Preliminary Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from the People's Republic of China, 32072-32074 [E7-11206]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
32072
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 111 / Monday, June 11, 2007 / Notices
through March 22, 2007, the Department
verified the Section A and quantity and
value questionnaire response of Huanri
in Panjia Village, Laizhou, PRC. On May
4, 2007, the Department issued the
verification report for Huanri. See
Memorandum to the File through
Wendy J. Frankel, Office Director, and
Robert Bolling, Program Manager, From
Eugene Degnan, Senior International
Trade Analyst, and Paul Stolz,
International Trade Compliance
Analyst, entitled, ‘‘Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review of Brake Rotors
from the People’s Republic of China:
Verification of Section A and Quantity
and Value Response of Shandong
Huanri Group Co., Ltd., Laizhou Huanri
Automobile Parts Co., Ltd., and
Shandong Huanri Group General Co.’’
On May 10, 2007, the Department set
the deadlines for submission of case and
rebuttal briefs as May 21, 2007, and May
29, 2007, respectively. On May 10, 2007,
the Coalition for the Preservation of
American Brake Drum and Rotor
Aftermarket Manufacturers (‘‘the
Petitioner’’), requested a 5-day extension
of time to submit rebuttal briefs. On
May 15, 2007, the Department granted
the Petitioner’s request and extended
the deadline for submission of rebuttal
briefs to June 5, 2007, for all parties.
rmajette on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Extension of Time Limit of Final
Results
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act
of 1930 (the ‘‘Act’’) requires the
Department to issue the final results
within 120 days after the date on which
the preliminary results are published.
However, if it is not practicable to
complete this review within the time
period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act
allows the Department to extend the
deadline for the final results to a
maximum of 180 days after the
publication date of the preliminary
results.
The Department determines that
completion of the final results of these
reviews within the statutory time period
is not practicable. The Department
requires additional time to analyze
comments regarding the 19 respondents,
including 15 separate–rate respondents
and three mandatory respondents in the
administrative review and one
respondent in the new shipper review.
Therefore, given the number and
complexity of issues and companies in
this case, and in accordance with
sections 751(a)(3)(A) and
751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act, we are
extending the time period for issuing
the final results of review by 46 days to
166 days after the publication of the
preliminary results. Therefore, the final
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:15 Mar 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
results will be due no later than July 31,
2007.
This notice is published pursuant to
sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i) of the
Act.
Dated: June 5, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–11251 Filed 6–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–865]
Preliminary Rescission of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review: Certain
Hot–Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products
from the People’s Republic of China
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 11, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Catherine Bertrand or Christopher Riker,
Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3207
and (202) 482–3441, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On November 1, 2006, the Department
of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) published
a notice of opportunity to request an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain hot–
rolled carbon steel flat products from
the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’)
for the period of review (‘‘POR’’)
November 1, 2005, through October 31,
2006. See Antidumping or
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
to Request Administrative Review, 71
FR 64240 (November 1, 2006). On
November 30, 2006, United States Steel
(‘‘Petitioner’’), a domestic producer of
certain hot–rolled carbon steel flat
products, requested that the Department
conduct an administrative review of
Anshan Iron & Steel Group Corp.,
Angang Group International Trade
Corporation, Angang New Iron and Steel
Co., Angang New Steel Co., Ltd., and
Angang Group Hong Kong Co., Ltd.
(collectively ‘‘Angang’’) and Baosteel
Group Corporation, Shanghai Baosteel
International Economic & Trading Co.,
Ltd., and Baoshan Iron and Steel Co.,
Ltd. (collectively ‘‘Baosteel’’). On
December 27, 2006, the Department
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
published a notice of initiation of an
antidumping duty administrative review
on certain hot–rolled carbon steel flat
products from the PRC. See Initiation of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews and Request for
Revocation in Part (‘‘Notice of
Initiation’’), 71 FR 77720 (December 27,
2006).
On January 4, 2007, the Department
issued a quantity and value
questionnaire to Angang and Baosteel.
On January 18, 2007, Angang submitted
a letter stating that Angang had no sales,
shipments, or entries of subject
merchandise to the United States during
the POR. Also on January 18, 2007,
Baosteel submitted a letter stating that it
had no sales of subject merchandise to
the United States during the POR.
On February 7, 2007, Petitioner
submitted information on the record of
this review, in the form of Port Import
Export Reporting Service (‘‘PIERS’’) data,
which is a subscription service based
upon shipping manifests, alleging that
there were entries made of subject
merchandise into the United States
during the POR by Angang and Baosteel.
