[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 188 (Monday, September 29, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58324-58326]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23124]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-851-803]
Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel From the Czech Republic: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Affirmative
Determination of Critical Circumstances
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that
grain-oriented electrical steel (GOES) from the Czech Republic is
being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair
value (LTFV), as provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act). In addition, we determine that critical
circumstances exist with respect to imports of the subject merchandise
from the Czech Republic. The period of investigation (POI) is July 1,
2012, through June 30, 2013. The final dumping margins of sales at LTFV
are listed below in the ``Final Determination'' section of this notice.
DATES: Effective Date: September 29, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Bailey at (202) 482-0193 or
Dennis McClure at (202) 482-5973; AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On May 9, 2014, the Department published the Preliminary
Determination of sales at LTFV of GOES from the Czech Republic.\1\ The
following events occurred since the Preliminary Determination was
issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel From the Czech Republic:
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Negative
Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances, and
Postponement of Final Determination, 79 FR 26717 (May 9, 2014)
(Preliminary Determination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In May 2014, the Department verified the sales data submitted by
ArcelorMittal Frydek-Mistek (AMFM) and its U.S. affiliate,
ArcelorMittal International America LLC, in accordance with section
782(i) of the Act. We also issued a supplemental cost of production
(COP) questionnaire to AMFM on May 9, 2014, and received the response
to this supplemental questionnaire on June 3, 2014.
In June 2014, we verified the COP information submitted by AMFM,
and we attempted to verify the sales information submitted by Sujani
Enterprises, Ltd. (Sujani), in accordance with section 782(i) of the
Act.
We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary
Determination. On July 28 and August 4, 2014, the domestic industry,\2\
AMFM, and Sujani submitted case and rebuttal briefs, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The domestic industry includes AK Steel Corporation,
Allegheny Ludlum, LLC, and the United Steelworkers (i.e., the
parties filing the petition), as well as one additional domestic
interested party, the International Union, United Automobile,
Aerospace, and Agricultural Implemental Workers of America (UAW).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Investigation
The scope of the investigation covers GOES, which is a flat-rolled
alloy steel product containing by weight specific levels of silicon,
carbon, and aluminum. For a complete description of the scope of the
investigation, see Appendix I of this notice.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in
this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum,
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues raised is
attached to this notice as Appendix II. The Issues and Decision
Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is
available to registered users at http://iaaccess.trade.gov and it is
available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the
main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version
of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at
http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed and electronic
versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in May and June 2014, we
verified the sales and cost information submitted by AMFM for use in
our final determination. We used standard verification procedures,
including an examination of relevant accounting and production records,
and original source documents provided by AMFM.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Memorandum to the File from Stephen Bailey and Dennis
McClure, Senior Analysts, entitled ``Verification of ArcelorMittal
International America LLC in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation
of Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel from the Czech Republic,'' dated
June 11, 2014; Memorandum to the File from Stephen Bailey and Dennis
McClure, Senior Analysts, entitled ``Verification of Sales Response
of ArcelorMittal Fr[yacute]dek-M[iacute]stek in the Less-Than-Fair-
Value Investigation of Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel from the
Czech Republic,'' dated July 3, 2014; and Memorandum to the File
from Christopher J. Zimpo, Senior Accountant, entitled
``Verification of Cost Response of ArcelorMittal Frydek-Mistek
(``AMFM'') in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Grain-Oriented
Electrical Steel from the Czech Republic,'' dated July 18, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, as provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in June
2014, we also attempted to verify the sales information submitted by
Sujani, using standard verification procedures.\4\ However, as noted in
the Sujani Sales Verification Report, Sujani was unable to substantiate
the data in its accounting system using independent sources, and it
withheld information when requested by the Department's verifiers. As a
consequence, we find that Sujani's reported data is unverifiable, and
so incomplete that it cannot serve as a reliable basis for reaching a
determination in this investigation.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Memorandum to the File from Dennis McClure, Senior
Analyst, and Stephen Banea, Analyst, Office II, AD/CVD Operations,
entitled, ``Verification of Sujani Enterprises, Inc. in the Less-
Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel
from the Czech Republic,'' dated July 16, 2013 (Sujani Sales
Verification Report).
