Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico, 14957-14959 [E9-7437]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices
A copy of the application will be
available for public inspection at the
Office of the Foreign–Trade Zones
Board’s Executive Secretary at the
address listed above and in the
‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the Board’s
website, which is accessible via
www.trade.gov/ftz. For further
information, contact Pierre Duy at:
pierrelduy@ita.doc.gov, or (202) 482–
1378.
Dated: March 25, 2009.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–7441 Filed 4–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–201–830]
Notice of Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review: Carbon and
Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From
Mexico
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 12, 2008, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published in the Federal
Register a notice of initiation of a
changed circumstances review of the
antidumping duty order of carbon and
certain alloy steel wire rod (wire rod)
from Mexico in order to determine
whether Ternium Mexico, S.A. de C.V.
(Ternium) is the successor-in-interest to
Hylsa S.A. de C.V. (Hylsa) for purposes
of determining antidumping duty
liability. See Notice of Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review: Carbon and
Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from
Mexico, (73 FR 66839) November 12,
2008 (Notice of Initiation). We have
preliminarily determined that Ternium
is the successor-in-interest to Hylsa, for
purposes of determining antidumping
duty liability in this proceeding.
Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
DATES:
Effective Date: April 2, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jolanta Lawska, Office of AD/CVD
Operations, Office 3, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–8362.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:43 Apr 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
Background
On October 29, 2002, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
antidumping duty order on wire rod
from Mexico. See Notice of
Antidumping Duty Orders: Carbon and
Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from
Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova,
Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine, 67
FR 65945 (October 29, 2002) (Wire Rod
Order). On September 3, 2008, Ternium
requested that the Department conduct
a changed circumstances review of the
antidumping duty order on wire rod
from Mexico claiming that it is the
successor-in-interest to Hylsa, in
accordance with section 751(b) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act)
and 19 CFR 351.216. In its request,
Ternium indicated that effective April 1,
2008, the production and sales
operations of Hylsa were transferred to
Ternium.1 In response to this request
the Department initiated a changed
circumstances review of the
antidumping duty order on wire rod
from Mexico. See Notice of Initiation.
On November 18, 2008, the Department
issued a questionnaire to Ternium
requesting additional information
regarding its successor-in-interest
changed circumstances review request.
On December 10, 2008, Ternium
submitted its response to the
Department’s questionnaire
(Questionnaire Response). In our Notice
of Initiation we invited interested
parties to comment. We 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; (e)
concrete reinforcing bars and rods; and
(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).
1 Prior to the reorganization effective April 1,
2008, Ternium was a holding company and did not
have any production or sales operations.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14957
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
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
E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM
02APN1
14958
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
(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.
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 the 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
proceeding is dispositive.
Preliminary Results
In making a successor-in-interest
determination, the Department typically
examines several factors including, but
not limited to, changes in: (1)
Management; (2) production facilities;
(3) supplier relationships; and (4)
customer base. See, e.g., Notice of Final
Results of Changed Circumstances
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:43 Apr 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From
Japan, 67 FR 58 (Jan. 2, 2002); Brass
Sheet and Strip from Canada: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460,
20462 (May 13, 1992). While no single
factor or combination of factors will
necessarily provide a dispositive
indication of a successor-in-interest
relationship, the Department will
generally consider the new company to
be the successor to the previous
company if the new company’s resulting
operation is not materially dissimilar to
that of its predecessor. See, e.g., Fresh
and Chilled Atlantic Salmon from
Norway; Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 64 FR 9979
(March 1, 1999); Industrial Phosphoric
Acid from Israel; Final Results of
Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR
6944 (February 14, 1994). Thus, if the
evidence demonstrates that, with
respect to the production and sale of the
subject merchandise, the new company
operates as the same business entity as
the former company, the Department
will accord the new company the same
antidumping treatment as its
predecessor.
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.221(c)(3)(i), we preliminarily
determine that Ternium is the
successor-in-interest to Hylsa. In its
September 3, 2008, and December 10,
2008, submissions Ternium provided
evidence supporting its claim to be the
successor-in-interest to Hylsa.2
Documentation attached to Ternium’s
September 3, 2008, and December 10,
2008, submissions shows that the
transfer of production and sales
operations from Hylsa to Ternium
resulted in little or no change in
management, production facilities,
supplier relationships, or customer base.