On February 13, 2007, the Department
requested that Angang and Baosteel
provide comments on the PIERS data
placed on the record by Petitioner. Also,
on February 13, 2007, the Department
requested that Petitioner provide the
Harmonized Tariff Codes for the data it
provided from PIERS and explain how
the information it placed on the record
could be tied to actual entry
documentation from U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’). Baosteel
submitted comments on February 16,
2007, and on March 6, 2007, again
stating that it had no shipments, sales,
or entries of subject merchandise during
the POR to the United States, and
provided supporting sales
documentation for the entries listed in
the PIERS data to demonstrate that those
entries were not subject merchandise.
On February 20, 2007, Angang
responded to the Department’s February
13, 2007, questionnaire, and stated
again that it had no shipments, sales, or
entries of subject merchandise during
the POR, and alleged that the PIERS
data placed on the record by Petitioner
was not reflective of the actual material
that was shipped by Angang. Also, on
February 20, 2007, Petitioner submitted
a response to the Department’s February
13, 2007, questionnaire, and placed a
revised version of the PIERS data on the
record which contained the tariff code
numbers.
The Department conducted a CBP
data query for possible entries of subject
merchandise into the United States
during the POR by Angang and Baosteel.
E:\ERIC\11JNN1.SGM
11JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 111 / Monday, June 11, 2007 / Notices
rmajette on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
The data query response indicated that
there were no shipments by either
Angang or Baosteel during the POR.
On January 16, 2007, we sent
inquiries to CBP requesting notification
as to whether it had information
indicating that there were shipments of
subject merchandise into the United
States during the POR by Angang or
Baosteel. We received responses from
several CBP ports indicating that certain
shipments by Baosteel to the United
States during the POR may contain
subject merchandise. We requested all
of the documentation relating to these
shipments and placed the
documentation on the record. See
Memorandum to the File from Catherine
Bertrand dated April 11, 2007. On April
11, 2007, we sent Baosteel a
questionnaire regarding the entry
documentation, and requested that
Baosteel explain whether the entries
were subject merchandise. On May 2,
2007, Baosteel responded and
maintained that the entries in the entry
documentation were for cold–rolled
carbon steel which is outside the scope
of the antidumping duty order. See
Baosteel’s May 2, 2007, submission:
Response to April 11, 2007
Questionnaire. Petitioner did not
provide comments on Baosteel’s May 2,
2007, submission.
Scope of the Review
For purposes of this review, the
products covered are certain hot–rolled
carbon steel flat products of a
rectangular shape, of a width of 0.5 inch
or greater, neither clad, plated, nor
coated with metal and whether or not
painted, varnished, or coated with
plastics or other non–metallic
substances, in coils (whether or not in
successively superimposed layers),
regardless of thickness, and in straight
lengths of a thickness of less than 4.75
mm and of a width measuring at least
10 times the thickness. Universal mill
plate (i.e., flat–rolled products rolled on
four faces or in a closed box pass, of a
width exceeding 150 mm, but not
exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness
of not less than 4.0 mm, not in coils and
without patterns in relief) of a thickness
not less than 4.0 mm is not included
within the scope of this review.
Specifically included within the
scope of this review are vacuum
degassed, fully stabilized (commonly
referred to as interstitial–free (IF)) steels,
high strength low alloy (HSLA) steels,
and the substrate for motor lamination
steels. IF steels are recognized as low
carbon steels with micro–alloying levels
of elements such as titanium or niobium
(also commonly referred to as
columbium), or both, added to stabilize
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:15 Mar 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA
steels are recognized as steels with
micro–alloying levels of elements such
as chromium, copper, niobium,
vanadium, and molybdenum. The
substrate for motor lamination steels
contains micro–alloying levels of
elements such as silicon and aluminum.
Steel products to be included in the
scope of this review, regardless of
definitions in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS),
are products in which: i) iron
predominates, by weight, over each of
the other contained elements; ii) the
carbon content is 2 percent or less, by
weight; and iii) none of the elements
listed below exceeds the quantity, by
weight, respectively indicated:
1.80 percent of manganese, or
2.25 percent of silicon, or
1.00 percent of copper, or
0.50 percent of aluminum, or
1.25 percent of chromium, or
0.30 percent of cobalt, or
0.40 percent of lead, or
1.25 percent of nickel, or
0.30 percent of tungsten, or
0.10 percent of molybdenum, or
0.10 percent of niobium, or
0.15 percent of vanadium, or
0.15 percent of zirconium.
