) ball bearing steel; and
(e) concrete reinforcing bars and rods.
Also excluded are (f) free machining
steel products (i.e., products that
contain by weight one or more of the
following elements: 0.03 percent 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).
Also excluded from the scope are
1080 grade tire cord quality wire rod
and 1080 grade tire bead quality wire
rod. This grade 1080 tire cord quality
rod is defined as: (i) grade 1080 tire cord
quality wire rod measuring 5.0 mm or
more but not more than 6.0 mm in
cross-sectional diameter; (ii) with an
average partial decarburization of no
more than 70 microns in depth
(maximum individual 200 microns); (iii)
having no non–deformable inclusions
greater than 20 microns and no
deformable inclusions greater than 35
microns; (iv) having a carbon
segregation per heat average of 3.0 or
better using European Method NFA 04–
114; (v) having a surface quality with no
surface defects of a length greater than
0.15 mm; (vi) capable of being drawn to
a diameter of 0.30 mm or less with 3 or
fewer breaks per ton; and, (vii)
containing by weight the following
elements in the proportions shown: (1)
0.78 percent or more of carbon, (2) less
than 0.01 percent of aluminum, (3)
0.040 percent or less, in the aggregate,
of phosphorus and sulfur, (4) 0.006
percent or less of nitrogen, and (5) not
more than 0.15 percent, in the aggregate,
of copper, nickel and chromium.
This grade 1080 tire bead quality rod
is defined as: (i) grade 1080 tire bead
quality wire rod measuring 5.5 mm or
more but not more than 7.0 mm in
cross-sectional diameter; (ii) with an
average partial decarburization of no
more than 70 microns in depth
(maximum individual 200 microns); (iii)
having no non–deformable inclusions
greater than 20 microns and no
E:\FR\FM\06MRN1.SGM
06MRN1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 6, 2007 / Notices
deformable inclusions greater than 35
microns; (iv) having a carbon
segregation per heat average of 3.0 or
better using European Method NFA 04–
114; (v) having a surface quality with no
surface defects of a length greater than
0.2 mm; (vi) capable of being drawn to
a diameter of 0.78 mm or larger with 0.5
or fewer breaks per ton; and (vii)
containing by weight the following
elements in the proportions shown: (1)
0.78 percent or more of carbon, (2) less
than 0.01 percent of soluble aluminum,
(3) 0.040 percent or less, in the
aggregate, of phosphorus and sulfur, (4)
0.008 percent or less of nitrogen, and (5)
either not more than 0.15 percent, in the
aggregate, of copper, nickel and
chromium (if chromium is not
specified), or not more than 0.10 percent
in the aggregate of copper and nickel
and a chromium content of 0.24 to 0.30
percent (if chromium is specified).
For purposes of the grade 1080 tire
cord quality wire rod and the grade
1080 tire bead quality wire rod, an
inclusion will be considered to be
deformable if its ratio of length
(measured along the axis - that is, the
direction of rolling - of the rod) over
thickness (measured on the same
inclusion in a direction perpendicular
to the axis of the rod) is equal to or
greater than three. The size of an
inclusion for purposes of the 20 microns
and 35 microns limitations is the
measurement of the largest dimension
observed on a longitudinal section
measured in a direction perpendicular
to the axis of the rod. This measurement
methodology applies only to inclusions
on certain grade 1080 tire cord quality
wire rod and certain grade 1080 tire
bead quality wire rod that are entered,
or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after July 24, 2003.
See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire
Rod from Brazil, Canada, Indonesia,
Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago,
and Ukraine: Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Review, 68 FR 64079,
64081 (November 12, 2003).
The designation of the products as
‘‘tire cord quality’’ or ‘‘tire bead quality’’
indicates the acceptability of the
product for use in the production of tire
cord, tire bead, or wire for use in other
rubber reinforcement applications such
as hose wire. These quality designations
are presumed to indicate that these
products are being used in tire cord, tire
bead, and other rubber reinforcement
applications, and such merchandise
intended for the tire cord, tire bead, or
other rubber reinforcement applications
is not included in the scope. However,
should petitioners or other interested
parties provide a reasonable basis to
believe or suspect that there exists a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:10 Mar 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
pattern of importation of such products
for other than those applications, end–
use certification for the importation of
such products may be required. Under
such circumstances, only the importers
of record would normally be required to
certify the end use of the imported
merchandise.
All products meeting the physical
description of subject merchandise that
are not specifically excluded are
included in this scope.
