Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Canada: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77005-77007 [E8-30090]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 244 / Thursday, December 18, 2008 / Notices
in this administrative review. See the
July 29, 2008, Memorandum from The
Team to James Maeder, Office Director,
titled ‘‘2007 Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review of Brake Rotors
from the People’s Republic of China:
Selection of Respondents for Individual
Review.’’
In July and August 2008, several
companies, including Longkou
Haimeng, timely withdrew their
requests for review. We partially
rescinded the review with respect to
these companies. See Brake Rotors From
the People’s Republic of China: Notice
of Partial Rescission of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR
53193 (September 15, 2008).
Extension of Time Limit of
Preliminary Results
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires
the Department to make a preliminary
determination in an administrative
review within 245 days after the last day
of the anniversary month of an order or
finding for which a review is requested.
If it is not practicable to complete the
review within this time period, section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the
Department to extend this deadline to a
maximum of 365 days. The deadline for
the preliminary results of this review is
currently December 31, 2008.
In this review, the interested parties
have not submitted publicly available
information (PAI) for consideration in
valuing the factors of production in the
preliminary results. Moreover, we have
requested and received documentation
from U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) for certain entries
made by exporter/producer
combinations which are also included
in this review to determine whether
those entries are non–subject
merchandise. Therefore, the Department
requires additional time to obtain
updated PAI and analyze the entry data
from CBP. Thus, it is not practicable to
complete this review within the original
time limit. Therefore, the Department is
partially extending the time limit for
completion of the preliminary results
from 245 days to 306 days, in
accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) the
Act. The preliminary results are now
due no later than March 2, 2009. The
final results continue to be due 120 days
after the publication of the preliminary
results.
We are issuing and publishing this
notice in accordance with section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.213(h)(2).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:51 Dec 17, 2008
Jkt 217001
77005
Dated: December 11, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. E8–30111 Filed 12–17–08; 8:45 am]
and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From
Canada: Extension of Time Limit for
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 73 FR 63134
(October 23, 2008).
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
Period of Review
The period of review is October 1,
2006 through September 30, 2007.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A–122–840)
Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire
Rod from Canada: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 10, 2008, the
Department of Commerce (Department)
published the preliminary results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on carbon and
certain alloy steel wire rod from Canada.
See Notice of Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel
Wire Rod From Canada, 73 FR 39646
(July 10, 2008) (Preliminary Results).
This review covers the period October 1,
2006, through September 30, 2007, for
Ivaco Rolling Mills 2004 L.P. and Sivaco
Ontario, a division of Sivaco Wire
Group 2004 L.P. (referred to collectively
as Ivaco).
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 18, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Bezirganian or Robert James, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 7, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–1131 or (202) 482–
0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 10, 2008, the Department
published the preliminary results of this
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on carbon and
certain alloy steel wire rod from Canada.
See Preliminary Results, 73 FR 39646.
Ivaco submitted its case brief on August
11, 2008, and petitioners, ISG
Georgetown Inc., Gerdau Ameristeel
U.S. Inc., Nucor Steel Connecticut Inc.,
Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc.,
and Rocky Mountain Steel Mills,
submitted their rebuttal brief on August
18, 2008. No hearing was requested. The
Department extended the deadline for
completion of the final results by 35
days, to December 12, 2008. See Carbon
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the 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. 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.
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
E:\FR\FM\18DEN1.SGM
18DEN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
77006
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 244 / Thursday, December 18, 2008 / Notices
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
0.2 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.
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:51 Dec 17, 2008
Jkt 217001
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
subject to this order are currently
classifiable under subheadings
7213.91.3011, 7213.91.3015,
7213.91.3092, 7213.91.4500,
7213.91.6000, 7213.99.0030,
7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0000,
7227.90.6010, and 7227.90.6080 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.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this
administrative review are addressed in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum
from Gary Taverman, Acting Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations,
dated December 11, 2008 (Decision
Memorandum), which is hereby
adopted by this notice. A list of the
issues parties have raised and to which
we have responded, all of which are in
the Decision Memorandum (and, for the
level of trade issue, in a separate
proprietary document referenced in the
Decision Memorandum), is attached to
this notice as an appendix. Parties can
find a discussion of all public issues
raised in this review and the
corresponding recommendations in this
public memorandum, which is on file in
the Central Records Unit in room 1117
of the main Department building. In
addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly via the Internet 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
Based on our analysis of the
comments received, we have not made
any changes to the calculations in our
preliminary results.
Final Results of Review
We determine the following
weighted–average percentage margin
exists for the period October 1, 2006,
through September 30, 2007:
Manufacturer/Exporter
Weighted Average
Margin
Ivaco Rolling Mills 2004
L.P. / Sivaco Ontario,
a division of Sivaco
Wire Group 2004 L.P.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
2.33 percent
Sfmt 4703
Assessment
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) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR
351.212(b). The Department calculated
an assessment rate for each importer of
the subject merchandise covered by the
review. Upon issuance of the final
results of this review, for the importer–
specific assessment rate calculated in
the final results that is above de minimis
(i.e., at or above 0.50 percent), we will
issue assessment instructions directly to
CBP to assess antidumping duties on
appropriate entries by applying the
assessment rate to the entered value of
the merchandise. Pursuant to 19 CFR
356.8(a), the Department intends to
issue assessment instructions to CBP 41
days after the date of publication of
these final results of review.
