Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain Tin Mill Products From Japan

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-588-854]

Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain Tin Mill

Products From Japan

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 30, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samantha Denenberg at (202) 482-1386

or Linda Ludwig at (202) 482-3833, Import Administration, International

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

Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.

Initiation of Investigations

The Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are

references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective

date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise

indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are references

to the provisions codified at 19 CFR Part 351 (1998).

The Petition

On October 28, 1999, the Department of Commerce (``the

Department'') received a petition filed in proper form by Weirton Steel

Corporation, Independent Steelworkers Union, and United Steelworkers of

America, AFL-CIO (collectively petitioners). The Department received

supplemental information to the petition on November 8, 1999.

In accordance with section 732(b) of the Act, petitioners allege

that imports of certain tin mill products (``TMP'') from Japan 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 Act, and that such

imports are materially injuring an industry in the United States.

The Department finds that petitioners filed these petitions on

behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as

defined in sections 771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act and they have

demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the

antidumping investigation they are requesting the Department to

initiate (see Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

below).

[[Page 66893]]

Scope of Investigation

The scope of this investigation includes tin mill flat-rolled

products that are coated or plated with tin, chromium or chromium

oxides. Flat-rolled steel products coated with tin are known as tin

plate. Flat-rolled steel products coated with chromium or chromium

oxides are known as tin-free steel or electrolytic chromium-coated

steel. The scope includes all the noted tin mill products regardless of

thickness, width, form (in coils or cut sheets), coating type

(electrolytic or otherwise), edge (trimmed, untrimmed or further

processed, such and scroll cut), coating thickness, surface finish,

temper, coating metal (tin, chromium, chromium oxide), reduction

(single-or double-reduced), and whether or not coated with a plastic

material.

The merchandise subject to this investigation is classified in the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''), under

HTSUS subheadings 7210.11.0000, 7210.12.0000, 7210.50.0000,

7212.10.0000, and 7210.50.0000 if of non-alloy steel and under HTSUS

subheadings 7225.99.0090, and 7226.99.0000 if of alloy steel. Although

the subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, our

written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on

behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act

provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic

producers or workers who support the petition account for: (1) at least

25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and

(2) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product

produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or

opposition to, the petition.

Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the

producers of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether the

petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the

Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic

like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is

responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has been

injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product

in order to define the industry. While both the Department and the ITC

must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like

product (section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different purposes

and pursuant to separate and distinct authority. In addition, the

Department's determination is subject to limitations of time and

information. Although this may result in different definitions of the

like product, such differences do not render the decision of either

agency contrary to the law.1

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ See Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd., v. United States, 688 F. Supp.

639, 642-44 (CIT 1988); High Information Content Flat Panel Displays

and Display Glass Therefore from Japan: Final Determination;

Rescission of Investigation and Partial Dismissal of Petition, 56 FR

32376, 32380-81 (July 16, 1991).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a

product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in

characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation

under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic

like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an

investigation,'' i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be

investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the

petition. Moreover, petitioners do not offer a definition of domestic

like product distinct from the scope of the investigation.

The domestic like product referred to in the petition is the single

domestic like product defined in the ``Scope of Investigation''

section, above. The Department has no basis on the record to find the

petition's definition of the domestic like product to be inaccurate.

The Department has, therefore, adopted the domestic like product

definition set forth in the petition. In this case, the Department has

determined that the petition and supplemental information to the

petition contain adequate evidence of sufficient industry support (see

Attachment to the Initiation Checklist Re: Industry Support, November

17, 1999). Producers and workers supporting the petition represent over

50 percent of total production of the domestic like product.

Accordingly, both tests under section 732(c)(4)(A) are satisfied, and

the Department determines that this petition is filed on behalf of the

domestic industry within the meaning of 732(b)(1) of the Act.

Export Price and Normal Value

The following are descriptions of the allegations of sales at less

than fair value upon which our decision to initiate this investigation

is based. Should the need arise to use any of this information in our

preliminary or final determinations for purposes of facts available

under section 776 of the Act, we may re-examine the information and

revise the margin calculations, if appropriate.