The products under review are
currently classifiable under subheadings
7213.91.3010, 7213.91.3090,
7213.91.4510, 7213.91.4590,
7213.91.6010, 7213.91.6090,
7213.99.0031, 7213.99.0038,
7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0010,
7227.20.0020, 7227.20.0090,
7227.20.0095, 7227.90.6051,
7227.90.6053, 7227.90.6058, and
7227.90.6059 of the HTSUS. Although
the HTSUS subheadings are provided
for convenience and customs purposes,
the written description of the scope of
this order is dispositive.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Subsequent to the preliminary results,
we discovered some minor technical
problems with the computer program
we used to calculate the margin. We
found that several incorrect temporary
data sets were used in the preliminary
calculations. For the final results, we
changed the names of the following
temporary data sets in the margin
program to correspond to the names in
the comparison market program. In the
margin program, we changed the names
of the weighted–average cost data set,
the weighted–average comparison
market data set, and the weighted–
average comparison market profit and
selling expense data set. Correcting
these problems does not change the de
minimis margin from the preliminary
results. See November 7, 2006,
Memorandum to the File from Case
Analysts, ‘‘Telephone Call Regarding a
Technical Clarification of the
Preliminary Calculation,’’ a public
document on file in room B–099 of the
Central Records Unit (CRU). In addition,
in our preliminary calculation, when we
calculated the foreign unit price in
dollars, we incorrectly converted the
gross unit price variable, the credit
expense variable, and the indirect
selling expense variable, which were
already reported in U.S. dollars. We
have made the necessary corrections to
the margin program as noted in our
Final Calculation Memorandum, to the
file, dated March 7, 2007, the public
version of which is on file in the CRU.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9923
Final Results of Review
As noted above, there have been no
changes from the Preliminary Results,
except for the minor clarification of
temporary databases and the correction
of the currency conversion error.
Therefore, we are not attaching a
Decision Memorandum to this Federal
Register notice. For further details of the
issues addressed in this proceeding, see
the Preliminary Results.
As a result of this review, we find that
the following weighted–average
dumping margin exists for the period
October 1, 2004, through September 30,
2005:
Producer/Manufacturer
Mittal Steel Point Lisas
Limited .......................
Weighted–Average
Margin
0.06% (i.e., de
minimis)
Assessment Rates
The Department will determine, and
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties
on all appropriate entries, pursuant to
section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR
351.212(b). The Department calculated
importer–specific duty assessment rates
on the basis of the ratio of the total
antidumping duties calculated for the
examined sales to the total entered
value of the examined sales for that
importer. Where the assessment rate is
above de minimis, we will instruct CBP
to assess duties on all entries of subject
merchandise by that importer. The
Department intends to issue assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after the
date of publication of these final results
of review.
The Department clarified its
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This
clarification will apply to entries of
subject merchandise during the POR
produced by Mittal where Mittal did not
know its merchandise 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
intermediate company(ies) involved in
the transaction. For a full discussion of
this clarification, see Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements
will be effective upon publication of the
final results of this administrative
review for all shipments of wire rod
from Trinidad and Tobago, entered or
E:\FR\FM\06MRN1.SGM
06MRN1
9924
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 6, 2007 / Notices
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date of these final results, as provided
by section 751(a) of the Act: (1) For
Mittal no cash deposit will be required;
(2) for merchandise exported by
producers or exporters not covered in
this review, but covered in the less–
than-fair–value (LTFV) investigation,
the cash deposit rate will continue to be
the company–specific rate established
in the final determination; (3) if the
exporter is not a firm covered in this
review or the LTFV investigation, but
the producer is, the cash deposit rate
will be the rate established for the
producer of the subject merchandise for
the most recent period; and (4) if neither
the exporter nor the producer is a firm
covered in this review or the less–thanfair–value investigation, the cash
deposit rate will be 11.40 percent, the
‘‘All Others’’ rate established in the
investigation. See Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Carbon and Certain Alloy
Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and
Tobago, 67 FR 55788 (August 30, 2002).
These deposit requirements shall
remain in effect until publication of the
final results of the next administrative
review.
Reimbursement of Duties
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping and/or countervailing
duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this review
period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the
presumption that reimbursement of
antidumping and/or countervailing
duties occurred and the subsequent
increase in antidumping duties by the
amount of antidumping and/or
countervailing duties reimbursed.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
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(a)(3). 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 that is subject to
sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these
results and notice in accordance with
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:35 Mar 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act.