\5\ See sections 782(e)(2) and (3) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 58325]]
Changes Since the Preliminary Determination
Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at
verification, we made certain changes to the margin calculation for
AMFM. For a discussion of these changes, see the ``Margin
Calculations'' section of the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
With respect to Sujani, as noted in the ``Verification'' section
above, we found that Sujani's reported sales information could not be
verified. As a consequence, for purposes of the final determination, we
find that necessary information is not available on the record, and
that Sujani withheld information requested by the Department,
significantly impeded the proceeding, and provided information that
could not be verified, within the meaning of sections 776(a)(1) and
776(a)(2)(A), (C), and (D) of the Act. Furthermore, we find that Sujani
failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability in this
proceeding because it failed to provide complete information at the
Department's request, although it possessed this information. Thus,
pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.308(a), and
consistent with sections 782(e)(2) and (3) of the Act, we have based
Sujani's dumping margin on total adverse facts available (AFA). For
further discussion, see Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 11.
``All Others'' Rate
Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated all-
others rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted-average of the
estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters
and producers individually investigated excluding any zero or de
minimis margins, and margins determined entirely under section 776 of
the Act. In the Preliminary Determination, the Department calculated
the ``all others'' rate based on the average of AMFM's and Sujani's
margins. In light of the Department's use of total AFA for Sujani for
purposes of this final determination, Sujani's rate is no longer
appropriate for use in calculating the ``all others'' rate. Therefore,
the Department has assigned AMFM's weighted-average dumping margin of
13.76 percent to all other entities not individually examined.
Final Determination
The final weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dumping margin
Manufacturer/Exporter (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ArcelorMittal Frydek-Mistek............................. 13.76
Sujani Enterprises, Ltd................................. 35.93
All Others.............................................. 13.76
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Determination of Critical Circumstances
For AMFM and the companies covered by the all others rate, we made
no changes to our critical circumstances analysis announced in the
Preliminary Determination and described in the ``Decision Memorandum
for the Preliminary Determination of the Antidumping Duty Investigation
of Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel from the Czech Republic.'' \6\ Thus,
pursuant to 735(a)(3) of the Act, we continue to find that critical
circumstances do not exist with respect to imports of GOES from the
Czech Republic from AMFM and the companies covered by the all others
rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Preliminary Determination, 79 FR at 26717, and
accompanying Preliminary Issues and Decision Memorandum at 16-18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Sujani, because we now find it to be uncooperative, we are
determining for Sujani, as AFA, a final dumping margin of 35.93
percent, which is the highest model-specific margin calculated for
AMFM. In performing its critical circumstances analysis, the Department
normally considers margins of 25 percent or more for export price sales
and 15 percent or more for constructed export price sales sufficient to
impute importer knowledge of sales at LTFV.\7\ Because Sujani's final
dumping margin exceeds the threshold sufficient to impute knowledge of
dumping, this margin provides a sufficient basis for imputing knowledge
of sales of subject merchandise at LTFV to the importers, as set forth
in section 735(a)(3)(ii) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See, e.g., Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Germany,
Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine: Preliminary
Determination of Critical Circumstances, 67 FR 6224, 6225 (February
11, 2002) (Steel Wire Rod Preliminary Determination), unchanged in
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Moldova, 67 FR 55790
(Steel Wire Rod Moldova Final Determination); Affirmative
Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances: Magnesium Metal
From the People's Republic of China, 70 FR 5606, 5607 (February 3,
2005) (Magnesium Metal Preliminary Critical Circumstances
Determination), unchanged in Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Affirmative Critical Circumstances: Magnesium
Metal From the People's Republic of China, 70 FR 9037 (Magnesium
Metal Final Determination) (February 24, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In determining whether an importer knew or should have known that
there was likely to be material injury caused by reason of such
imports, the Department normally will look to the preliminary injury
determination of the International Trade Commission (ITC).\8\ If the
ITC finds a reasonable indication of material injury to the relevant
U.S. industry, the Department will determine that a reasonable basis
exists to impute importer knowledge that material injury is likely by
reason of such imports.\9\ Here, the ITC found that ``there is a
reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is
materially injured by reason of imports from China, Czech Republic,
Germany, Japan, Korea, Poland, and Russia of grain-oriented electrical
steel, provided for in subheadings 7225.11.00, 7226.11.10, and
7226.11.90 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. . .
.'' \10\ Therefore, the ITC's preliminary injury determination in this
investigation is sufficient to impute knowledge of the likelihood of
material injury.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See, e.g., Certain Potassium Phosphate Salts From the
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances in the Antidumping Duty Investigation, 75 FR
24572, 24573 (May 5, 2010), unchanged in Certain Potassium Phosphate
Salts From the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Termination of Critical
Circumstances Inquiry, 75 FR 30377 (June 1, 2010).
\9\ See, e.g., Steel Wire Rod Preliminary Determination,
Unchanged in Steel Wire Rod Moldova Final Determination; and
Magnesium Metal Preliminary Critical Circumstances Determination,
unchanged in Magnesium Metal Final Determination.
