[Federal Register: July 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 127)]
[Notices]
[Page 40354-40356]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02jy04-34]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-475-821]
Stainless Steel Wire Rod from Italy: Final Results of Full Sunset
Review of Countervailing Duty Order
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of final results of full sunset review of countervailing
duty order of Stainless Steel Wire Rod from Italy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On August 1, 2003, the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') initiated a sunset review of the countervailing duty
order on Stainless Steel Wire Rod from Italy (68 FR 45219). Because we
find that the net countervailable subsidy likely to prevail is de
minimis, the Department is revoking this countervailing duty order.
DATES: Effective Date: July 2, 2004.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hilary Sadler, Esq. or Martha Douthit,
Office of Policy, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4340 or (202) 482-5050.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Applicable Statute
The Department's procedures for the conduct of sunset reviews are
set forth in Section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
``Act''), and 19 CFR 351.218. Guidance on methodological and analytical
issues relevant to the Department's conduct of sunset reviews is set
forth in the Department's Policy Bulletin 98:3--Policies regarding the
Conduct of Five-Year Sunset Reviews of Countervailing Duty and
Countervailing Duty Orders: Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16,
1998) (``Sunset Policy Bulletin'').
For purposes of this review, the product covered is Stainless Steel
Wire Rod (``SSWR'') from Italy. Certain stainless steel wire rod (SSWR
or subject merchandise) comprises products that are hot-rolled or hot-
rolled annealed and/or pickled and/or descaled rounds, squares,
octagons, hexagons or other shapes, in coils, that may also be coated
with a lubricant containing copper, lime or oxalate. SSWR is made of
alloy steels containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and
10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or without other elements. These
products are
[[Page 40355]]
manufactured only by hot-rolling or hot-rolling, annealing, and/or
pickling and/or descaling, and are normally sold in coiled form, and
are of solid cross-section. The majority of SSWR sold in the United
States is round in cross-sectional shape, annealed and pickled, and
later cold-finished into stainless steel wire or small-diameter bar.
The most common size for such products is 5.5 millimeters or 0.217
inches in diameter, which represents the smallest size that normally is
produced on a rolling mill and is the size that most wire drawing
machines are set up to draw. The range of SSWR sizes normally sold in
the United States is between 0.20 inches and 1.312 inches in diameter.
Two stainless steel grades SF20T and K-M35FL are excluded from the
scope of the investigation. The percentages of chemical makeup for the
excluded grades are as follows:
SF20T:
Carbon--0.05 max
Manganese--2.00 max
Phosphorous--0.05 max
Sulfur--0.15 max
Silicon--1.00 max
Chromium--19.00/21.00
Molybdenum--1.50/2.50
Lead--added (0.10/0.30)
Tellurium--added (0.03 min)
K-M35FL:
Carbon--0.015 max
Manganese--0.40 max
Phosphorous--0.04 max
Sulfur--0.03 max
Silicon--0.70/1.00
Chromium--12.50/14.00
Nickel--0.30 max
Lead--added (0.10/0.30)
Aluminum--0.20/0.35
The products covered by this order are currently classifiable under
subheadings 7221.00.0005, 7221.00.0015, 7221.00.0030, 7221.00.0045, and
7221.00.0075 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience
and Customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this
order is dispositive.
Background
On September 15, 1998, the Department published the countervailing
duty order on SSWR from Italy. See Notice of Countervailing Duty Order:
Stainless Steel Wire Rod from Italy, 63 FR 49334 (September 15, 1998).
The Department completed only one administrative review of the subject
countervailing duty order. See Stainless Steel Wire Rod From Italy:
Notice of Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review,
67 FR 63619 (October 15, 2002) (``Administrative Review''). Pursuant to
section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c), the Department
initiated a sunset review of this order by publishing notice of the
initiation in the Federal Register 68 FR 45219 (August 1, 2003). In
addition, as a courtesy to interested parties, the Department sent
letters, via certified and registered mail, to each party listed on the
Department's most current service list for this proceeding to inform
them of the automatic initiation of a sunset review of this order.
