Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India: Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 2344-2346 [2011-619]
Download as PDF
2344
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Notices
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
We are issuing and publishing the
preliminary results determination in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: January 7, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011–627 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–533–820]
Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat
Products From India: Notice of
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to requests from
petitioners,1 the Department of
Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) is
conducting an administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on certain
hot-rolled carbon steel flat products
from India (‘‘Indian Hot-Rolled’’)
manufactured by Essar Steel Limited
(‘‘Essar’’), Ispat Industries Limited
(‘‘Ispat’’), JSW Steel Limited (‘‘JSW’’), and
Tata Steel Limited (‘‘Tata’’). The period
of review (‘‘POR’’) covers December 1,
2008, through November 30, 2009. We
preliminarily determine that Essar,
Ispat, JSW, and Tata had no reviewable
entries of subject merchandise during
the POR.
Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
We intend to issue the final results no
later than 120 days from the date of
publication of this notice, pursuant to
section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’).
DATES: Effective Date: January 13, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Hargett or James Terpstra,
AD/CVD Operations Office 3, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–4161 and (202)
482–3965, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
1 The petitioners are the United States Steel
Corporation, Nucor Corporation, and ArcelorMittal
USA Inc. (collectively ‘‘petitioners’’).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
Background
On December 3, 2001, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
antidumping duty order on Indian HotRolled. See Notice of Amended Final
Antidumping Duty Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Antidumping Duty Order: Certain HotRolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From
India, 66 FR 60194 (December 3, 2001)
(‘‘Amended Final Determination’’). On
December 1, 2009, the Department
published in the Federal Register a
notice titled ‘‘Opportunity to Request
Administrative Review’’ of the
antidumping duty order on Indian HotRolled. See Antidumping or
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
To Request Administrative Review, 74
FR 62743 (December 1, 2009). On
December 31, 2009, petitioners
requested an administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on Indian
Hot-Rolled, for subject merchandise
produced or exported by Ispat, JSW,
Tata, and Essar. On January 29, 2010,
the Department published a notice of
initiation of antidumping duty
administrative review of Indian HotRolled for the period December 1, 2008,
through November 30, 2009. See
Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews, Request for Revocation in Part,
and Deferral of Initiation of
Administrative Review, 75 FR 4770
(January 29, 2010) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’).
On February 2, 2010, Ispat and Essar,
and on February 17, 2010, JSW, each
informed the Department that they did
not have shipments of subject
merchandise to the United States during
the POR.
In February 2010, the Department
exercised its discretion to toll deadlines
for the duration of the closure of the
Federal Government from February 5,
through February 12, 2010. Thus all
deadlines in this segment of the
proceeding have been extended for
seven days. See Memorandum to the
Record from Ronald Lorentzen, DAS for
Import Administration, regarding
‘‘Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As
a Result of the Government Closure
During the Recent Snowstorm,’’ dated
February 12, 2010.
On February 16, 2010, the Department
issued its antidumping questionnaire to
Tata. On February 18, 2010, Tata
informed the Department that it had one
shipment of subject merchandise that
was entered into the United States
during the POR, but that shipment was
not of normal commercial quantities
and was a one-off transaction for testing
purposes only. Tata informed the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Department that it would, therefore, not
respond to the antidumping
questionnaire.
On August 23, 2010, the Department
placed on the record and invited
interested parties to comment on U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’)
data obtained to corroborate the claims
of the respondents. See Memorandum to
the File from Christopher Hargett,
International Trade Compliance
Analyst, through James Terpstra,
Program Manager, and Melissa Skinner,
Office Director, concerning ‘‘Customs
and Border Protection (‘CBP’) Data for
Corroboration of Claims of No
Shipments,’’ dated August 23, 2010
(‘‘August 23 Comment Memorandum’’);
clarified by Memorandum to the File
from Christopher Hargett, International
Trade Compliance Analyst, through
James Terpstra, Program Manager, and
Melissa Skinner, Office Director,
concerning ‘‘Clarification of Customs
and Border Protection (‘CBP’) Data for
Corroboration of Claims of No
Shipments,’’ dated August 25, 2010
(‘‘August 25 Clarification
Memorandum’’). On August 31, 2010,
we received timely comments from
Nucor Corporation.
On September 14, 2010, the
Department extended the deadline for
the preliminary results to January 7,
2011. See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon
Steel Flat Products from India:
Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary
Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 75 FR 55742
(September 14, 2010).
