Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Stainless Steel Bar From Brazil, India, Italy, Japan and Spain

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[A-351-825, A-533-810, A-475-813, A-588-833 and A-469-805]

Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Stainless Steel

Bar From Brazil, India, Italy, Japan and Spain

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 27, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Jenkins or Shawn Thompson, Office

of Antidumping Investigations, Import Administration, International

Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-

1756, or (202) 482-3965.

INITIATION OF INVESTIGATIONS:

The Petitions

On December 30, 1993, we received petitions filed in proper form by

five producers of stainless steel bar (AL Tech Specialty Steel Corp.,

Carpenter Technology Corp., Republic Engineered Steels, Slater Steels

Corporation and Talley Metals Technology, Inc.) and one labor union

(United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO/CLC) (collectively,

petitioners). On January 4, 1994, and January 7, 1994, Electralloy

Corp. and the Crucible Specialty Metals Division of the Crucible

Materials Corp., respectively, notified the Department that they are

also petitioners in these investigations. In accordance with 19 CFR

353.12, the petitioners allege that imports of stainless steel bar from

Brazil, India, Italy, Japan and Spain are being, or are likely to be,

sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of

section 731 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and that

these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to,

a U.S. industry.

The petitioners have stated that they have standing to file the

petitions because they are interested parties, as defined under

sections 771(9)(C) and 771(9)(D) of the Act, and because the petitions

were filed on behalf of the U.S. industry producing the product subject

to these investigations. If any interested party, as described under

paragraphs (C), (D), (E), or (F) of section 771(9) of the Act, wishes

to register support for, or opposition to, these petitions, it should

file a written notification with the Acting Assistant Secretary for

Import Administration.

Under the Department's regulations, any producer or reseller

seeking exclusion from a potential antidumping duty order must submit

its request for exclusion within 30 days of the date of the publication

of this notice. The procedures and requirements are contained in 19 CFR

353.14.

Period of Investigation

The period of investigation is July 1, 1993 to December 31, 1993.

Scope of Investigations

For purposes of these investigations, the term ``stainless steel

bar'' means articles of stainless steel in straight lengths that have

been either hot-rolled, forged, turned, cold-drawn, cold-rolled or

otherwise cold-finished, or ground, having a uniform solid cross

section along their whole length in the shape of circles, segments of

circles, ovals, rectangles (including squares), triangles, hexagons,

octagons or other convex polygons. Stainless steel bar includes cold-

finished stainless steel bars that are turned or ground in straight

lengths, whether produced from hot-rolled bar or from straightened and

cut rod or wire, and reinforcing bars that have indentations, ribs,

grooves, or other deformations produced during the rolling process.

Except as specified above, the term does not include stainless

steel semi-finished products, cut length flat-rolled products (i.e.,

cut length rolled products which if less than 4.75 mm in thickness have

a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness, or if 4.75 mm or

more in thickness having a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures at

least twice the thickness), wire (i.e., cold-formed products in coils,

of any uniform solid cross section along their whole length, which do

not conform to the definition of flat-rolled products), and angles,

shapes and sections.

The stainless steel bar subject to these investigations is

currently classifiable under subheadings 7222.10.00, 7222.20.00 and

7222.30.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

(HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and

customs purposes, our written description of the scope of these

investigations is dispositive.

For purposes of these initiations we are considering the subject

merchandise to be one class or kind of merchandise. We invite

interested parties to comment on this issue by March 25, 1994.

United States Price and Foreign Market Value

Brazil

Petitioners based United States price (USP) on January-March 1993

invoices issued by the U.S. subsidiary of Acos Villares SA (Villares),

a Brazilian producer of stainless steel bar, to an unrelated U.S.

customer. Since USP was based on C&F terms of sale, petitioners

deducted from USP amounts for U.S. duty, ocean freight, marine

insurance, and harbor maintenance and U.S. merchandise processing fees.

Petitioners used Villares' delivered home market prices as the

basis for FMV. These prices and related expenses were contained in a

market research report. FMV was based on actual tax-exclusive, May-June

1993 delivered sales prices of Villares to unrelated customers in

Brazil. Petitioners deducted from FMV an amount for inland freight.

Petitioners indicate that the home market price used for FMV was

reported in U.S. dollars, thus taking into account Brazil's

hyperinflationary economy.

Based on a comparison of USP to FMV, the dumping margin alleged by

petitioners for stainless steel bar from Brazil is 19.43 percent.

India

Petitioners calculated USP based on two different methodologies.

First, petitioners obtained a July 1993 U.S. price quote for stainless

steel bar from India to an unrelated U.S. customer. Since the prices

were quoted C&F for delivery to the east or west coast of the United

States, petitioners deducted from USP amounts for import duties, ocean

freight, marine insurance, and harbor maintenance and U.S. merchandise

processing fees.

Petitioners calculated a second weighted-average USP using the

average import values of stainless steel bar from India for August and

September 1993. The unit values were derived from U.S. Department of

Commerce import statistics.

Petitioners used Indian home market prices for stainless steel bar

from Mukand Ltd., the largest stainless steel bar producer in India, as

the basis for FMV. These prices were contained in a market research

report. Petitioners deducted from these prices taxes, insurance,

freight, and a distributor's margin based on information in the market

research report. Because the comparison of USP and FMV involved non-

identical merchandise, petitioners made an adjustment for differences

in merchandise based on information contained in the market research

report.

