[Federal Register: August 7, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 152)]
[Notices]
[Page 47039-47043]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07au03-29]
[[Page 47039]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-428-825]
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils From Germany; Notice of
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of antidumping duty
administrative review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 7, 2003.
SUMMARY: In response to a request from Allegheny Ludlum, AK Steel
Corporation, Butler Armco Independent Union, J&L Specialty Steel, Inc.,
North American Stainless, United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO/CLC,
and Zanesville Armco Independent Organization (collectively,
petitioners) and respondent ThyssenKrupp Nirosta GmbH, ThyssenKrupp VDM
GmbH, ThyssenKrupp Nirosta North America, Inc., and ThyssenKrupp VDM
USA, Inc. (collectively, TKN), the Department of Commerce (the
Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping
duty order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils (S4) from
Germany. The review covers one manufacturer/exporter of the subject
merchandise to the United States during the period of review (POR) July
1, 2001, through June 30, 2002.
We preliminarily determine that TKN made sales at less than normal
value during the POR. If these preliminary results are adopted in our
final results of review, we will instruct the U.S. Bureau of Customs
and Border Protection (Customs) to assess antidumping duties based on
the difference between the United States Price (USP) and normal value
(NV).
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary
results. Parties who submit arguments in this proceeding are requested
to submit with the arguments: (1) A statement of the issues and (2) a
brief summary of the arguments (no longer than five pages, including
footnotes) and (3) a table of authorities.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Tran, Thomas Killiam, or
Robert James at (202) 482-1121, (202) 482-5222, or (202) 482-0649,
respectively, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Enforcement Group
III, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published an antidumping duty order on S4 from
Germany on July 27, 1999. See Notice of Amended Final Determination of
Sales at Less than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order; S4 Steel
Sheet and Strip in Coils from Germany (Antidumping Duty Order), 64 FR
40557 (July 27, 1999). The Department published the Notice of
Opportunity to Request Administrative Review of S4 from Germany for the
period July 1, 2001, through June 30, 2002, on July 1, 2002 (67 FR
44172).
On July 30 and 31, 2002, respectively, TKN and petitioners
requested an administrative review of TKN's sales for the period July
1, 2001, through June 30, 2002. On August 27, 2002, we published in the
Federal Register a notice of initiation of this antidumping duty
administrative review. See Notice of Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation
in Part, 67 FR 55000 (August 27, 2002).
Because it was not practicable to complete this review within the
normal time frame, on February 10, 2003, we published in the Federal
Register our notice of the extension of time limits for this review.
See S4 Steel Sheet and Strips in Coils from Germany; Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; Time Limits; Notice of Extension of Time Limits,
68 FR 6719 (February 10, 2003). This extension established the deadline
for these preliminary results as July 31, 2003.
Scope of the Review
For purposes of this order, the products covered are certain S4. S4
steel is an alloy steel containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less of
carbon and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or without other
elements. The subject sheet and strip is a flat-rolled product in coils
that is greater than 9.5 mm in width and less than 4.75 mm in
thickness, and that is annealed or otherwise heat treated and pickled
or otherwise descaled. The subject sheet and strip may also be further
processed (e.g., cold-rolled, polished, aluminized, coated, etc.)
provided that it maintains the specific dimensions of sheet and strip
following such processing.