On November 23, 2010, we requested
CBP to provide documents associated
with certain entries. See Memorandum
to Michael Walsh, Director, AD/CVD/
Revenue Policy and Programs, Office of
International Trade, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, from Melissa
Skinner, Office Director, entitled
‘‘Request for U.S. Entry Documents—
Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products
from India (A–533–820),’’ dated
November 23, 2010 (‘‘November 23 CBP
Request Memorandum’’). We received
such documents on December 23, 2010.
See Memorandum from Christopher
Hargett, International Trade Compliance
Analyst, Office 3, through Melissa
Skinner, Office Director, Office 3, AD/
CVD Operations, to the File, entitled
‘‘Entry Documentation for Corroboration
of Claims of No Shipments,’’ dated
January 7, 2011 (‘‘January 7 Entry
Documentation Memorandum’’).
Period of Review
The POR covered by this review is
December 1, 2008, through November
30, 2009.
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to this order
is 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 nonmetallic 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
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 order.
Specifically included in the scope of
this order are vacuum-degassed, fully
stabilized (commonly referred to as
interstitial-free (‘‘IF’’)) steels, highstrength low-alloy (‘‘HSLA’’) steels, and
the substrate for motor lamination
steels. IF steels are recognized as lowcarbon 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 included in the scope
of this order, 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
above are within the scope of this order
unless otherwise excluded. The
following products, by way of example,
are outside or specifically excluded
from the scope of this order:
• Alloy hot-rolled carbon 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 bearings 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.
• United States Steel (‘‘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 order
is currently classifiable 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 covered
by this order, including: vacuumdegassed 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,
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2345
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 customs purposes, the
Department’s written description of the
merchandise subject to this order is
dispositive.
Preliminary Results of Review
As noted in the ‘‘Background’’ section
above, Essar, Ispat and JSW have each
submitted timely-filed certifications
indicating that they had no shipments of
subject merchandise to the United
States during the POR. In addition, Tata
informed the Department that it had
made one small shipment of subject
merchandise that entered the United
States during the POR. However, Tata
claimed that the shipment was not of
normal commercial quantities in the
ordinary course of trade. Further, Tata
claimed that the shipment to the United
States was a one-off transaction for
testing purposes only.
In August, 2010, the Department
released to interested parties under
Administrative Protective Order
(‘‘APO’’) information it intended to use
for corroboration of the respondents’
claims. See August 23 Comment
Memorandum; clarified by August 25
Clarification Memorandum. In
comments submitted on August 31,
2010, Nucor asserted that the data
presented failed to confirm the absence
of sales, entries, or shipments; alleging
instead that the data raise additional
questions that the Department should
address.
On November 23, 2010, the
Department requested from CBP the
entry documents associated with certain
entries which Nucor alleged raised
questions with respect to the assertions
of respondent(s). See November 23 CBP
Request Memorandum.
On December 23, 2010, the
Department received the entry
documents from CBP. These documents
and our analysis are proprietary. See
January 7 Entry Document
Memorandum. Based on the claims of
the parties and our analysis of CBP data,
we preliminarily determine that the
evidence on the record indicates that
Essar, Ispat, and JSW did not export
subject merchandise to the United
States during the POR. Further, the
Department preliminary determines that
record evidence indicates that Tata had
no reviewable transactions of subject
merchandise during the POR. However,
based on our review of the recently
obtained entry documentation, we
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
2346
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Notices
intend to seek clarifying information
from Tata after our preliminary results
with respect to its exports.
Disclosure
The Department will disclose these
preliminary results to the parties within
five days of the date of publication of
this notice in accordance with 19 CFR
351.224(b).
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Comments
Interested parties are invited to
comment on the preliminary results and
may submit case briefs and/or written
comments within 30 days of the date of
publication of this notice. See 19 CFR
351.309(c)(1)(ii). Rebuttal briefs, limited
to issues raised in the case briefs, will
be due five days later, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.309(d). Parties who submit
case or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding
are requested to submit with each
argument (1) a statement of the issue,
and (2) a brief summary of the
argument. Parties are requested to
provide a summary of the arguments not
to exceed five pages and a table of
statutes, regulations, and cases cited.
See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2). Additionally,
parties are requested to provide their
case brief and rebuttal briefs in
electronic format (e.g., Microsoft Word,
pdf, etc.). Interested parties, who wish
to request a hearing or to participate if
one is requested, must submit a written
request to the Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration within 30 days
of the date of publication of this notice.
Requests should contain: (1) The party’s
name, address, and telephone number;
(2) the number of participants; and (3)
a list of issues to be discussed. See 19
CFR 351.310(c). Issues raised in the
hearing will be limited to those raised
in case and rebuttal briefs. The
Department will issue the final results
of this review, including the results of
its analysis of issues raised in any such
written briefs or at the hearing, if held,
not later than 120 days after the date of
publication of this notice.