For purposes of this initiation, we have accepted petitioners'

calculation of USP based on the first methodology. Accordingly, the

range of dumping margins of stainless steel bar from India based on a

comparison of USP to FMV alleged by petitioners under this methodology

is 11.26 to 21.02 percent.

Italy

Petitioners based USP on price quotations for U.S. sales made by

Cogne, an Italian producer of stainless steel bar, to an unrelated U.S.

customer. Since these USPs were quoted FOB duty paid, petitioners

deducted the applicable import duties.

Petitioners calculated FMV using two methodologies. First,

petitioners used Cogne's delivered home market prices as the basis for

FMV. These prices were contained in a market research report.

Petitioners deducted from these prices inland freight and insurance

based on information contained in the same report.

Second, petitioners based FMV on constructed value (CV).

Petitioners used CV because they alleged that Cogne's home market sales

are being made at prices below the cost of production (COP).

Petitioners also allege that another Italian company, Bolzano, is

making home market sales of stainless steel bar at prices below the

COP. These allegations are based on a comparison of home market prices

for Cogne and Bolzano, obtained from the market research report, with

COP. COP was based on the COP of an efficient U.S. producer of

stainless steel bar, adjusted for known differences in costs between

the United States and Italy. Where petitioners calculated CV, they used

the COP derived from this U.S. producer and added the statutory minimum

of eight percent for profit.

The Department is initiating COP investigations for the two

companies where petitioners provided company-specific home market

prices, contingent upon whether these companies become respondents in

this investigation. The Department is not initiating COP investigations

for those companies and exporters where petitioners did not provide

company-specific home market prices.

Petitioners allege a price-to-price dumping margin for stainless

steel bar from Italy of 15.15 percent. Petitioners allege a price-to-CV

dumping margin of 157.03 percent.

Japan

Petitioners based USP on June 1993 sales invoices from Daido Steel

Sheet Corporation (Daido), a Japanese producer of stainless steel bar,

to an unrelated U.S. customer. Since the USPs were quoted ex-dock, duty

paid, Los Angeles, petitioners deducted from USP amounts for U.S. duty,

ocean freight, marine insurance, harbor maintenance and U.S.

merchandise processing fees.

Petitioners used Daido's delivered May-June 1993 home market sales

prices as the basis for FMV. These prices were contained in a market

research report. To calculate an ex-factory price, except for credit,

petitioners used expense information from the market research report.

For credit, petitioners used the rate in effect in Japan for March 1993

as reported in the International Financial Statistics, July 1993.

Petitioners deducted from FMV an amount for inland freight and

insurance, trade discounts, rebates and sales promotion expenses,

advertising and warranties. Petitioners made circumstance-of-sale

adjustments for credit and packing.

Based on a comparison of USP to FMV, the dumping margins alleged by

petitioners for stainless steel bar from Japan range from 48.00 to

61.47 percent.

Spain

Petitioners based USP on a September 1993 price quote for U.S.

sales made by Acenor, a Spanish producer of stainless steel bar, to an

unrelated U.S. company. Since USP was quoted on a direct mill delivery

basis, petitioners deducted the applicable import duties, ocean

freight, marine insurance, harbor maintenance and U.S. merchandise

processing fees.

Petitioners calculated FMV using two methodologies. First,

petitioners used Acenor's delivered home market prices as the basis for

FMV. These prices were contained in a market research report.

Petitioners deducted inland freight from FMV using information

contained in the same report.

Second, petitioners based FMV on CV because they alleged that

Acenor's home market sales are being made at prices below the COP.

Petitioners also allege that another Spanish company, Roldan, is making

home market sales of stainless steel bar at prices below the COP. These

allegations are based on a comparison of home market prices for Acenor

and Roldan, obtained from the market research report, with COP. COP was

based on the COP of an efficient U.S. producer, adjusted for known

differences in costs between the United States and Spain. Where

petitioners calculated CV, they used the COP from this producer and

added the statutory minimum of eight percent for profit.

The Department is initiating COP investigations for the two

companies where petitioners provided company-specific home market

prices, contingent upon whether these companies become respondents in

this investigation. The Department is not initiating COP investigations

for those companies and exporters where petitioners did not provide

company-specific home market prices.

Petitioners allege a price-to-price dumping margin for stainless

steel bar from Spain of 38.82 percent. Petitioners allege a price-to-CV

dumping margin of 144.88 percent.

Initiation of Investigations

We have examined the petitions on stainless steel bar from Brazil,

India, Italy, Japan and Spain, and have found that the petitions meet

the requirements of section 732(b) of the Act. Therefore, we are

initiating antidumping duty investigations to determine whether imports

of stainless steel bar from Brazil, India, Italy, Japan and Spain are

being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair

value.

Preliminary Determination by the International Trade Commission

The International Trade Commission (ITC) will determine by February

14, 1994, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of

stainless steel bar from Brazil, India, Italy, Japan and Spain are

materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. A

negative ITC determination on any one of these investigations will

result in that investigation being terminated; otherwise, the

investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time

limits.

This notice is published pursuant to section 732(c)(2) of the Act

and 19 CFR 353.13(b).

Dated: January 19, 1994.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 94-1776 Filed 1-26-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P