The Department received substantive responses from Carpenter
Technology Corporation,\1\ (the domestic interested party), Cogne
Acciai Speciali S.r.l. (``CAS''), the Government of Italy, and the
European Union within the applicable deadlines specified in 19 CFR
351.218(d). See Response of Carpenter Technology (August 18, 2003), CAS
(September 2, 2003), GOI (August 28, 2003), and the EU (August 29,
2003). However, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(e)(2)(i), the Department
determined to conduct a full (240-day) sunset review of this order. See
Memorandum for Ronald K. Lorentzen, Re: Stainless Steel Wire Rod from
Italy, Adequacy of Respondent Interested Parties' Response to the
Notice of Initiation (September 24, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Carpenter Technology, AL Tech Specialty Corporation,
Republic Engineered Steels, and Talley Metals Technology, Inc. filed
the original petition. Since the order, Carpenter Technology
acquired Talley Metals Technology, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Determination under
Section 129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act: Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination: Stainless Steel Wire Rod from Italy,
October 24, 2003 (``Section 129 Memo''), the Department determined that
the privatization of CAS was at arm's-length and for fair-market-value,
and that allegations of broader market distortions were not
sufficiently supported. Accordingly, any allocable, non-recurring
subsidies granted to CAS prior to its privatization were extinguished
in their entirety and, therefore, are non-countervailable. On November
7, 2003, the U.S. Trade Representative requested the Department,
pursuant to section 129(b)(4) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, to
implement the determination in the Section 129 Memo. See Notice of
Implementation under Section 129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act,
68 FR 64858, (November 17, 2003). Accordingly, the Department excluded
CAS from the countervailing duty order on certain stainless steel wire
rod from Italy and revised the ``all others rate.'' Id., at 16.
On April 21, 2004, the Department received identical case briefs
from the GOI and the EC. See Case Briefs from the EC and the GOI re:
Sunset Review of the Countervailing Duty Investigation: Stainless Steel
Wire Rod from Italy (April 19, 2004). We received no case brief or
rebuttal from Carpenter Technology.
Because CAS has been excluded from the original order as a result
of the Section 129 determination and is therefore no longer an
interested party in this sunset proceeding, its comments will not be
addressed. In addition, any comments submitted by Carpenter Technology,
the EC, and the GOI pertaining to CAS or to programs specific to CAS
have been rendered moot by CAS's exclusion and will not be addressed.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in this case are addressed in the ``Issues and
Decision Memorandum'' (``Decision Memo'') from Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Director, Office of Policy, Import Administration, to James J.
Jochum, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated June 27,
2004, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The issues discussed in
the Decision Memo include the likelihood of continuation or recurrence
of dumping and the magnitude of the margin likely to prevail if the
finding were to be revoked. Parties can find a complete discussion of
all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations
in this public memorandum, which is on file in room B-099 of the main
Commerce Building.
In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be
accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn, under the
heading ``July 2004.'' The paper copy and electronic version of the
Decision Memo are identical in content.
Determination To Revoke
Under section 751(d)(2) of the Act, in the case of a sunset review,
the Department will revoke a countervailing duty order unless it
determines that the countervailable subsidy would be likely to continue
or recur, and the International Trade Commission (``ITC'') determines
that material injury would be likely to continue or recur. Based on the
Department's analysis of the subsidy programs at issue in this case, we
have determined that the level of subsidization likely to prevail, were
the order revoked, is below the de minimis threshold. See Issues and
Decision Memorandum. Therefore, as a result of
[[Page 40356]]
this sunset review, the Department finds that revocation of the
countervailing duty order would not be likely to lead to continuation
or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy. Pursuant to section
751(d)(2) of the Act, the Department will revoke this countervailing
duty order, effective on September 15, 2003, the fifth anniversary date
of publication in the Federal Register of the order, consistent with 19
CFR 351.222(i)(2)(i).
Notification of the ITC
As discussed in section III.B of the Policy Bulletin, the
Department normally will provide the ITC with the net countervailable
subsidy that was determined in the original investigation. However, the
purpose of the net countervailable subsidy in the context of sunset
review is to provide the ITC with a rate which represents the
countervailable rate that is likely to prevail if the order is revoked,
and the Department has therefore adjusted the investigation rate as
provided under section III.B of the Policy Bulletin. See section
752(b)(1)(B) of the Act. As noted above, the rate is de minimis.
This five-year (``sunset'') review and notice are in accordance
with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 28, 2004.
Jeffrey A. May,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 04-15105 Filed 7-1-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P