Assessment Rate
The Department intends to issue
appropriate assessment instructions
directly to CBP 15 days after the
publication of the final results of this
review.
Since the implementation of the 1997
regulations, our practice concerning noshipment respondents has been to
rescind the administrative review if the
respondent certifies that it had no
shipments and we have confirmed
through our examination of CBP data
that there were no shipments of subject
merchandise during the POR. See
Antidumping Duties; Countervailing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27393 (May 19,
1997). As a result, in such
circumstances, we normally instruct
CBP to liquidate any entries from the
no-shipment company at the deposit
rate in effect on the date of entry.
In our May 6, 2003, ‘‘automatic
assessment’’ clarification, we explained
that, where respondents in an
administrative review demonstrate that
they had no knowledge of sales through
resellers to the United States, we would
instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at
the all-others rate applicable to the
proceeding. See Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment
Policy Notice).
Because ‘‘as entered’’ liquidation
instructions do not alleviate the
concerns which the May 2003
clarification was intended to address,
we find it appropriate in this case to
instruct CBP to liquidate any existing
entries of merchandise produced by
Essar, Ispat, JSW, or Tata and exported
by other parties at the all-others rate,
should we continue to find that Essar,
Ispat, and JSW had no shipments of
subject merchandise to the United
States, and Tata had no reviewable
transactions, during the POR, in our
final results. See, e.g., Magnesium Metal
From the Russian Federation: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 75 FR 56989
(September 17, 2010). In addition, the
Department finds that it is more
consistent with the May 2003
clarification not to rescind the review in
part in these circumstances but, rather,
to complete the review with respect to
Essar, Ispat, JSW, and Tata and issue
appropriate instructions to CBP based
on the final results of the review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit rates will be
effective upon publication of the final
results of this administrative review for
all shipments of hot-rolled carbon steel
flat products from India entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C)
of the Act: (1) For Essar, Ispat, JSW, and
Tata, and for previously reviewed or
investigated companies not listed above,
the cash deposit rate will continue to be
the company-specific rate published for
the most recent final results in which
that manufacturer or exporter
participated; (2) if the exporter is not a
firm covered in these reviews, a prior
review, or the original less-than-fairvalue (‘‘LTFV’’) investigation, but the
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate
will be the rate established for the most
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
recent final results for the manufacturer
of the merchandise; and (3) if neither
the exporter nor the manufacturer is a
firm covered in this or any previous
review or the LTFV conducted by the
Department, the cash deposit rate will
be 23.87 percent, the all-others rate
established in the LTFV. See Amended
Final Determination. These cash deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a preliminary
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping and countervailing duties
prior to liquidation of the relevant
entries during this review period.
Failure to comply with this requirement
could result in the Secretary’s
presumption that reimbursement of
antidumping and countervailing duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping and
countervailing duties.
These preliminary results of review
are issued and published in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).
Dated: January 7, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011–619 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Quarterly Update to Annual Listing of
Foreign Government Subsidies on
Articles of Cheese Subject to an InQuota Rate of Duty
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: January 13, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gayle Longest, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 3, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202)
482–3338.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
702 of the Trade Agreements Act of
1979 (as amended) (‘‘the Act’’) requires
the Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) to determine, in
consultation with the Secretary of
Agriculture, whether any foreign
government is providing a subsidy with
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2344-2346]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-619]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-533-820]
Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India: Notice
of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to requests from petitioners,\1\ the Department of
Commerce (``the Department'') is conducting an administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat
products from India (``Indian Hot-Rolled'') manufactured by Essar Steel
Limited (``Essar''), Ispat Industries Limited (``Ispat''), JSW Steel
Limited (``JSW''), and Tata Steel Limited (``Tata''). The period of
review (``POR'') covers December 1, 2008, through November 30, 2009. We
preliminarily determine that Essar, Ispat, JSW, and Tata had no
reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The petitioners are the United States Steel Corporation,
Nucor Corporation, and ArcelorMittal USA Inc. (collectively
``petitioners'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary
results. We intend to issue the final results no later than 120 days
from the date of publication of this notice, pursuant to section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'').