The merchandise subject to this order is classified in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) at subheadings:
7219.13.00.31, 7219.13.00.51, 7219.13.00.71, 7219.13.00.81,
7219.14.00.30, 7219.14.00.65, 7219.14.00.90, 7219.32.00.05,
7219.32.00.20, 7219.32.00.25, 7219.32.00.35, 7219.32.00.36,
7219.32.00.38, 7219.32.00.42, 7219.32.00.44, 7219.33.00.05,
7219.33.00.20, 7219.33.00.25, 7219.33.00.35, 7219.33.00.36,
7219.33.00.38, 7219.33.00.42, 7219.33.00.44, 7219.34.00.05,
7219.34.00.20, 7219.34.00.25, 7219.34.00.30, 7219.34.00.35,
7219.35.00.05, 7219.35.00.15, 7219.35.00.30, 7219.35.00.35,
7219.90.00.10, 7219.90.00.20, 7219.90.00.25, 7219.90.00.60,
7219.90.00.80, 7220.12.10.00, 7220.12.50.00, 7220.20.10.10,
7220.20.10.15, 7220.20.10.60, 7220.20.10.80, 7220.20.60.05,
7220.20.60.10, 7220.20.60.15, 7220.20.60.60, 7220.20.60.80,
7220.20.70.05, 7220.20.70.10, 7220.20.70.15, 7220.20.70.60,
7220.20.70.80, 7220.20.80.00, 7220.20.90.30, 7220.20.90.60,
7220.90.00.10, 7220.90.00.15, 7220.90.00.60, and 7220.90.00.80.
Although the HTS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs
purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise under
review is dispositive.
Excluded from the scope of this order are the following: (1) Sheet
and strip that is not annealed or otherwise heat treated and pickled or
otherwise descaled; (2) sheet and strip that is cut to length; (3)
plate (i.e., flat-rolled S4 steel products of a thickness of 4.75 mm or
more); (4) flat wire (i.e., cold-rolled sections, with a prepared edge,
rectangular in shape, of a width of not more than 9.5 mm); and (5)
razor blade steel. Razor blade steel is a flat-rolled product of S4
steel, not further worked than cold-rolled (cold-reduced), in coils, of
a width of not more than 23 mm and a thickness of 0.266 mm or less,
containing, by weight, 12.5 to 14.5 percent chromium, and certified at
the time of entry to be used in the manufacture of razor blades. See
Chapter 72 of the HTSUS, ``Additional U.S. Note'' 1(d).
In response to comments by interested parties, the Department has
determined that certain specialty S4 steel products are also excluded
from the scope of this order. These excluded products are described
below.
Flapper valve steel is defined as S4 steel strip in coils
containing, by weight, between 0.37 and 0.43 percent carbon, between
1.15 and 1.35 percent molybdenum, and between 0.20 and 0.80 percent
manganese. This steel also contains, by weight, phosphorus of 0.025
percent or less, silicon of between
[[Page 47040]]
0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of 0.020 percent or less. The product
is manufactured by means of vacuum arc remelting, with inclusion
controls for sulphide of no more than 0.04 percent and for oxide of no
more than 0.05 percent. Flapper valve steel has a tensile strength of
between 210 and 300 ksi, yield strength of between 170 and 270 ksi,
plus or minus 8 ksi, and a hardness (Hv) of between 460 and 590.
Flapper valve steel is most commonly used to produce specialty flapper
valves for compressors.
Also excluded is a product referred to as suspension foil, a
specialty steel product used in the manufacture of suspension
assemblies for computer disk drives. Suspension foil is described as
302/304 grade or 202 grade stainless steel of a thickness between 14
and 127 microns, with a thickness tolerance of plus-or-minus 2.01
microns, and surface glossiness of 200 to 700 percent Gs. Suspension
foil must be supplied in coil widths of not more than 407 mm, and with
a mass of 225 kg or less. Roll marks may only be visible on one side,
with no scratches of measurable depth. The material must exhibit
residual stresses of 2 mm maximum deflection, and flatness of 1.6 mm
over 685 mm length.
Certain stainless steel foil for automotive catalytic converters is
also excluded from the scope of this order. This stainless steel strip
in coils is a specialty foil with a thickness of between 20 and 110
microns used to produce a metallic substrate with a honeycomb structure
for use in automotive catalytic converters. The steel contains, by
weight, carbon of no more than 0.030 percent, silicon of no more than
1.0 percent, manganese of no more than 1.0 percent, chromium of between
19 and 22 percent, aluminum of no less than 5.0 percent, phosphorus of
no more than 0.045 percent, sulfur of no more than 0.03 percent,
lanthanum of between 0.002 and 0.05 percent, and total rare earth
elements of more than 0.06 percent, with the balance iron.