Dated: February 27, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–3892 Filed 3–5–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–580–825]
Oil Country Tubular Goods, Other
Than Drill Pipe, from Korea: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 31, 2006, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on oil
country tubular goods (‘‘OCTG’’), other
than drill pipe, from Korea for the
period (‘‘POR’’) August 1, 2004 through
July 31, 2005. See Oil Country Tubular
Goods, Other Than Drill Pipe, from
Korea: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 71 FR 51797 (August 31, 2006)
(Preliminary Results). This review
covers the following manufacturers/
exporters: Husteel Co., Ltd. (‘‘Husteel’’)
and SeAH Steel Corporation (‘‘SeAH’’).
Based on our analysis of the comments
received, we have made changes to the
Preliminary Results. For the final
dumping margins see the ‘‘Final Results
of Review’’ section below.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 6, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Scott Lindsay, Nicholas Czajkowski, or
Dara Iserson, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 6, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202)
482–0780, (202) 482–1395, or (202) 482–
4052, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On August 31, 2006, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
preliminary results of the administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on OCTG from Korea. See Preliminary
Results. Since the Preliminary Results,
the following events have occurred. We
received case briefs on October 2, 2006,
and rebuttal briefs on October 10, 2006.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
On October 24, 2006, the Department
sent a letter to the parties informing
them that Domestic Interested Parties,
IPSCO Tubulars, Inc., Lone Star Steel
Company, and Maverick Tube
Corporations (collectively, IPSCO
Tubulars) as well as the Petitioner, U.S.
Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel) were
being provided an opportunity to
submit a rebuttal brief solely in
reference to a new issue raised by
Respondents in their case brief. The
Department received these rebuttal
briefs from IPSCO Tubulars on October
30, 2006, and U.S. Steel Corporation on
November 1, 2006. On December 22,
2006, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), the Department extended the
final results by 60 days to February 27,
2006. See Notice of Extension of Time
Limit for Final Results of Administrative
Review: Oil Country Tubular Goods,
Other Than Drill Pipe, from Korea, 71
FR 76977 (December 22, 2006).
Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order
The products covered by this order
are OCTG, hollow steel products of
circular cross-section, including only oil
well casing and tubing, of iron (other
than cast iron) or steel (both carbon and
alloy), whether seamless or welded,
whether or not conforming to American
Petroleum Institute (‘‘API’’) or non–API
specifications, whether finished or
unfinished (including green tubes and
limited service OCTG products). This
scope does not cover casing or tubing
pipe containing 10.5 percent or more of
chromium, or drill pipe. The products
subject to this order are currently
classified in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’) under sub–headings:
7304.29.10.10, 7304.29.10.20,
7304.29.10.30, 7304.29.10.40,
7304.29.10.50, 7304.29.10.60,
7304.29.10.80, 7304.29.20.10,
7304.29.20.20, 7304.29.20.30,
7304.29.20.40, 7304.29.20.50,
7304.29.20.60, 7304.29.20.80,
7304.29.30.10, 7304.29.30.20,
7304.29.30.30, 7304.29.30.40,
7304.29.30.50, 7304.29.30.60,
7304.29.30.80, 7304.29.40.10,
7304.29.40.20, 7304.29.40.30,
7304.29.40.40, 7304.29.40.50,
7304.29.40.60, 7304.29.40.80,
7304.29.50.15, 7304.29.50.30,
7304.29.50.45, 7304.29.50.60,
7304.29.50.75, 7304.29.60.15,
7304.29.60.30, 7304.29.60.45,
7304.29.60.60, 7304.29.60.75,
7305.20.20.00, 7305.20.40.00,
7305.20.60.00, 7305.20.80.00,
7306.20.10.30, 7306.20.10.90,
7306.20.20.00, 7306.20.30.00,
7306.20.40.00, 7306.20.60.10,
E:\FR\FM\06MRN1.SGM
06MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 6, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9922-9924]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-3892]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-274-804]
Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 7, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary results of the antidumping (AD)
administrative review on carbon and alloy steel wire rod (wire rod)
from Trinidad and Tobago. The period of review (POR) is October 1,
2004, through September 30, 2005. See Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod
from Trinidad and Tobago: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 71 FR 65077 (November 7, 2006) (Preliminary
Results). This review covers Mittal Steel Point Lisas Limited (MSPL),
manufacturer of the subject merchandise, and its affiliates Mittal
Steel North America Inc. (MSNA) and Mittal Walker Wire Inc.