All products that meet the physical
and chemical description provided
above are within the scope of this
review unless otherwise excluded. The
following products, by way of example,
are outside or specifically excluded
from the scope of this review:
• Alloy hot–rolled steel products in
which at least one of the chemical
elements exceeds those listed above
(including, e.g., American Society
for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
specifications A543, A387, A514,
A517, A506).
• Society of Automotive Engineers
(SAE)/American Iron & Steel
Institute (AISI) grades of series 2300
and higher.
• Ball bearing steels, as defined in the
HTSUS.
• Tool steels, as defined in the
HTSUS.
• Silico–manganese (as defined in the
HTSUS) or silicon electrical steel
with a silicon level exceeding 2.25
percent.
• ASTM specifications A710 and
A736.
• USS abrasion–resistant steels (USS
AR 400, USS AR 500).
• All products (proprietary or
otherwise) based on an alloy ASTM
specification (sample specifications:
ASTM A506, A507).
• Non–rectangular shapes, not in
coils, which are the result of having
been processed by cutting or
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32073
stamping and which have assumed
the character of articles or products
classified outside chapter 72 of the
HTSUS.
The merchandise subject to this
review is classified in the HTSUS at
subheadings: 7208.10.15.00,
7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00,
7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00,
7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60,
7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60,
7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60,
7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60,
7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30,
7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15,
7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90,
7208.40.60.30, 7208.40.60.60,
7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00,
7208.90.00.00, 7211.14.00.90,
7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00,
7211.19.30.00, 7211.19.45.00,
7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30,
7211.19.75.60, and 7211.19.75.90.
Certain hot–rolled carbon steel flat
products covered by this review,
including: vacuum degassed fully
stabilized; high strength low alloy; and
the substrate for motor lamination steel
may also enter under the following tariff
numbers: 7225.11.00.00, 7225.19.00.00,
7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00,
7225.40.70.00, 7225.99.00.90,
7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30,
7226.11.90.60, 7226.19.10.00,
7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00,
7226.91.70.00, 7226.91.80.00, and
7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise
may also enter under 7210.70.30.00,
7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30,
7212.40.10.00, 7212.40.50.00, and
7212.50.00.00. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and U.S. Customs
purposes, the written description of the
merchandise under review is
dispositive.
Period of Review
The POR is November 1, 2005,
through October 31, 2006.
Preliminary Rescission of Review
The Department has analyzed all of
the information on the record regarding
alleged U.S. entries of subject
merchandise during the POR by Angang
and Baosteel. As noted above, Petitioner
placed information on the record from
PIERS that indicated there may have
been U.S. entries of subject merchandise
during the POR from Angang and
Baosteel.
The legal description of what enters
the Unites States is determined by CBP
entry documentation. Where a conflict
exists between PIERS and CBP
information, the Department weighs the
CBP data more heavily because it
contains the actual entry documentation
E:\ERIC\11JNN1.SGM
11JNN1
rmajette on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
32074
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 111 / Monday, June 11, 2007 / Notices
for the shipment, including the Customs
7501 form, invoice, and bill of lading.
The CBP data regarding Baosteel
indicates that the merchandise is not
subject to the order covering this
review. Additionally, the supporting
documents placed on the record by
Baosteel concerning these entries
indicate that the merchandise at issue
was cold–rolled steel, which is not
subject to the scope of the order. CBP
did not indicate that there were any
shipments from Angang of subject
merchandise into the United States
during the POR. Therefore, the
Department preliminarily finds that the
merchandise from the entry
documentation is not subject to the
scope of the antidumping duty order on
hot–rolled carbon steel flat product from
the PRC.
Because there is no information on
the record which indicates that either
Angang or Baosteel made sales,
shipments, or entries to the United
States of subject merchandise during the
POR, and because Angang and Baosteel
are the only companies subject to this
administrative review, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and
consistent with our practice, we are
preliminarily rescinding this review of
the antidumping duty order on certain
hot–rolled carbon steel flat products
from the PRC for the period of
November 1, 2005, to October 31, 2006.
If the rescission is confirmed in our
final results, the cash deposit rate for
Angang and Baosteel will continue to be
the rate established in the most recently
completed segment of this proceeding.
Interested parties may submit
comments for consideration in the
Department’s final results not later than
30 days after publication of this notice.
Responses to those comments may be
submitted not later than 10 days
following submission of the comments.