\10\ See Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel From China, Czech
Republic, Germany, Japan, Korea, Poland, and Russia; Determinations,
78 FR 70574 (November 26, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 351.206(h)(1) of the Department's regulations provides
that, in determining whether imports of the subject merchandise were
``massive,'' the Department normally will examine: (i) The volume and
value of the imports; (ii) seasonal trends; and (iii) the share of
domestic consumption accounted for by the imports. In addition, 19 CFR
351.206(h)(2) provides that, ``{i{time} n general, unless the imports
during the `relatively short period' . . . have increased by at least
15 percent over the imports during an immediately preceding period of
comparable duration, the Secretary will not consider the imports
massive.'' It is the Department's practice to conduct its massive
imports analysis based on the experience of investigated companies,
using the reported monthly shipment data for the base and comparison
periods.\11\ However, as noted above, we
[[Page 58326]]
determined that Sujani has not acted to the best of its ability in
responding to our requests for information.\12\ Therefore, the
Department determines that the use of adverse facts available is
warranted. Accordingly, we find that there were massive imports of
subject merchandise from Sujani, pursuant to our practice.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final Determination of Critical
Circumstances: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe From the
People's Republic of China, 73 FR 31970, 31972-31973 (June 5, 2008);
and Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the People's Republic of
China, 74 FR 2049, 2052-2053 (January 14, 2009) (SDGE Final
Determination).
\12\ See the ``Verification'' section of this memorandum, above.
\13\ See SDGE Final Determination, 74 FR at 2052-2053.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the analysis above, we determine that critical circumstances
exist with respect to imports of GOES from Sujani.
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the
date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department
will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to
suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of GOES from the Czech
Republic, as described in Appendix I of this notice, for AMFM and the
companies covered by the all others rate which were entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after May 9, 2014, the
date of publication of the preliminary determination of this
investigation in the Federal Register. For entries made by Sujani, in
accordance with section 735(c)(4)(B) of the Act, we will instruct CBP
to suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of GOES from the
Czech Republic, as described in Appendix I of this notice which were
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after
February 8, 2014, which is 90 days prior to the date of publication of
the preliminary determination of this investigation in the Federal
Register.
Further, the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit
equal to the amount by which normal value exceeds U.S. price as
follows: (1) For the mandatory respondents listed above, the cash
deposit rate will be equal to the dumping margin which the Department
determined in this final determination; (2) if the exporter is not a
mandatory respondent identified in this investigation, but the producer
is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the producer
of the subject merchandise; and (3) the cash deposit rates for all
other producers or exporters will be 13.76 percent. The suspension of
liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the
ITC of the final affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. Because
the final determination in this proceeding is affirmative, in
accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will make its
final determination as to whether the domestic industry in the United
States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by
reason of imports of GOES from the Czech Republic no later than 45 days
after our final determination. If the ITC determines that material
injury or threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will
be terminated and all cash deposits will be refunded. If the ITC
determines that such injury does exist, the Department will issue an
antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further
instruction by the Department, antidumping duties on all imports of the
subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of
liquidation.
Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders (APO)
This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to APO of their
responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or
conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure
to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a
sanctionable violation.
This determination and this notice are issued and published
pursuant to sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: September 22, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix I--Scope of the Investigation
The scope of this investigation covers grain-oriented silicon
electrical steel (GOES). GOES is a flat-rolled alloy steel product
containing by weight at least 0.6 percent but not more than 6
percent of silicon, not more than 0.08 percent of carbon, not more
than 1.0 percent of aluminum, and no other element in an amount that
would give the steel the characteristics of another alloy steel, in
coils or in straight lengths. The GOES that is subject to this
investigation is currently classifiable under subheadings
7225.11.0000, 7226.11.1000, 7226.11.9030, and 7226.11.9060 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 investigation
is dispositive. Excluded are flat-rolled products not in coils that,
prior to importation into the United States, have been cut to a
shape and undergone all punching, coating, or other operations
necessary for classification in Chapter 85 of the HTSUS as a
transformer part (i.e., laminations).
Appendix II--List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum
General Comments
1. Affiliation Between AMFM and Sujani
2. The Knowledge Test
Company-Specific Comments
AMFM
3. Home Market Sale Outside the Ordinary Course of Trade
4. Indirect Selling Expenses
5. Packing Expenses
6. CEP Offset
7. Electricity
8. Rolls and Roller Adjustment to Cost of Manufacturing
9. Verification Changes to AMFM's Cost Data
10. Profit
Sujani
11. Total Facts Available for Sujani
12. Other Sujani Adjustments
[FR Doc. 2014-23124 Filed 9-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P