The Department clarified its
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This
clarification will apply to entries of
subject merchandise during the period
of review produced by Ivaco for which
Ivaco did not know the merchandise
was destined for the United States. In
such instances, we will instruct CBP to
liquidate unreviewed entries at the 8.11
percent all–others rate if there is no
company–specific rate for an
intermediary involved in the
transaction. See id.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The Department has revoked this
order, effective October 29, 2007. See
Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order
on Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire
Rod from Canada, 73 FR 44223 (July 30,
2008). Therefore, there is no need to
issue new cash deposit instructions for
this administrative review.
Notification to Interested Parties
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 duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this
review period. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
Department’s presumption that
reimbursement of the antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping
duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
E:\FR\FM\18DEN1.SGM
18DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 244 / Thursday, December 18, 2008 / Notices
protective orders (APOs) of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition 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 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.This notice is
issued and published in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of
the Act.
Dated: December 11, 2008.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Policy and
Negotiations.
Appendix Issues and Decision
Memorandum
Comment 1: Level of Trade
Comment 2: Offsetting for U.S. Sales
that Exceed Normal Value
[FR Doc. E8–30090 Filed 12–17–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A–588–046)
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan:
Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Review and
Determination To Revoke Antidumping
Duty Finding, in Part
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 29, 2008, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published a notice of
initiation and preliminary results of a
changed circumstances review with
intent to revoke, in part, the
antidumping duty (AD) finding on
polychloroprene rubber from Japan. See
Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan:
Initiation and Preliminary Results of
Changed Circumstances Review, and
Intent to Revoke Antidumping Duty
Finding, in Part, 73 FR 56548
(September 29, 2008) (Initiation and
Preliminary Results). On October 27,
2008, the Federal Register corrected
certain errors it made in publishing the
Initiation and Preliminary Results. See
Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan:
Initiation and Preliminary Results of
Changed Circumstances Review, and
Intent to Revoke Antidumping Duty
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:51 Dec 17, 2008
Jkt 217001
Finding, in Part, 73 FR 63687 (October
27, 2008) (Initiation Correction).
In the Initiation and Preliminary
Results and Initiation Correction, the
Department invited interested parties to
comment on the Initiation and
Preliminary Results and no comments
were received. Accordingly, we are now
revoking this AD finding, in part, with
regard to certain polychloroprene rubber
products from Japan, as described in the
‘‘Scope of Changed Circumstances
Review’’ section of this notice, based on
the fact that domestic parties have
expressed no further interest in the
relief provided by the AD finding with
respect to the imports of such products.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 18, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Summer Avery, 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)
482–4052.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 4, 2008, the Department
received a request on behalf of the
petitioner, DuPont Performance
Elastomers L.L.C. (DPE),1 for revocation,
in part, of the AD finding on
polychloroprene rubber from Japan
pursuant to sections 751(b)(1) and
782(h) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act). DPE requested
partial revocation of the AD finding
with respect to certain polychloroprene
rubber products, listed below in the
section entitled ‘‘Scope of Changed
Circumstances Review.’’ In its August 4,
2008 submission, DPE stated that it no
longer has any interest in antidumping
relief from imports of such
polychloroprene rubber from Japan. On
September 29, 2008, the Department
published a notice of initiation and
preliminary results of a changed
circumstances review with intent to
revoke, in part, the AD finding on
polychloroprene rubber from Japan. See
Initiation and Preliminary Results. In
preparing the notice for publication, the
Federal Register made a number of
substantive errors during its technical
preparation of the Initiation and
1 DPE is the sole petitioner in this antidumping
proceeding. See Polychloroprene Rubber From
Japan: Final Results of the Expedited Sunset Review
of the Antidumping Duty Finding, 69 FR 64276
(November 4, 2004). DPE has been the sole U.S.
producer of polychloroprene rubber since 1998,
when Bayer Group closed its polychloroprene
rubber plant in Houston, Texas. See
Polychloroprene Rubber from Japan, Inv. No. AA1921-129 (Second Review), U.S. ITC Pub. 3786
(June 2005), at 4-5.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77007
Preliminary Results for publication. On
October 27, 2008, the Federal Register
published corrections of these errors.
See Initiation Correction. The
Department provided interested parties
with a deadline to submit written
comments no later than 30 days after the
date of the Initiation Correction. The
Department did not receive any
comments from interested parties.
Scope of Changed Circumstances
Review
The merchandise subject to DPE’s
request and covered by this changed
circumstances review is
polychloroprene rubber from Japan with
aqueous dispersions of 2–
chlorobutadiene–1,3 homopolymers,
where the polymer content of the
dispersion is between 55 weight percent
and 61 weight percent and the dispersed
homopolymer contains less than 10
weight percent of a tetrahydrofuran–
insoluble fraction. This changed
circumstances review covers
polychloroprene rubber from Japan
meeting the specifications as described
above. Effective upon publication of
these final results of changed
circumstances review in the Federal
Register, the amended scope of the AD
finding will read as identified in the
‘‘Scope of the Finding (As Amended By
These Final Results of Changed
Circumstances)’’ section below.