All written comments must be
submitted in accordance with 19 CFR
351.303, and must be served on
interested parties on the Department’s
service list in accordance with 19 CFR
351.303(f). The Department will issue
the final results of this administrative
review, which will include the results of
its analysis of issues raised in any such
comments, within 120 days of
publication of the preliminary results,
and will publish these results in the
Federal Register.
This notice is published in
accordance with sections 751 and
777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:15 Mar 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
Dated: May 31, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–11206 Filed 6–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–580–829]
Stainless Steel Wire Rod from the
Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to a request by
Carpenter Technology Corporation, a
domestic interested party, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on stainless
steel wire rod (SSWR) from the Republic
of Korea (Korea). This review covers two
producers/exporters of the subject
merchandise that have been collapsed
for purposes of the Department’s
analysis, consistent with prior
determinations in this proceeding. The
period of review is September 1, 2005,
through August 31, 2006.
The Department has preliminarily
determined that the companies subject
to this review made U.S. sales of SSWR
at prices less than normal value. If these
preliminary results are adopted in our
final results of administrative review,
we will instruct U.S. Customs and
Border Protection to assess antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries.
Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results of
review. We will issue the final results of
review no later than 120 days from the
date of publication of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 11, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Schauer, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 5, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202)
482–0410.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On September 15, 1998, the
Department published in the Federal
Register the antidumping duty order on
SSWR from Korea. See Notice of
Amendment of Final Determination of
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Antidumping Duty Order: Stainless
Steel Wire Rod From Korea, 63 FR
49331 (September 15, 1998) (Amended
Final Determination), and Stainless
Steel Wire Rod From Korea:
Amendment of Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value Pursuant
to Court Decision, 66 FR 41550 (August
8, 2001) (Amended Final Determination
Pursuant to Court Decision). In
September 2006, the Department
published in the Federal Register a
notice of ‘‘Opportunity to Request
Administrative Review’’ of the
antidumping duty order on SSWR from
Korea. See Antidumping or
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
to Request Administrative Review, 71
FR 52061 (September 1, 2006).
On September 29, 2006, in accordance
with 19 CFR § 351.213(b)(1), Carpenter
Technology Corporation requested that
the Department conduct a review of
Changwon Specialty Steel Co., Ltd.
(Changwon), and Dongbang Special
Steel Co., Ltd. (Dongbang), and any of
their affiliates (collectively, the
respondent1) for the period from
September 1, 2005, through August 31,
2006.
In October 2006, the Department
initiated an administrative review of the
respondent. See Initiation of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 71 FR 63752
(October 31, 2006). On November 2,
2006, the Department issued its
antidumping questionnaire to the
respondent. The respondent did not
respond to the Department’s
questionnaire. On December 15, 2006,
we sent a letter to the respondent
requesting that it respond to our
questionnaire. The respondent
submitted no response to this letter.
The Department is conducting this
administrative review in accordance
with section 751 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act). The period
of review is September 1, 2005, through
August 31, 2006.
Scope of the 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
1 We collapsed Changwon and Dongbang in the
less-than-fair-value investigation and in every
subsequent review of this order because we found
‘‘a close supplier relationship between the entities.’’
See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value: Stainless Steel Wire Rod
From Korea, 63 FR 40404, 40405 (July 29, 1998).
E:\ERIC\11JNN1.SGM
11JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 111 (Monday, June 11, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32072-32074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-11206]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-865]
Preliminary Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review:
Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from the People's
Republic of China
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 11, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Bertrand or Christopher
Riker, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3207 and (202) 482-3441,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 1, 2006, the Department of Commerce (``Department'')
published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review
of the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat
products from the People's Republic of China (``PRC'') for the period
of review (``POR'') November 1, 2005, through October 31, 2006. See
Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 71 FR
64240 (November 1, 2006). On November 30, 2006, United States Steel
(``Petitioner''), a domestic producer of certain hot-rolled carbon
steel flat products, requested that the Department conduct an
administrative review of Anshan Iron & Steel Group Corp., Angang Group
International Trade Corporation, Angang New Iron and Steel Co., Angang
New Steel Co., Ltd., and Angang Group Hong Kong Co., Ltd. (collectively
``Angang'') and Baosteel Group Corporation, Shanghai Baosteel
International Economic & Trading Co., Ltd., and Baoshan Iron and Steel
Co., Ltd. (collectively ``Baosteel''). On December 27, 2006, the
Department published a notice of initiation of an antidumping duty
administrative review on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products
from the PRC. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part (``Notice of
Initiation''), 71 FR 77720 (December 27, 2006).