Permanent magnet iron-chromium-cobalt alloy stainless strip is also
excluded from the scope of this order. This ductile stainless steel
strip contains, by weight, 26 to 30 percent chromium, and 7 to 10
percent cobalt, with the remainder of iron, in widths 228.6 mm or less,
and a thickness between 0.127 and 1.270 mm. It exhibits magnetic
remanence between 9,000 and 12,000 gauss, and a coercivity of between
50 and 300 oersteds. This product is most commonly used in electronic
sensors and is currently available under proprietary trade names such
as ``Arnokrome III.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Arnokrome III'' is a trademark of the Arnold Engineering
Company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certain electrical resistance alloy steel is also excluded from the
scope of this order. This product is defined as a non-magnetic
stainless steel manufactured to American Society of Testing and
Materials (ASTM) specification B344 and containing, by weight, 36
percent nickel, 18 percent chromium, and 46 percent iron, and is most
notable for its resistance to high temperature corrosion. It has a
melting point of 1390 degrees Celsius and displays a creep rupture
limit of 4 kilograms per square millimeter at 1000 degrees Celsius.
This steel is most commonly used in the production of heating ribbons
for circuit breakers and industrial furnaces, and in rheostats for
railway locomotives. The product is currently available under
proprietary trade names such as ``Gilphy 36.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Gilphy 36'' is a trademark of Imphy, S.A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certain martensitic precipitation-hardenable stainless steel is
also excluded from the scope of this order. This high-strength, ductile
stainless steel product is designated under the Unified Numbering
System (UNS) as S45500-grade steel, and contains, by weight, 11 to 13
percent chromium, and 7 to 10 percent nickel. Carbon, manganese,
silicon and molybdenum each comprise, by weight, 0.05 percent or less,
with phosphorus and sulfur each comprising, by weight, 0.03 percent or
less. This steel has copper, niobium, and titanium added to achieve
aging, and will exhibit yield strengths as high as 1700 Mpa and
ultimate tensile strengths as high as 1750 Mpa after aging, with
elongation percentages of 3 percent or less in 50 mm. It is generally
provided in thicknesses between 0.635 and 0.787 mm, and in widths of
25.4 mm. This product is most commonly used in the manufacture of
television tubes and is currently available under proprietary trade
names such as ``Durphynox 17.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``Durphynox 17'' is a trademark of Imphy, S.A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, three specialty stainless steels typically used in certain
industrial blades and surgical and medical instruments are also
excluded from the scope of this order. These include stainless steel
strip in coils used in the production of textile cutting tools (e.g.,
carpet knives).\4\ This steel is similar to ASTM grade 440F, but
containing, by weight, 0.5 to 0.7 percent of molybdenum. The steel also
contains, by weight, carbon of between 1.0 and 1.1 percent, sulfur of
0.020 percent or less, and includes between 0.20 and 0.30 percent
copper and between 0.20 and 0.50 percent cobalt. This steel is sold
under proprietary names such as ``GIN4 Mo.'' The second excluded
stainless steel strip in coils is similar to AISI 420-J2 and contains,
by weight, carbon of between 0.62 and 0.70 percent, silicon of between
0.20 and 0.50 percent, manganese of between 0.45 and 0.80 percent,
phosphorus of no more than 0.025 percent and sulfur of no more than
0.020 percent. This steel has a carbide density on average of 100
carbide particles per square micron. An example of this product is
``GIN5'' steel. The third specialty steel has a chemical composition
similar to AISI 420 F, with carbon of between 0.37 and 0.43 percent,
molybdenum of between 1.15 and 1.35 percent, but lower manganese of
between 0.20 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.025
percent, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of no
more than 0.020 percent. This product is supplied with a hardness of
more than Hv 500 guaranteed after customer processing, and is supplied
as, for example, ``GIN6.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This list of uses is illustrative and provided for
descriptive purposes only.