This documentation consists of: (1) A
copy of documentation of merger of
Hylsamex 3 into Ternium; (2) diagram
depicting the organizational structure of
Hylsa and Ternium; (3) tables depicting
the management structure of Hylsa as of
November 30, 2007, and the current
management structure of Ternium as of
July 2008; (4) listings of Hylsa’s
suppliers of major inputs for production
2 In our Notice of Initiation, we referred to
Ternium’s request as a name change, however, as
explained above it is related to the transfer of
production and sales functions from Hylsa to
Ternium. Effective April 1, 2008, Hylsa exists solely
as a service company which employs workers at the
former Hylsa facilities and provides its services to
Ternium on a contract basis.
3 Hylsamex is the former parent company of
Hylsa. On February 12, 2008, Ternium merged with
Hylsamex into Ternium Grupo IMSA SAB de C.V.
(GISA).
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
of subject merchandise in 2007 and of
Ternium’s suppliers of inputs for
production of subject merchandise in
the second quarter of 2008 (after the
transfer took effect); (5) a list of Hylsa’s
and Ternium’s facilities at which
subject merchandise is produced; (6)
listings of Hylsa’s wire rod customers in
the home and U.S. markets in 2007 and
of Ternium’s wire rod customers in the
home and U.S. markets in the second
quarter of 2008 (after the transfer took
effect). The documentation described
above demonstrates that there was little
to no change in management structure,
supplier relationships, production
facilities, or customer base. For these
reasons, we preliminarily find that
Ternium is the successor-in-interest to
Hylsa and, thus, should receive the
same antidumping duty treatment with
respect to steel wire rod from Mexico as
Hylsa.
Public Comment
Any interested party may request a
hearing within 10 days of publication of
this notice. Any hearing, if requested,
will be held no later than 37 days after
the date of publication of this notice, or
the first workday thereafter. Case briefs
from interested parties may be
submitted not later than 14 days after
the date of publication of this notice.
Rebuttal briefs, limited to the issues
raised in those comments, may be filed
not later than 21 days after the date of
publication of this notice. All written
comments shall be submitted in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.303.
Persons interested in attending the
hearing, if one is requested, should
contact the Department for the date and
time of the hearing. In accordance with
19 CFR 351.216(e), the Department will
issue the final results of its antidumping
duty changed circumstances review not
later than 270 days after the date on
which the review is initiated.
During the course of this antidumping
duty changed circumstances review,
deposit requirements for the subject
merchandise exported and
manufactured by Ternium will continue
to be the all others rate established in
the investigation. See Notice of
Antidumping Duty Orders: Carbon and
Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from
Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova,
Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine, 67
FR 65945, 65947 (October 29, 2002).
The cash deposit rate will be altered, if
warranted, pursuant only to the final
results of this review.
We are issuing and publishing these
preliminary results and notice in
accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and
777(i)(1) and (2) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.216.
E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM
02APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices
Dated: March 26, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–7437 Filed 4–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–421–811]
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From
the Netherlands; Extension of Time
Limit for Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) finds that it is not
practicable to complete the preliminary
results of this review within the original
time frame due to the need to complete
a scheduled cost verification, report the
procedures and results of the
Department’s sales verifications, and
possibly request additional information
from CP Kelco B.V. Accordingly, the
Department is extending the time limit
for completion of the preliminary
results of this administrative review by
46 days, to May 18, 2009.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patrick Edwards, Brian Davis, or
Angelica Mendoza, 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) 482–8029, (202) 482–
7924, or (202) 482–3019, respectively.
AGENCY:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Background
The Department published an
antidumping duty order on purified
carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from the
Netherlands on July 11, 2005. See
Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders:
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from
Finland, Mexico, the Netherlands and
Sweden, 70 FR 39734 (July 11, 2005).
On July 11, 2008, the Department
published a notice of ‘‘Opportunity to
Request an Administrative Review’’ of
this antidumping duty order for the
period July 1, 2007, through June 30,
2008. See Antidumping or
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
To Request Administrative Review, 73
FR 39948 (July 11, 2008). Also on July
11, 2008, CP Kelco B.V. and its U.S.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:43 Apr 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
affiliates (CP Kelco U.S., Inc. and J.M.
Huber Corporation) timely requested
that the Department initiate and
conduct an administrative review for
the period of review. On July 14, 2008,
Aqualon Company, a division of
Hercules Incorporated (petitioner),
timely requested that the Department
conduct an administrative review of
sales of subject merchandise by Akzo
Nobel Functional Chemicals B.V. (Akzo
Nobel) and CP Kelco B.V. covered by
the order. On July 31, 2008, Akzo Nobel
timely requested that the Department
conduct an administrative review of its
sales of merchandise covered by the
order.