On January 4, 2007, the Department issued a quantity and value
questionnaire to Angang and Baosteel. On January 18, 2007, Angang
submitted a letter stating that Angang had no sales, shipments, or
entries of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR.
Also on January 18, 2007, Baosteel submitted a letter stating that it
had no sales of subject merchandise to the United States during the
POR.
On February 7, 2007, Petitioner submitted information on the record
of this review, in the form of Port Import Export Reporting Service
(``PIERS'') data, which is a subscription service based upon shipping
manifests, alleging that there were entries made of subject merchandise
into the United States during the POR by Angang and Baosteel. On
February 13, 2007, the Department requested that Angang and Baosteel
provide comments on the PIERS data placed on the record by Petitioner.
Also, on February 13, 2007, the Department requested that Petitioner
provide the Harmonized Tariff Codes for the data it provided from PIERS
and explain how the information it placed on the record could be tied
to actual entry documentation from U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(``CBP''). Baosteel submitted comments on February 16, 2007, and on
March 6, 2007, again stating that it had no shipments, sales, or
entries of subject merchandise during the POR to the United States, and
provided supporting sales documentation for the entries listed in the
PIERS data to demonstrate that those entries were not subject
merchandise. On February 20, 2007, Angang responded to the Department's
February 13, 2007, questionnaire, and stated again that it had no
shipments, sales, or entries of subject merchandise during the POR, and
alleged that the PIERS data placed on the record by Petitioner was not
reflective of the actual material that was shipped by Angang. Also, on
February 20, 2007, Petitioner submitted a response to the Department's
February 13, 2007, questionnaire, and placed a revised version of the
PIERS data on the record which contained the tariff code numbers.
The Department conducted a CBP data query for possible entries of
subject merchandise into the United States during the POR by Angang and
Baosteel.
[[Page 32073]]
The data query response indicated that there were no shipments by
either Angang or Baosteel during the POR.
On January 16, 2007, we sent inquiries to CBP requesting
notification as to whether it had information indicating that there
were shipments of subject merchandise into the United States during the
POR by Angang or Baosteel. We received responses from several CBP ports
indicating that certain shipments by Baosteel to the United States
during the POR may contain subject merchandise. We requested all of the
documentation relating to these shipments and placed the documentation
on the record. See Memorandum to the File from Catherine Bertrand dated
April 11, 2007. On April 11, 2007, we sent Baosteel a questionnaire
regarding the entry documentation, and requested that Baosteel explain
whether the entries were subject merchandise. On May 2, 2007, Baosteel
responded and maintained that the entries in the entry documentation
were for cold-rolled carbon steel which is outside the scope of the
antidumping duty order. See Baosteel's May 2, 2007, submission:
Response to April 11, 2007 Questionnaire. Petitioner did not provide
comments on Baosteel's May 2, 2007, submission.
Scope of the Review
For purposes of this review, the products covered are certain hot-
rolled carbon steel flat products of a rectangular shape, of a width of
0.5 inch or greater, neither clad, plated, nor coated with metal and
whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other
non-metallic substances, in coils (whether or not in successively
superimposed layers), regardless of thickness, and in straight lengths
of a thickness of less than 4.75 mm and of a width measuring at least
10 times the thickness. Universal mill plate (i.e., flat-rolled
products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width
exceeding 150 mm, but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness of not
less than 4.0 mm, not in coils and without patterns in relief) of a
thickness not less than 4.0 mm is not included within the scope of this
review.
Specifically included within the scope of this review are vacuum
degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to as interstitial-free
(IF)) steels, high strength low alloy (HSLA) steels, and the substrate
for motor lamination steels. IF steels are recognized as low carbon
steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium or
niobium (also commonly referred to as columbium), or both, added to
stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as
steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper,
niobium, vanadium, and molybdenum. The substrate for motor lamination
steels contains micro-alloying levels of elements such as silicon and
aluminum.
Steel products to be included in the scope of this review,
regardless of definitions in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS), are products in which: i) iron predominates, by
weight, over each of the other contained elements; ii) the carbon
content is 2 percent or less, by weight; and iii) none of the elements
listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:
1.80 percent of manganese, or
2.25 percent of silicon, or
1.00 percent of copper, or
0.50 percent of aluminum, or
1.25 percent of chromium, or
0.30 percent of cobalt, or
0.40 percent of lead, or
1.25 percent of nickel, or
0.30 percent of tungsten, or
0.10 percent of molybdenum, or
0.10 percent of niobium, or
0.15 percent of vanadium, or
0.15 percent of zirconium.