DATES: Effective Date: January 13, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Hargett or James Terpstra,
AD/CVD Operations Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4161 and (202) 482-3965, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 3, 2001, the Department published in the Federal
Register the antidumping duty order on Indian Hot-Rolled. See Notice of
Amended Final Antidumping Duty Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat
Products From India, 66 FR 60194 (December 3, 2001) (``Amended Final
Determination''). On December 1, 2009, the Department published in the
Federal Register a notice titled ``Opportunity to Request
Administrative Review'' of the antidumping duty order on Indian Hot-
Rolled. See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review,
74 FR 62743 (December 1, 2009). On December 31, 2009, petitioners
requested an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on
Indian Hot-Rolled, for subject merchandise produced or exported by
Ispat, JSW, Tata, and Essar. On January 29, 2010, the Department
published a notice of initiation of antidumping duty administrative
review of Indian Hot-Rolled for the period December 1, 2008, through
November 30, 2009. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Administrative Reviews, Request for Revocation in Part, and
Deferral of Initiation of Administrative Review, 75 FR 4770 (January
29, 2010) (``Initiation Notice''). On February 2, 2010, Ispat and
Essar, and on February 17, 2010, JSW, each informed the Department that
they did not have shipments of subject merchandise to the United States
during the POR.
In February 2010, the Department exercised its discretion to toll
deadlines for the duration of the closure of the Federal Government
from February 5, through February 12, 2010. Thus all deadlines in this
segment of the proceeding have been extended for seven days. See
Memorandum to the Record from Ronald Lorentzen, DAS for Import
Administration, regarding ``Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a
Result of the Government Closure During the Recent Snowstorm,'' dated
February 12, 2010.
On February 16, 2010, the Department issued its antidumping
questionnaire to Tata. On February 18, 2010, Tata informed the
Department that it had one shipment of subject merchandise that was
entered into the United States during the POR, but that shipment was
not of normal commercial quantities and was a one-off transaction for
testing purposes only. Tata informed the Department that it would,
therefore, not respond to the antidumping questionnaire.
On August 23, 2010, the Department placed on the record and invited
interested parties to comment on U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(``CBP'') data obtained to corroborate the claims of the respondents.
See Memorandum to the File from Christopher Hargett, International
Trade Compliance Analyst, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, and
Melissa Skinner, Office Director, concerning ``Customs and Border
Protection (`CBP') Data for Corroboration of Claims of No Shipments,''
dated August 23, 2010 (``August 23 Comment Memorandum''); clarified by
Memorandum to the File from Christopher Hargett, International Trade
Compliance Analyst, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, and
Melissa Skinner, Office Director, concerning ``Clarification of Customs
and Border Protection (`CBP') Data for Corroboration of Claims of No
Shipments,'' dated August 25, 2010 (``August 25 Clarification
Memorandum''). On August 31, 2010, we received timely comments from
Nucor Corporation.
On September 14, 2010, the Department extended the deadline for the
preliminary results to January 7, 2011. See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon
Steel Flat Products from India: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary
Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 55742
(September 14, 2010).
On November 23, 2010, we requested CBP to provide documents
associated with certain entries. See Memorandum to Michael Walsh,
Director, AD/CVD/Revenue Policy and Programs, Office of International
Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, from Melissa Skinner, Office
Director, entitled ``Request for U.S. Entry Documents--Certain Hot-
Rolled Steel Flat Products from India (A-533-820),'' dated November 23,
2010 (``November 23 CBP Request Memorandum''). We received such
documents on December 23, 2010. See Memorandum from Christopher
Hargett, International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 3, through
Melissa Skinner, Office Director, Office 3, AD/CVD Operations, to the
File, entitled ``Entry Documentation for Corroboration of Claims of No
Shipments,'' dated January 7, 2011 (``January 7 Entry Documentation
Memorandum'').
Period of Review
The POR covered by this review is December 1, 2008, through
November 30, 2009.
[[Page 2345]]
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to this order is 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
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 order.
Specifically included in the scope of this order 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 included in the scope of this order, 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 order unless otherwise
excluded. The following products, by way of example, are outside or
specifically excluded from the scope of this order:
Alloy hot-rolled carbon 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 bearings 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.
United States Steel (``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 order is currently classifiable 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
covered by this order, 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 customs purposes, the Department's written
description of the merchandise subject to this order is dispositive.
Preliminary Results of Review
As noted in the ``Background'' section above, Essar, Ispat and JSW
have each submitted timely-filed certifications indicating that they
had no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the
POR. In addition, Tata informed the Department that it had made one
small shipment of subject merchandise that entered the United States
during the POR. However, Tata claimed that the shipment was not of
normal commercial quantities in the ordinary course of trade. Further,
Tata claimed that the shipment to the United States was a one-off
transaction for testing purposes only.