Japan

Petitioners identified Nippon Steel Corporation, NKK Corporation,

Kawasaki Steel Corporation, and Toyo Kohan Co. Ltd. as possible

exporters of TMP from Japan. Petitioners further identified these

exporters as the primary producers of subject merchandise in Japan.

Petitioners based export price (``EP'') for imports from Japan on

import values as recorded in official U.S. Department of Commerce IM-

145 statistics. In calculating import values, petitioners used the

customs values reported for the HTS categories which represent imports

of tin plate (e.g., HTSUS 7210.12.0000) and imports of tin free steel

(e.g., HTSUS 7210.50.0000). Petitioners used average customs values for

each product (for the month of June 1999) which approximate the FOB

price of the merchandise, packaged and ready for delivery in the

exporter's country. Petitioners did not deduct foreign inland freight

and handling in Japan because they had no information regarding these

expenses.

With respect to normal value (``NV''), petitioners stated that the

volume of Japanese home market sales was sufficient to form a basis for

normal value, pursuant to section 773(a)(1)(C)(ii) of the Act.

Petitioners constructed normal values based on the average prices of

tin mill products sold in Japan by Nippon Steel Corporation

(``Nippon'') to large end users during June 1999. Petitioners

determined that, because Nippon is the largest producer of the subject

merchandise in the Japanese market, Nippon's prices would be

representative of the normal value in the Japanese tin mill market. The

Japanese home market prices for five sample models of tin plate

products and thirteen sample models of tin free steel were obtained by

foreign market research consultants in Japan. The prices used in the

calculation of NV were delivered, VAT exclusive prices. Petitioners

derived NV by deducting a commission from the delivered price, which

represents payment made to large trading companies. Petitioners also

deducted expenses for freight, handling, and other movement related

expenses such as storage during transportation and tolls. For the

calculation of dumping margins, petitioners compared the average unit

value for all five sample sales of tin plate to the average customs

value for the corresponding HTSUS item for the month of June 1999, and

the average unit value for all thirteen sample sales of tin free steel

to the

[[Page 66894]]

average customs value for the corresponding HTSUS item for the month of

June 1999.

The estimated dumping margins in the petition, based on a

comparison between Nippon's home market prices and U.S. prices derived

from IM-145 statistics, range from 0.78 percent to 95.29 percent.

Fair Value Comparisons

Based on the data provided by petitioners, there is reason to

believe that imports of certain tin mill products from Japan are being,

or are likely to be, sold at less than fair value.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

The petition alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic

like product is being materially injured, and is threatened with

material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise

sold at less than fair value. Petitioners explained that the industry's

injured condition is evident in the declining trends in net operating

profits, net sales volumes, and capacity utilization. The allegations

of injury and causation are supported by relevant evidence including

U.S. Customs import data, lost sales, and pricing information. The

Department assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding

material injury and causation, and determined that these allegations

are supported by accurate and adequate evidence and meet the statutory

requirements for initiation (see Attachments to Initiation Checklist,

Re: Material Injury, November 17, 1999).

Initiation of Antidumping Investigations

Based upon our examination of the petition on TMP and petitioners'

supplemental information clarifying the petition, we have found that

the petition meets the requirements of section 732 of the Act.

Therefore, we are initiating an antidumping duty investigation to

determine whether imports of certain tin mill products from Japan are

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

value. Unless the deadline is extended, we will make our preliminary

determination no later than 140 days after the date of publication of

this notice.

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, a copy of the

public version of each petition has been provided to the

representatives of Japan. We will attempt to provide a copy of the

public version of each petition to each exporter named in the petition

(as appropriate).

International Trade Commission Notification

We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section

732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determinations by the ITC

The ITC will determine, by December 13, 1999, whether there is a

reasonable indication that imports of certain tin mill products from

Japan are causing material injury, or threatening to cause material

injury, to a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination will result in

the investigation being terminated; otherwise, these investigations

will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.

This notice is published pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act.

Dated: November 17, 1999.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 99-30972 Filed 11-29-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P