All products that meet the physical and chemical description
provided above are within the scope of this review unless otherwise
excluded. The following products, by way of example, are outside or
specifically excluded from the scope of this review:
Alloy hot-rolled steel products in which at least one of
the chemical elements exceeds those listed above (including, e.g.,
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) specifications A543,
A387, A514, A517, A506).
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)/American Iron &
Steel Institute (AISI) grades of series 2300 and higher.
Ball bearing steels, as defined in the HTSUS.
Tool steels, as defined in the HTSUS.
Silico-manganese (as defined in the HTSUS) or silicon
electrical steel with a silicon level exceeding 2.25 percent.
ASTM specifications A710 and A736.
USS abrasion-resistant steels (USS AR 400, USS AR 500).
All products (proprietary or otherwise) based on an alloy
ASTM specification (sample specifications: ASTM A506, A507).
Non-rectangular shapes, not in coils, which are the result
of having been processed by cutting or stamping and which have assumed
the character of articles or products classified outside chapter 72 of
the HTSUS.
The merchandise subject to this review is classified in the HTSUS
at subheadings: 7208.10.15.00, 7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00,
7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00, 7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60,
7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60, 7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60,
7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60, 7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30,
7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15, 7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90,
7208.40.60.30, 7208.40.60.60, 7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00,
7208.90.00.00, 7211.14.00.90, 7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00,
7211.19.30.00, 7211.19.45.00, 7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30,
7211.19.75.60, and 7211.19.75.90. Certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat
products covered by this review, including: vacuum degassed fully
stabilized; high strength low alloy; and the substrate for motor
lamination steel may also enter under the following tariff numbers:
7225.11.00.00, 7225.19.00.00, 7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00,
7225.40.70.00, 7225.99.00.90, 7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30,
7226.11.90.60, 7226.19.10.00, 7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00,
7226.91.70.00, 7226.91.80.00, and 7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise
may also enter under 7210.70.30.00, 7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30,
7212.40.10.00, 7212.40.50.00, and 7212.50.00.00. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience and U.S. Customs purposes, the
written description of the merchandise under review is dispositive.
Period of Review
The POR is November 1, 2005, through October 31, 2006.
Preliminary Rescission of Review
The Department has analyzed all of the information on the record
regarding alleged U.S. entries of subject merchandise during the POR by
Angang and Baosteel. As noted above, Petitioner placed information on
the record from PIERS that indicated there may have been U.S. entries
of subject merchandise during the POR from Angang and Baosteel.
The legal description of what enters the Unites States is
determined by CBP entry documentation. Where a conflict exists between
PIERS and CBP information, the Department weighs the CBP data more
heavily because it contains the actual entry documentation
[[Page 32074]]
for the shipment, including the Customs 7501 form, invoice, and bill of
lading. The CBP data regarding Baosteel indicates that the merchandise
is not subject to the order covering this review. Additionally, the
supporting documents placed on the record by Baosteel concerning these
entries indicate that the merchandise at issue was cold-rolled steel,
which is not subject to the scope of the order. CBP did not indicate
that there were any shipments from Angang of subject merchandise into
the United States during the POR. Therefore, the Department
preliminarily finds that the merchandise from the entry documentation
is not subject to the scope of the antidumping duty order on hot-rolled
carbon steel flat product from the PRC.
Because there is no information on the record which indicates that
either Angang or Baosteel made sales, shipments, or entries to the
United States of subject merchandise during the POR, and because Angang
and Baosteel are the only companies subject to this administrative
review, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and consistent with our
practice, we are preliminarily rescinding this review of the
antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products
from the PRC for the period of November 1, 2005, to October 31, 2006.
If the rescission is confirmed in our final results, the cash deposit
rate for Angang and Baosteel will continue to be the rate established
in the most recently completed segment of this proceeding.
Interested parties may submit comments for consideration in the
Department's final results not later than 30 days after publication of
this notice. Responses to those comments may be submitted not later
than 10 days following submission of the comments. All written comments
must be submitted in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303, and must be served
on interested parties on the Department's service list in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.303(f). The Department will issue the final results of
this administrative review, which will include the results of its
analysis of issues raised in any such comments, within 120 days of
publication of the preliminary results, and will publish these results
in the Federal Register.
This notice is published in accordance with sections 751 and
777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR
351.213(d)(4).
Dated: May 31, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-11206 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