In response to all three requests, the
Department initiated an administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on purified CMC from the Netherlands
on August 26, 2008. See Initiation of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 73 FR 50308
(August 26, 2008).1 The current
deadline for the preliminary results of
this review is April 2, 2009.
Extension of Time Limits for
Preliminary Results
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires
the Department to complete the
preliminary results of an administrative
review within 245 days after the last day
of the anniversary month of an order for
which a review is requested. However,
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 the time limit for
the preliminary results to a maximum of
365 days after the last day of the
anniversary month of an order for which
a review is requested.
The Department finds that it is not
practicable to complete the preliminary
results of this review within the original
time frame due to the need to complete
a scheduled cost verification, report the
procedures and results of the
Department’s sales verifications, and
possibly request additional information
from CP Kelco B.V. Accordingly, the
Department is extending the time limit
for completion of the preliminary
results of this administrative review by
46 days to May 18, 2009. We intend to
issue the final results no later than 120
days after publication of the preliminary
results.
1 On October 9, and October 10, 2008,
respectively, Akzo Nobel and petitioner withdrew
their requests for review of Akzo Nobel’s sales of
merchandise covered by the order. Therefore, the
Department rescinded the review with respect to
Akzo Nobel. See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose
from the Netherlands: Partial Recession of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR
66841.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14959
This extension is issued and
published in accordance with sections
751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: March 27, 2009.
John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
[FR Doc. E9–7451 Filed 4–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–580–810]
Welded ASTM A–312 Stainless Steel
Pipe From South Korea: Extension of
Time Limit for Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: April 2, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jacqueline Arrowsmith or Douglas
Kirby, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6,
Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–5255 and (202)
482–3782, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 17, 2008, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) issued the preliminary
results of the administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on ASTM
A–312 stainless steel pipe from South
Korea. See Certain Welded Stainless
Steel Pipes from the Republic of Korea:
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR
79050 (December 24, 2008). The period
of review is December 1, 2006 through
November 30, 2007. The final results for
this administrative review are currently
due no later than April 23, 2009.
Extension of Time Limit for Final
Results
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires
the Department to issue the preliminary
results of an administrative review
within 245 days after the last day of the
anniversary month of an antidumping
duty order for which a review is
requested, and issue the final results
within 120 days after the date on which
the preliminary results are published.
However, if the Department finds it is
E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM
02APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 62 (Thursday, April 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14957-14959]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-7437]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-201-830]
Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From
Mexico
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 12, 2008, the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of
a changed circumstances review of the antidumping duty order of carbon
and certain alloy steel wire rod (wire rod) from Mexico in order to
determine whether Ternium Mexico, S.A. de C.V. (Ternium) is the
successor-in-interest to Hylsa S.A. de C.V. (Hylsa) for purposes of
determining antidumping duty liability. See Notice of Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy
Steel Wire Rod from Mexico, (73 FR 66839) November 12, 2008 (Notice of
Initiation). We have preliminarily determined that Ternium is the
successor-in-interest to Hylsa, for purposes of determining antidumping
duty liability in this proceeding. Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
DATES: Effective Date: April 2, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jolanta Lawska, Office of AD/CVD
Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-8362.
Background
On October 29, 2002, the Department published in the Federal
Register the antidumping duty order on wire rod from Mexico. See Notice
of Antidumping Duty Orders: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod
from Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago, and
Ukraine, 67 FR 65945 (October 29, 2002) (Wire Rod Order). On September
3, 2008, Ternium requested that the Department conduct a changed
circumstances review of the antidumping duty order on wire rod from
Mexico claiming that it is the successor-in-interest to Hylsa, in
accordance with section 751(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act) and 19 CFR 351.216. In its request, Ternium indicated that
effective April 1, 2008, the production and sales operations of Hylsa
were transferred to Ternium.\1\ In response to this request the
Department initiated a changed circumstances review of the antidumping
duty order on wire rod from Mexico. See Notice of Initiation. On
November 18, 2008, the Department issued a questionnaire to Ternium
requesting additional information regarding its successor-in-interest
changed circumstances review request. On December 10, 2008, Ternium
submitted its response to the Department's questionnaire (Questionnaire
Response). In our Notice of Initiation we invited interested parties to
comment. We did not receive any comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Prior to the reorganization effective April 1, 2008, Ternium
was a holding company and did not have any production or sales
operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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; (e) concrete
reinforcing bars and rods; and (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 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
[[Page 14958]]
(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.
