You are on page 1of 8

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No.

151 / Monday, August 8, 2005 / Notices 45675

calculations. As noted by U&A France, assessment of antidumping duties on will be notified of the time and location.
the Department has previously included entries of merchandise covered by these The Department will publish the final
the value of merchandise entered for results and for future deposits of results of this administrative review,
consumption into the United States, but estimated duties. For duty assessment including the results of its analysis of
first sold outside of the United States, in purposes, we calculated an importer- issues raised in any case or rebuttal
the denominator of the importer specific specific assessment rate by dividing the brief, no later than 120 days after
assessment calculations. See Mexinox total dumping margins calculated for publication of these preliminary results,
2002; Mexinox 2003; and Mexinox 2004. the U.S. sales to the importer by the sum unless extended. See 19 CFR 351.213(h).
In Mexinox 2002, we determined that it of total entered value of these sales plus
is appropriate to include the entered the entered value of subject Notification to Importers
value of merchandise entered for merchandise entered for consumption This notice serves as a preliminary
consumption into the United States, but but first sold outside of the United reminder to importers of their
subsequently first sold outside of the States. If the preliminary results are responsibility under regulation 19 CFR
United States into the denominator of adopted in the final results of review, 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding
the Department’s importer specific this rate will be used for assessment of the reimbursement of antidumping
assessment calculation to ‘‘facilitate the antidumping duties on all entries of the duties prior to liquidation of the
U.S. Customs Service’s collection of subject merchandise by that importer relevant entries during this review
antidumping duties on subject during the POR. period. Failure to comply with this
merchandise.’’ See Mexinox 2002 and requirement could result in the
Revocation of the Order
accompanying Issues and Decision Secretary’s presumption that
Memorandum, at comment 15. On July 12, 2005, the United States
International Trade Commission (ITC) reimbursement of antidumping duties
Finally, we disagree with the
informed the Department that the occured and the subsequent assessment
Petitioners’ assertion that we are unable
revocation of the antidumping duty of double antidumping duties.
to determine who is the importer of
record from the record of this case. U&A orders on stainless steel sheet and strip These preliminary results of this
France specifically states that U&A from France would not likely lead to administrative review and notice are
France is the importer of record for the continuation of recurrence of material issued and published in accordance
sales entered for consumption, but injury to an industry in the United with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of
subsequently first sold outside of the States within a reasonably foreseeable the Act.
United States, at Appendix SA–2 of the time. Accordingly, the Department will Dated: August 1, 2005.
supplemental questionnaire response be revoking this antidumping duty order Joseph A. Spetrini,
dated March 22, 2005. Accordingly, the effective, July 27, 2004. Therefore, cash
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Department has preliminarily included deposits of estimated antidumping Administration.
the entered value of the merchandise duties are no longer required.
[FR Doc. 05–15639 Filed 8–5–05; 8:45 am]
which was imported for consumption Public Comment BILLING CODE 3510–DS–M
into the United States, but subsequently
first sold outside of the United States in Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(b), the
the denominator of the importer specific Department will disclose to parties to
the proceeding any calculation DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
assessment calculation. A more detailed
discussion of this issue and the performed in connection with these International Trade Administration
computer code which implements this preliminary results within five days
decision is included in the Department’s after the date of publication of this
notice. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309, [A–201–822]
analysis memorandum. See Analysis
Memorandum. interested parties may submit written
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils
comments in response to these
Preliminary Results of Review from Mexico; Preliminary Results of
preliminary results. Unless extended by
Antidumping Duty Administrative
As a result of this review, we the Department, case briefs are to be
preliminarily find that the following submitted within 30 days after the date
weighted-average dumping margin of publication of this notice, and AGENCY: Import Administration,
exists: rebuttal briefs, limited to arguments International Trade Administration,
raised in case briefs, are to be submitted Department of Commerce.
STAINLESS STEEL SHEET AND STRIP IN no later than five days after the time
SUMMARY: In response to requests from
COILS FROM FRANCE limit for filing case briefs. Parties who
submit arguments in this proceeding are respondent ThyssenKrupp Mexinox
Producer/manufac- Weighted-average requested to submit with the argument: S.A. de C.V. (Mexinox S.A.) and
turer/exporter margin (1) A statement of the issues, and (2) a Mexinox USA, Inc. (Mexinox USA)
brief summary of the argument. Case (collectively, Mexinox) and petitioners,1
U&A France .............. 11.11 percent. the Department of Commerce (the
and rebuttal briefs must be served on
interested parties in accordance with 19 Department) is conducting an
Duty Assessment CFR 351.303(f). administrative review of the
Upon issuance of the final results of Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), antidumping duty order on stainless
review, the Department shall determine, within 30 days of the date of publication steel sheet and strip in coils (S4 in coils)
and CBP shall assess, antidumping of this notice, interested parties may from Mexico. This administrative
duties on all appropriate entries. The request a public hearing on arguments review covers imports of subject
Department will issue appraisement to be raised in the case and rebuttal
1 Petitioners are Allegheny Ludlum Corporation,
instructions directly to CBP within briefs. Unless the Secretary specifies
North American Stainless, United Auto Workers
fifteen days of publication of the final otherwise, the hearing, if requested, will Local 3303, Zanesville Armco Independent
results of review. The final results of be held two days after the date for Organization, Inc. and the United Steelworkers of
this review shall be the basis for the submission of rebuttal briefs. Parties America, AFL-CIO/CLC.