\5\ ``GIN4 Mo,'' ``GIN5'' and ``GIN6'' are the proprietary
grades of Hitachi Metals America, Ltd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, the Department conducted
a cost verification at TKN's headquarters. See Memorandum from Ernest
Gziryan to Neal M. Halper, ``Verification Report on the Cost of
Production and Constructed Value Data Submitted by ThussenKrupp Nirosta
GmbH and Affiliates,'' July 14, 2003. We used standard verification
procedures, including on-site inspection of the facility, examination
of relevant records, and selection of original documents containing
relevant information. See id.
Fair Value Comparisons
To determine whether sales of S4 in the United States were made at
less than fair value, we compared USP to NV, as described in the
``Constructed Export Price'' and ``Normal Value'' sections of this
notice. In accordance with section 777A(d)(2) of the Tariff Act, we
calculated monthly weighted-average NVs and compared these to
individual U.S. transactions.
Constructed Export Price (CEP)
We calculated CEP in accordance with subsection 772(b) of the
Tariff Act, because sales to the first unaffiliated purchaser took
place after importation into the United States. We based CEP on
[[Page 47041]]
the packed, delivered, duty paid or delivered to unaffiliated
purchasers in the United States. We made adjustments for price or
billing errors, where applicable. We also made deductions for movement
expenses in accordance with section 772(c)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act;
these included, where appropriate, foreign inland freight, marine
insurance, U.S. customs duties, U.S. inland freight, foreign brokerage
and handling, international freight, foreign inland freight, insurance,
and U.S. warehousing expenses. In accordance with section 772(d)(1) of
the Tariff Act, we deducted those selling expenses associated with
economic activities occurring in the United States, including direct
selling expenses (credit costs, warranty expenses, commissions and
other direct selling expenses), inventory carrying costs, and indirect
selling expenses. We offset credit expenses by the amount of interest
revenue on sales. For CEP sales, we also made an adjustment for profit
in accordance with section 772(d)(3) of the Tariff Act.
For those sales in which material was sent to an unaffiliated U.S.
processor to be further processed, we made an adjustment based on the
transaction-specific further-processing amounts reported by TKN. In
addition, TKN's affiliated U.S. reseller, Ken-Mac, performed further
processing on some of TKN's U.S. sales. For these sales, we deducted
the cost of further processing in accordance with section 772(d)(2) of
the Tariff Act. In calculating the cost of further manufacturing for
Ken-Mac, we relied upon the further manufacturing information provided
by TKN. See Memorandum from Ernest Gziryan to Neal M. Halper, ``Cost of
Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the
Preliminary Results,'' July 31, 2003 (Cost Memorandum).
Home Market
In order to determine whether there was a sufficient volume of
sales in the home market to serve as a viable basis for calculating NV
(i.e., the aggregate volume of home market sales of the foreign like
product was equal to or greater than five percent of the aggregate
volume of U.S. sales), we compared the respondent's volume of home
market sales of the foreign like product to the volume of U.S. sales of
the subject merchandise, in accordance with section 773(a)(1) of the
Tariff Act. As TKN's aggregate volume of home market sales of the
foreign like product was greater than five percent of its aggregate
volume of U.S. sales of the subject merchandise, we determined the home
market was viable. Therefore, we have based NV on home market sales in
the usual commercial quantities and in the ordinary course of trade.