(collectively, Mittal). Neither the petitioners nor the respondent
commented on the preliminary results.
The Department has made some minor corrections to the margin
program used for the preliminary results. See Changes Since the
Preliminary Results section below. Although we have made certain
changes since the preliminary results, these final results do not
differ from the preliminary results. The final results are listed below
in the Final Results of Review section.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 6, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Moore or Dennis McClure, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
3692 or (202) 482-5973, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 7, 2006, the Department published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of the AD order on wire rod from
Trinidad and Tobago. See Preliminary Results, 71 FR 65077. This review
covers imports of wire rod from Mittal during the POR, October 1, 2004,
through September 30, 2005. We invited interested parties to comment on
the Preliminary Results. As noted above, the Department did not receive
any comments.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to this order is certain hot-rolled
products of carbon steel and alloy steel, in coils, of approximately
round cross section, 5.00 mm or more, but less than 19.00 mm, in solid
cross-sectional diameter.
Specifically excluded are steel products possessing the above-noted
physical characteristics and meeting the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States (HTSUS) definitions for (a) stainless steel; (b) tool
steel; (c) high nickel steel; (d) ball bearing steel; and (e) concrete
reinforcing bars and rods. Also excluded are (f) free machining steel
products (i.e., products that contain by weight one or more of the
following elements: 0.03 percent 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).
Also excluded from the scope are 1080 grade tire cord quality wire
rod and 1080 grade tire bead quality wire rod. This grade 1080 tire
cord quality rod is defined as: (i) grade 1080 tire cord quality wire
rod measuring 5.0 mm or more but not more than 6.0 mm in cross-
sectional diameter; (ii) with an average partial decarburization of no
more than 70 microns in depth (maximum individual 200 microns); (iii)
having no non-deformable inclusions greater than 20 microns and no
deformable inclusions greater than 35 microns; (iv) having a carbon
segregation per heat average of 3.0 or better using European Method NFA
04-114; (v) having a surface quality with no surface defects of a
length greater than 0.15 mm; (vi) capable of being drawn to a diameter
of 0.30 mm or less with 3 or fewer breaks per ton; and, (vii)
containing by weight the following elements in the proportions shown:
(1) 0.78 percent or more of carbon, (2) less than 0.01 percent of
aluminum, (3) 0.040 percent or less, in the aggregate, of phosphorus
and sulfur, (4) 0.006 percent or less of nitrogen, and (5) not more
than 0.15 percent, in the aggregate, of copper, nickel and chromium.
This grade 1080 tire bead quality rod is defined as: (i) grade 1080
tire bead quality wire rod measuring 5.5 mm or more but not more than
7.0 mm in cross-sectional diameter; (ii) with an average partial
decarburization of no more than 70 microns in depth (maximum individual
200 microns); (iii) having no non-deformable inclusions greater than 20
microns and no
[[Page 9923]]
deformable inclusions greater than 35 microns; (iv) having a carbon
segregation per heat average of 3.0 or better using European Method NFA
04-114; (v) having a surface quality with no surface defects of a
length greater than 0.2 mm; (vi) capable of being drawn to a diameter
of 0.78 mm or larger with 0.5 or fewer breaks per ton; and (vii)
containing by weight the following elements in the proportions shown:
(1) 0.78 percent or more of carbon, (2) less than 0.01 percent of
soluble aluminum, (3) 0.040 percent or less, in the aggregate, of
phosphorus and sulfur, (4) 0.008 percent or less of nitrogen, and (5)
either not more than 0.15 percent, in the aggregate, of copper, nickel
and chromium (if chromium is not specified), or not more than 0.10
percent in the aggregate of copper and nickel and a chromium content of
0.24 to 0.30 percent (if chromium is specified).
For purposes of the grade 1080 tire cord quality wire rod and the
grade 1080 tire bead quality wire rod, an inclusion will be considered
to be deformable if its ratio of length (measured along the axis - that
is, the direction of rolling - of the rod) over thickness (measured on
the same inclusion in a direction perpendicular to the axis of the rod)
is equal to or greater than three. The size of an inclusion for
purposes of the 20 microns and 35 microns limitations is the
measurement of the largest dimension observed on a longitudinal section
measured in a direction perpendicular to the axis of the rod. This
measurement methodology applies only to inclusions on certain grade
1080 tire cord quality wire rod and certain grade 1080 tire bead
quality wire rod that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after July 24, 2003. See Carbon and Certain Alloy
Steel Wire Rod from Brazil, Canada, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova,
Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine: Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Review, 68 FR 64079, 64081 (November 12, 2003).