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 the 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 proceeding is dispositive.
Preliminary Results
In making a successor-in-interest determination, the Department
typically examines several factors including, but not limited to,
changes in: (1) Management; (2) production facilities; (3) supplier
relationships; and (4) customer base. See, e.g., Notice of Final
Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan, 67 FR 58 (Jan. 2, 2002);
Brass Sheet and Strip from Canada: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460, 20462 (May 13, 1992). While no
single factor or combination of factors will necessarily provide a
dispositive indication of a successor-in-interest relationship, the
Department will generally consider the new company to be the successor
to the previous company if the new company's resulting operation is not
materially dissimilar to that of its predecessor. See, e.g., Fresh and
Chilled Atlantic Salmon from Norway; Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 64 FR 9979 (March
1, 1999); Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Israel; Final Results of
Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR 6944 (February 14, 1994). Thus, if
the evidence demonstrates that, with respect to the production and sale
of the subject merchandise, the new company operates as the same
business entity as the former company, the Department will accord the
new company the same antidumping treatment as its predecessor.
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(i), we preliminarily
determine that Ternium is the successor-in-interest to Hylsa. In its
September 3, 2008, and December 10, 2008, submissions Ternium provided
evidence supporting its claim to be the successor-in-interest to
Hylsa.\2\ Documentation attached to Ternium's September 3, 2008, and
December 10, 2008, submissions shows that the transfer of production
and sales operations from Hylsa to Ternium resulted in little or no
change in management, production facilities, supplier relationships, or
customer base. This documentation consists of: (1) A copy of
documentation of merger of Hylsamex \3\ into Ternium; (2) diagram
depicting the organizational structure of Hylsa and Ternium; (3) tables
depicting the management structure of Hylsa as of November 30, 2007,
and the current management structure of Ternium as of July 2008; (4)
listings of Hylsa's suppliers of major inputs for production of subject
merchandise in 2007 and of Ternium's suppliers of inputs for production
of subject merchandise in the second quarter of 2008 (after the
transfer took effect); (5) a list of Hylsa's and Ternium's facilities
at which subject merchandise is produced; (6) listings of Hylsa's wire
rod customers in the home and U.S. markets in 2007 and of Ternium's
wire rod customers in the home and U.S. markets in the second quarter
of 2008 (after the transfer took effect). The documentation described
above demonstrates that there was little to no change in management
structure, supplier relationships, production facilities, or customer
base. For these reasons, we preliminarily find that Ternium is the
successor-in-interest to Hylsa and, thus, should receive the same
antidumping duty treatment with respect to steel wire rod from Mexico
as Hylsa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In our Notice of Initiation, we referred to Ternium's
request as a name change, however, as explained above it is related
to the transfer of production and sales functions from Hylsa to
Ternium. Effective April 1, 2008, Hylsa exists solely as a service
company which employs workers at the former Hylsa facilities and
provides its services to Ternium on a contract basis.
\3\ Hylsamex is the former parent company of Hylsa. On February
12, 2008, Ternium merged with Hylsamex into Ternium Grupo IMSA SAB
de C.V. (GISA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Comment
Any interested party may request a hearing within 10 days of
publication of this notice. Any hearing, if requested, will be held no
later than 37 days after the date of publication of this notice, or the
first workday thereafter. Case briefs from interested parties may be
submitted not later than 14 days after the date of publication of this
notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to the issues raised in those
comments, may be filed not later than 21 days after the date of
publication of this notice. All written comments shall be submitted in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.303. Persons interested in attending the
hearing, if one is requested, should contact the Department for the
date and time of the hearing. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.216(e), the
Department will issue the final results of its antidumping duty changed
circumstances review not later than 270 days after the date on which
the review is initiated.
During the course of this antidumping duty changed circumstances
review, deposit requirements for the subject merchandise exported and
manufactured by Ternium will continue to be the all others rate
established in the investigation. See Notice of Antidumping Duty
Orders: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Brazil, Indonesia,
Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine, 67 FR 65945, 65947
(October 29, 2002). The cash deposit rate will be altered, if
warranted, pursuant only to the final results of this review.
We are issuing and publishing these preliminary results and notice
in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) and (2) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.216.
[[Page 14959]]
Dated: March 26, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-7437 Filed 4-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P