Sales to affiliated customers in the home market not made at arm's-
length prices (if any) were excluded from our analysis because we
considered them to be outside the ordinary course of trade. If sales
were not made at arm's-length then the Department used the sale from
the affiliated party to the first unaffiliated party. See 19 CFR
351.102. To test whether these sales to affiliates were made at arm's-
length prices, we compared on a model-specific basis the starting
prices of sales to affiliated and unaffiliated customers net of all
movement charges, direct selling expenses, and packing. Where, for the
tested models of subject merchandise, prices to the affiliated party
were on average 99.5 percent or more of the price to the unaffiliated
parties, we determined that sales made to the affiliated party were at
arm's length. See 19 CFR 351.403(c).\6\ In instances where no price
ratio could be calculated for an affiliated customer because identical
merchandise was not sold to unaffiliated customers, we were unable to
determine whether these sales were made at arm's-length prices and,
therefore, excluded them from our analysis. See Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat
Products from Argentina, 58 FR 37062, 37077 (July 9, 1993) and Notice
of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Postponement of Final Determination; Emulsion Styrene-Butadiene Rubber
from Brazil, 63 FR 59509, 59512 (November 4, 1998). Where the exclusion
of such sales eliminated all sales of the most appropriate comparison
product, we made a comparison to the next most similar model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Because this review was initiated before November 23, 2002,
the 99.5 percent test applies to this review. See Antidumping
Proceedings: Affiliated Party Sales in the Ordinary Course of Trade,
67 FR 69186, 69197 (November 15, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost of Production (COP) Analysis
The Department disregarded certain sales made by TKN in the
preceding administrative review because these sales failed the cost
test. See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Germany, 68 FR
6716 (February 10, 2003); see also Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in
Coils from Germany; Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 67 FR 511199, 51201 (August 7, 2002). Thus, in
accordance with section 773(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Tariff Act, there are
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of S4 in the home
market were made at prices below their COP in the current review
period. Accordingly, pursuant to section 773(b) of the Tariff Act, we
initiated a cost investigation to determine whether sales made during
the POR were at prices below their respective COP.
In accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the Tariff Act, we
calculated COP based on the sum of the cost of materials and
fabrication for the foreign like product, plus an amount for general
and administrative expenses (G&A), interest expenses, and home market
packing costs. We relied on the COP data submitted by TKN, except where
noted below:
In accordance with section 773(f)(2) of the Tariff Act, where TKN's
reported transfer prices for purchases of nickel from an affiliated
party were not at arm's length, we increased these prices to reflect
the prevailing market prices. See Cost Memorandum. We recalculated the
cost of downstream processing performed by affiliates for TKN, and
revised TKN's reported G&A expense ratio to exclude net foreign
exchange losses. For both TKN and VDM, we revised the interest expense
ratio by recalculating the short-term interest income offset and
including the net miscellaneous financial expense, and we excluded
packing expenses from the cost of sales denominator of the financial
expense ratio. See ibid.
In accordance with section 773(b)(1) of the Tariff Act, in
determining whether to disregard home market sales made at prices below
COP, we examined whether such sales were made within an extended period
of time in substantial quantities, and whether such sales were made at
prices which would permit recovery of all costs within a reasonable
period of time.
Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act, where less than
20 percent of TKN's sales of a given model were at prices less than
COP, we did not disregard any below-cost sales of that model because
these below-cost sales were not made in substantial quantities. Where
20 percent or more of TKN's home market sales of a given model were at
prices less than the COP, we disregarded the below-cost sales because
such sales were made: (1) In substantial quantities within the POR
(i.e., within an extended period of time) in accordance with section
773(b)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act, and (2) at prices which would not
permit recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time, in
accordance with section 773(b)(2)(D) of
[[Page 47042]]
the Tariff Act (i.e., the sales were made at prices below the weighted-
average per-unit COP for the POR). We used the remaining sales as the
basis for determining NV, if such sales existed, in accordance with
section 773(b)(1) of the Tariff Act. We did not make use of constructed
value, as all U.S. sales were matched to home market merchandise.
