[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2344-2346]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing 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