The designation of the products as ``tire cord quality'' or ``tire
bead quality'' indicates the acceptability of the product for use in
the production of tire cord, tire bead, or wire for use in other rubber
reinforcement applications such as hose wire. These quality
designations are presumed to indicate that these products are being
used in tire cord, tire bead, and other rubber reinforcement
applications, and such merchandise intended for the tire cord, tire
bead, or other rubber reinforcement applications is not included in the
scope. However, should petitioners or other interested parties provide
a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that there exists a pattern of
importation of such products for other than those applications, end-use
certification for the importation of such products may be required.
Under such circumstances, only the importers of record would normally
be required to certify the end use of the imported merchandise.
All products meeting the physical description of subject
merchandise that are not specifically excluded are included in this
scope.
The products under review are currently classifiable under
subheadings 7213.91.3010, 7213.91.3090, 7213.91.4510, 7213.91.4590,
7213.91.6010, 7213.91.6090, 7213.99.0031, 7213.99.0038, 7213.99.0090,
7227.20.0010, 7227.20.0020, 7227.20.0090, 7227.20.0095, 7227.90.6051,
7227.90.6053, 7227.90.6058, and 7227.90.6059 of the HTSUS. Although the
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes,
the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Subsequent to the preliminary results, we discovered some minor
technical problems with the computer program we used to calculate the
margin. We found that several incorrect temporary data sets were used
in the preliminary calculations. For the final results, we changed the
names of the following temporary data sets in the margin program to
correspond to the names in the comparison market program. In the margin
program, we changed the names of the weighted-average cost data set,
the weighted-average comparison market data set, and the weighted-
average comparison market profit and selling expense data set.
Correcting these problems does not change the de minimis margin from
the preliminary results. See November 7, 2006, Memorandum to the File
from Case Analysts, ``Telephone Call Regarding a Technical
Clarification of the Preliminary Calculation,'' a public document on
file in room B-099 of the Central Records Unit (CRU). In addition, in
our preliminary calculation, when we calculated the foreign unit price
in dollars, we incorrectly converted the gross unit price variable, the
credit expense variable, and the indirect selling expense variable,
which were already reported in U.S. dollars. We have made the necessary
corrections to the margin program as noted in our Final Calculation
Memorandum, to the file, dated March 7, 2007, the public version of
which is on file in the CRU.
Final Results of Review
As noted above, there have been no changes from the Preliminary
Results, except for the minor clarification of temporary databases and
the correction of the currency conversion error. Therefore, we are not
attaching a Decision Memorandum to this Federal Register notice. For
further details of the issues addressed in this proceeding, see the
Preliminary Results.
As a result of this review, we find that the following weighted-
average dumping margin exists for the period October 1, 2004, through
September 30, 2005:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-Average
Producer/Manufacturer Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mittal Steel Point Lisas Limited.................... 0.06[percnt]
(i.e., de minimis)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries, pursuant to section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department calculated
importer-specific duty assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of
the total antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the
total entered value of the examined sales for that importer. Where the
assessment rate is above de minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess
duties on all entries of subject merchandise by that importer. The
Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days
after the date of publication of these final results of review.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification will apply to entries of
subject merchandise during the POR produced by Mittal where Mittal did
not know its merchandise 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 intermediate
company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full discussion of this
clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all
shipments of wire rod from Trinidad and Tobago, entered or
[[Page 9924]]
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication
date of these final results, as provided by section 751(a) of the Act:
(1) For Mittal no cash deposit will be required; (2) for merchandise
exported by producers or exporters not covered in this review, but
covered in the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate established
in the final determination; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered
in this review or the LTFV investigation, but the producer is, the cash
deposit rate will be the rate established for the producer of the
subject merchandise for the most recent period; and (4) if neither the
exporter nor the producer is a firm covered in this review or the less-
than-fair-value investigation, the cash deposit rate will be 11.40
percent, the ``All Others'' rate established in the investigation. See
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Carbon
and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago, 67 FR 55788
(August 30, 2002). These deposit requirements shall remain in effect
until publication of the final results of the next administrative
review.
Reimbursement of Duties
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties
prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period.
Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the presumption
that reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred
and the subsequent increase in antidumping duties by the amount of
antidumping and/or countervailing duties reimbursed.
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(a)(3). 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 that is
subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: February 27, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-3892 Filed 3-5-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