Normal Value
We calculated NV based on prices to unaffiliated customers or
prices to affiliated customers that we determined to be at arm's
length. We made adjustments for interest revenue, discounts, and
rebates where appropriate. We made deductions, where appropriate, for
foreign inland freight, handling, and warehousing, pursuant to section
773(a)(6)(B) of the Tariff Act. In addition, when comparing sales of
similar merchandise, we made adjustments for differences in cost
attributable to differences in physical characteristics of the
merchandise pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Tariff Act and
19 CFR 351.411. We also made adjustments for differences in
circumstances of sale (COS) in accordance with section
773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Tariff Act and 19 CFR 351.410. We made COS
adjustments for imputed credit expenses and warranty expenses. We also
made an adjustment, where appropriate, for the CEP offset in accordance
with section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Tariff Act. See ``Level of Trade and
CEP Offset'' section below. Finally, we deducted home market packing
costs and added U.S. packing costs in accordance with sections
773(a)(6)(A) and (B) of the Tariff Act.
Level of Trade and CEP Offset
In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Tariff Act, to
the extent practicable, we determine NV based on sales in the
comparison market at the same level of trade (LOT) as the CEP
transaction. The NV LOT is that of the starting price sales in the
comparison market or, when NV is based on CV, that of the sales from
which we derive selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses and
profit. For CEP, it is the level of the constructed sale from the
exporter to the importer. Moreover, for CEP sales, we consider only the
selling activities reflected in the price after the deduction of
expenses and profit, pursuant to section 772(d) of the Tariff Act. See
Micron Technology, Inc. v. United States, 243 F.3d 1301, 1314-1315
(Fed. Cir. 2001).
To determine whether NV sales are at a different LOT than CEP
sales, we examine stages in the marketing process and selling functions
along the chain of distribution between the producer and the
unaffiliated customer. If the comparison market sales are at a
different LOT, and the difference affects price comparability, as
manifested in a pattern of consistent price differences between the
sales on which NV is based and comparison market sales at the LOT of
the export transaction, we make a LOT adjustment under section
773(a)(7)(A) of the Tariff Act. Finally, for CEP sales, if the NV level
is more remote from the factory than the CEP level and there is no
basis for determining whether the differences in the levels between NV
and CEP affect price comparability, we adjust NV under section
773(a)(7)(B) of the Tariff Act (the CEP offset provision). See e.g.,
Certain Carbon Steel Plate from South Africa, Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 62 FR 61731 (November 19, 1997).
In implementing these principles in this review, we asked TKN to
identify the specific differences and similarities in selling functions
and support services between all phases of marketing in the home market
and the United States. TKN identified four channels of distribution in
the home market: (1) Mill direct sales (2) mill inventory sales (3)
service center inventory sales, and (4) service center processed sales.
For all channels TKN performs similar selling functions such as
negotiating prices with customers, setting similar credit terms,
arranging freight to the customer, and conducting market research and
sales calls. The remaining selling activities did not differ
significantly by channel of distribution. Because channels of
distribution do not qualify as separate levels of trade when the
selling functions performed for each customer class or channel are
sufficiently similar, we determined that one level of trade exists for
TKN's home market sales.
For the U.S. market, TKN reported four channels of distribution:
(1) Back-to-back CEP sales made through TKNNA or Thyssen Marathon
Canada (TMC); (2) consignment CEP sales made through TKNNA or TMC; (3)
inventory sales from TKNNA and TMC; and (4) sales by Ken-Mac. All U.S.
sales were CEP transactions and TKN performed the same selling
functions in each instance. Therefore, the U.S. market has one LOT.
When we compared CEP sales (after deductions made pursuant to
section 772(d) of the Tariff Act) to home market sales, we determined
that for CEP sales TKN performed fewer customer sales contacts,
technical services, delivery services, and warranty services. In
addition, the differences in selling functions performed for home
market and CEP transactions indicate that home market sales involved a
more advanced stage of distribution than CEP sales. In the home market
TKN provides marketing further down the chain of distribution by
providing certain downstream selling functions that are normally
performed by the affiliated resellers in the U.S. market (e.g.,
technical advice, credit and collection, etc.).