In August, 2010, the Department released to interested parties
under Administrative Protective Order (``APO'') information it intended
to use for corroboration of the respondents' claims. See August 23
Comment Memorandum; clarified by August 25 Clarification Memorandum. In
comments submitted on August 31, 2010, Nucor asserted that the data
presented failed to confirm the absence of sales, entries, or
shipments; alleging instead that the data raise additional questions
that the Department should address.
On November 23, 2010, the Department requested from CBP the entry
documents associated with certain entries which Nucor alleged raised
questions with respect to the assertions of respondent(s). See November
23 CBP Request Memorandum.
On December 23, 2010, the Department received the entry documents
from CBP. These documents and our analysis are proprietary. See January
7 Entry Document Memorandum. Based on the claims of the parties and our
analysis of CBP data, we preliminarily determine that the evidence on
the record indicates that Essar, Ispat, and JSW did not export subject
merchandise to the United States during the POR. Further, the
Department preliminary determines that record evidence indicates that
Tata had no reviewable transactions of subject merchandise during the
POR. However, based on our review of the recently obtained entry
documentation, we
[[Page 2346]]
intend to seek clarifying information from Tata after our preliminary
results with respect to its exports.
Disclosure
The Department will disclose these preliminary results to the
parties within five days of the date of publication of this notice in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Comments
Interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary
results and may submit case briefs and/or written comments within 30
days of the date of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR
351.309(c)(1)(ii). Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the
case briefs, will be due five days later, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.309(d). Parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs in this
proceeding are requested to submit with each argument (1) a statement
of the issue, and (2) a brief summary of the argument. Parties are
requested to provide a summary of the arguments not to exceed five
pages and a table of statutes, regulations, and cases cited. See 19 CFR
351.309(c)(2). Additionally, parties are requested to provide their
case brief and rebuttal briefs in electronic format (e.g., Microsoft
Word, pdf, etc.). Interested parties, who wish to request a hearing or
to participate if one is requested, must submit a written request to
the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration within 30 days of the
date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) The
party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of
participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. See 19 CFR
351.310(c). Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those
raised in case and rebuttal briefs. The Department will issue the final
results of this review, including the results of its analysis of issues
raised in any such written briefs or at the hearing, if held, not later
than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice.
Assessment Rate
The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions
directly to CBP 15 days after the publication of the final results of
this review.
Since the implementation of the 1997 regulations, our practice
concerning no-shipment respondents has been to rescind the
administrative review if the respondent certifies that it had no
shipments and we have confirmed through our examination of CBP data
that there were no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. See
Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27393 (May 19,
1997). As a result, in such circumstances, we normally instruct CBP to
liquidate any entries from the no-shipment company at the deposit rate
in effect on the date of entry.
In our May 6, 2003, ``automatic assessment'' clarification, we
explained that, where respondents in an administrative review
demonstrate that they had no knowledge of sales through resellers to
the United States, we would instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at
the all-others rate applicable to the proceeding. See Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment Policy Notice).
Because ``as entered'' liquidation instructions do not alleviate
the concerns which the May 2003 clarification was intended to address,
we find it appropriate in this case to instruct CBP to liquidate any
existing entries of merchandise produced by Essar, Ispat, JSW, or Tata
and exported by other parties at the all-others rate, should we
continue to find that Essar, Ispat, and JSW had no shipments of subject
merchandise to the United States, and Tata had no reviewable
transactions, during the POR, in our final results. See, e.g.,
Magnesium Metal From the Russian Federation: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 56989 (September 17,
2010). In addition, the Department finds that it is more consistent
with the May 2003 clarification not to rescind the review in part in
these circumstances but, rather, to complete the review with respect to
Essar, Ispat, JSW, and Tata and issue appropriate instructions to CBP
based on the final results of the review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit rates will be effective upon publication of
the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of
hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as
provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Essar, Ispat, JSW,
and Tata, and for previously reviewed or investigated companies not
listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-
specific rate published for the most recent final results in which that
manufacturer or exporter participated; (2) if the exporter is not a
firm covered in these reviews, a prior review, or the original less-
than-fair-value (``LTFV'') investigation, but the manufacturer is, the
cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent
final results for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (3) if
neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or
any previous review or the LTFV conducted by the Department, the cash
deposit rate will be 23.87 percent, the all-others rate established in
the LTFV. See Amended Final Determination. These cash deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further
notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and countervailing duties
prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period.
Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's
presumption that reimbursement of antidumping and countervailing duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping and
countervailing duties.
These preliminary results of review are issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.221(b)(4).
Dated: January 7, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-619 Filed 1-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P