Scope of the Finding (As Amended By
These Final Results of Changed
Circumstances)
The merchandise covered are
shipments of polychloroprene rubber,
an oil resistant synthetic rubber also
known as polymerized chlorobutadiene
or neoprene, currently classifiable under
items 4002.41.00, 4002.49.00, and
4003.00.00 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).
Although HTSUS item numbers are
provided for convenience and customs
purpose, the Department’s written
description of the scope remains
dispositive.
The following types of
polychloroprene rubber from Japan are
excluded from the scope: (1) aqueous
dispersions of polychloroprenes that are
dipolymers of chloroprene and
methacrylic acid, where the dispersion
has a pH of 8 or lower (this category is
limited to aqueous dispersions of these
polymers and does not include aqueous
dispersions of these polychloroprenes
that contain comonomers other than
methacrylic acid); (2) aqueous
dispersions of polychloroprenes that are
dipolymers of chloroprene and 2,3–
dichlorobutadiene–1,3 modified with
xanthogen disulfides, where the
E:\FR\FM\18DEN1.SGM
18DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 244 (Thursday, December 18, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77005-77007]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-30090]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A-122-840)
Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Canada: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 10, 2008, the Department of Commerce (Department)
published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod from
Canada. See Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From
Canada, 73 FR 39646 (July 10, 2008) (Preliminary Results). This review
covers the period October 1, 2006, through September 30, 2007, for
Ivaco Rolling Mills 2004 L.P. and Sivaco Ontario, a division of Sivaco
Wire Group 2004 L.P. (referred to collectively as Ivaco).
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 18, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Bezirganian or Robert James, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
1131 or (202) 482-0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 10, 2008, the Department published the preliminary results
of this administrative review of the antidumping duty order on carbon
and certain alloy steel wire rod from Canada. See Preliminary Results,
73 FR 39646. Ivaco submitted its case brief on August 11, 2008, and
petitioners, ISG Georgetown Inc., Gerdau Ameristeel U.S. Inc., Nucor
Steel Connecticut Inc., Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc., and
Rocky Mountain Steel Mills, submitted their rebuttal brief on August
18, 2008. No hearing was requested. The Department extended the
deadline for completion of the final results by 35 days, to December
12, 2008. See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Canada:
Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 73 FR 63134 (October 23, 2008).
Period of Review
The period of review is October 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the 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. 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.
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
[[Page 77006]]
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 0.2 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.
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 subject to this order are currently classifiable
under subheadings 7213.91.3011, 7213.91.3015, 7213.91.3092,
7213.91.4500, 7213.91.6000, 7213.99.0030, 7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0000,
7227.90.6010, and 7227.90.6080 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.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this administrative review are addressed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, dated December 11, 2008
(Decision Memorandum), which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list
of the issues parties have raised and to which we have responded, all
of which are in the Decision Memorandum (and, for the level of trade
issue, in a separate proprietary document referenced in the Decision
Memorandum), is attached to this notice as an appendix. Parties can
find a discussion of all public issues raised in this review and the
corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on
file in the Central Records Unit in room 1117 of the main Department
building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum
can be accessed directly via the Internet 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
Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have not made
any changes to the calculations in our preliminary results.
Final Results of Review
We determine the following weighted-average percentage margin
exists for the period October 1, 2006, through September 30, 2007:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted Average
Manufacturer/Exporter Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ivaco Rolling Mills 2004 L.P. / Sivaco Ontario, a 2.33 percent
division of Sivaco Wire Group 2004 L.P.............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
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) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department calculated an
assessment rate for each importer of the subject merchandise covered by
the review. Upon issuance of the final results of this review, for the
importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results that
is above de minimis (i.e., at or above 0.50 percent), we will issue
assessment instructions directly to CBP to assess antidumping duties on
appropriate entries by applying the assessment rate to the entered
value of the merchandise. Pursuant to 19 CFR 356.8(a), the Department
intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 41 days after the date
of publication of these final results of review.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This
clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the
period of review produced by Ivaco for which Ivaco did not know the
merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we
will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the 8.11 percent
all-others rate if there is no company-specific rate for an
intermediary involved in the transaction. See id.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The Department has revoked this order, effective October 29, 2007.
See Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order on Carbon and Certain Alloy
Steel Wire Rod from Canada, 73 FR 44223 (July 30, 2008). Therefore,
there is no need to issue new cash deposit instructions for this
administrative review.
Notification to Interested Parties
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 duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that
reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative
[[Page 77007]]
protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility concerning the
disposition 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 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.This notice is issued and published in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 11, 2008.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Policy and Negotiations.
Appendix Issues and Decision Memorandum
Comment 1: Level of Trade
Comment 2: Offsetting for U.S. Sales that Exceed Normal Value
[FR Doc. E8-30090 Filed 12-17-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