Based on our analysis, we determined that CEP and the starting
price of home market sales represent different stages in the marketing
process, and are thus at different LOTs. Therefore, when we compared
CEP sales to HM sales, we examined whether a LOT adjustment may be
appropriate. In this case TKN sold at one LOT in the home market;
therefore, there is no basis upon which to determine whether there is a
pattern of consistent price differences between levels of trade.
Further, we do not have the information which would allow us to examine
pricing patterns of TKN's sales of other similar products, and there is
no other record evidence upon which such an analysis could be based.
Because the data available do not provide an appropriate basis for
making a LOT adjustment, but the LOT in Germany for TKN is at a more
advanced stage than the LOT of the CEP sales, a CEP offset is
appropriate in accordance with section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Tariff Act,
as claimed by TKN. Where there were commissions in the U.S. market but
not the home market, we calculated the CEP offset as the lesser of
either the U.S. commissions or the home market indirect selling
expenses. Where there were commissions in both the U.S. and home
markets, we calculated the CEP offset as the lesser of either the home
market indirect selling expenses or the difference between the U.S. and
home market commissions. Where there were commissions in the home
market but not the U.S. market, we set the CEP offset equal to zero. We
performed these calculations in accordance with 772(d)(1)(D) of the
Tariff Act. We applied the CEP offset to NV, whether based on home
market prices or CV.
Preliminary Results of Review
As a result of our review, we preliminarily determine the following
weighted-average dumping margin exists for the period July 1, 2001,
through June 30, 2002:
[[Page 47043]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted average
Manufacturer/exporter margin
(percentage)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TKN.................................................. 3.59
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department will disclose calculations performed within five
days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19
CFR 351.224(b). An interested party may request a hearing within thirty
days of publication. See CFR 351.310(c). Any hearing, if requested,
will be held 37 days after the date of publication, or the first
business day thereafter, unless the Department alters the date pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.310(d). Interested parties may submit case briefs no
later than 30 days after the date of publication of these preliminary
results of review. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the
case briefs, may be filed no later than 35 days after the date of
publication of this notice. Parties who submit argument in these
proceedings are requested to submit with the argument (1) A statement
of the issue, (2) a brief summary of the argument and (3) a table of
authorities. Further, we would appreciate it if parties submitting
written comments would provide the Department with an additional copy
of the public version of any such comments on diskette. The Department
will issue final results of these administrative reviews, including the
results of our analysis of the issues in any such written comments or
at a hearing, within 120 days of publication of these preliminary
results.
The Department shall determine, and Customs shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 19
CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate importer-specific ad valorem
assessment rates for the merchandise based on the ratio of the total
amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales made
during the POR to the total customs value of the sales used to
calculate those duties for each importer. These rates will be assessed
uniformly on all entries the respective importers made during the POR
if these preliminary results are adopted in the final results of
review. The Department will issue appropriate appraisement instructions
directly to Customs within fifteen days of publication of the final
results of review.
Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective
upon completion of the final results of this administrative review for
all shipments of S4 in coils from Germany entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the
final results of this administrative review, as provided by section
751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act:
(1) The cash deposit rates for TKN will be the rates established in
the final results of review;
(2) If the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or the
less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the manufacturer is, the
cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent
period 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 conducted by the Department, the cash
deposit rate will be the ``all others'' rate of 13.48 percent from the
LTFV investigation (see Notice of Amended Final Determination of
Antidumping Duty Investigation: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in
Coils from Germany, 67 FR 15178 (March 29, 2002)).
This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act.
Dated: July 31, 2003.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Grant Aldonas, Under Secretary.
[FR Doc. 03-20177 Filed 8-6-03; 8:45 am]