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:13 Aug 05, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM 08AUN1
45676 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 151 / Monday, August 8, 2005 / Notices

merchandise from Mexinox S.A. during Department issued its first supplemental 7219.14.00.30, 7219.14.00.65,
the period July 1, 2003, to June 30, 2004. questionnaire for sections A, B, and C, 7219.14.00.90, 7219.32.00.05,
We preliminarily determine that sales to which Mexinox responded on March 7219.32.00.20, 7219.32.00.25,
of S4 in coils from Mexico have been 7, 2005. On April 14, 2005, the 7219.32.00.35, 7219.32.00.36,
made below normal value (NV). If these Department issued a second 7219.32.00.38, 7219.32.00.42,
preliminary results are adopted in our supplemental questionnaire for sections 7219.32.00.44, 7219.33.00.05,
final results of administrative review, A through C, as well as for section E 7219.33.00.20, 7219.33.00.25,
we will instruct U.S. Customs and pertaining to an affiliated U.S. reseller, 7219.33.00.35, 7219.33.00.36,
Border Protection (CBP) to assess Ken–Mac Metals, Inc. (Ken–Mac). 7219.33.00.38, 7219.33.00.42,
antidumping duties based on the Mexinox responded to sections A–C of 7219.33.00.44, 7219.34.00.05,
difference between the constructed this supplemental questionnaire on May 7219.34.00.20, 7219.34.00.25,
export price (CEP) and NV. Interested 16, 2005, and filed its response to 7219.34.00.30, 7219.34.00.35,
parties are invited to comment on these section E on May 23, 2005. The 7219.35.00.05, 7219.35.00.15,
preliminary results. Parties who submit Department also issued a supplemental 7219.35.00.30, 7219.35.00.35,
argument in these proceedings are questionnaire for section D on April 18, 7219.90.00.10, 7219.90.00.20,
requested to submit with the argument: 2005; Mexinox submitted its response to 7219.90.00.25, 7219.90.00.60,
1) a statement of the issues, 2) a brief this questionnaire on May 16, 2005. On 7219.90.00.80, 7220.12.10.00,
summary of the argument, and 3) a table May 25, 2005, the Department issued a 7220.12.50.00, 7220.20.10.10,
of authorities. second supplemental questionnaire for 7220.20.10.15, 7220.20.10.60,
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 8, 2005. section D and Mexinox filed its 7220.20.10.80, 7220.20.60.05,
response to this on June 8, 2005. 7220.20.60.10, 7220.20.60.15,
Finally, on July 6, 2005, the Department 7220.20.60.60, 7220.20.60.80,
Angela Strom, Maryanne Burke or
issued a third supplemental 7220.20.70.05, 7220.20.70.10,
Robert James, AD/CVD Operations,
questionnaire for sections A through C, 7220.20.70.15, 7220.20.70.60,
Office 7, Import Administration,
to which Mexinox responded on July 7220.20.70.80, 7220.20.80.00,
International Trade Administration,
14, 2005. 7220.20.90.30, 7220.20.90.60,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Because it was not practicable to 7220.90.00.10, 7220.90.00.15,
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, complete this review within the normal 7220.90.00.60, and 7220.90.00.80.
Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) time frame, on March 8, 2005, we Although the HTS subheadings are
482–2704, (202) 482–5604 or (202) 482– published in the Federal Register our provided for convenience and customs
0649, respectively. notice of the extension of time limits for purposes, the Department’s written
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: this review. Stainless Steel Sheet and description of the merchandise under
Background Strip in Coils from Mexico; Extension of this order is dispositive.
Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Excluded from the scope of this order
On July 27, 1999, the Department Antidumping Duty Administrative are the following: (1) sheet and strip that
published in the Federal Register the Review, 70 FR 11194 (March 8, 2005). is not annealed or otherwise heat treated
Notice of Amended Final Determination This extension established the deadline and pickled or otherwise descaled; (2)
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and for these preliminary results as July 31, sheet and strip that is cut to length; (3)
Antidumping Duty Order; Stainless 2005. plate (i.e., flat–rolled stainless steel
Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from products of a thickness of 4.75 mm or
Mexico (64 FR 40560). On July 1, 2004, Period of Review more); (4) flat wire (i.e., cold–rolled
the Department published the The period of review (POR) is July 1, sections, with a prepared edge,
Antidumping or Countervailing Duty 2003, through June 30, 2004. rectangular in shape, of a width of not
Order, Finding, or Suspended more than 9.5 mm); and (5) razor blade
Investigation; Opportunity To Request Scope of the Order
steel. Razor blade steel is a flat–rolled
Administrative Review, of, inter alia, S4 For purposes of this order, the product of stainless steel, not further
in coils from Mexico for the period July products covered are certain stainless worked than cold–rolled (cold–
1, 2003, through June 30, 2004. 69 FR steel sheet and strip in coils. Stainless reduced), in coils, of a width of not
39903. steel is an alloy steel containing, by more than 23 mm and a thickness of
In accordance with 19 CFR weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 0.266 mm or less, containing, by weight,
351.213(b)(1), Mexinox and petitioners 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with 12.5 to 14.5 percent chromium, and
requested that we conduct an or without other elements. The subject certified at the time of entry to be used
administrative review. On August 30, sheet and strip is a flat–rolled product in the manufacture of razor blades. See
2004, we published in the Federal in coils that is greater than 9.5 mm in Chapter 72 of the HTSUS, ‘‘Additional
Register a notice of initiation of this width and less than 4.75 mm in U.S. Note’’ 1(d).
antidumping duty administrative review thickness, and that is annealed or In response to comments by interested
covering the period July 1, 2003 through otherwise heat treated and pickled or parties, the Department has determined
June 30, 2004. Initiation of Antidumping otherwise descaled. The subject sheet that certain specialty stainless steel
and Countervailing Duty Administrative and strip may also be further processed products are also excluded from the
Reviews and Requests for Revocation in (e.g., cold–rolled, polished, aluminized, scope of this order. These excluded
Part, 69 FR 52857 (August 30, 2004). coated, etc.) provided that it maintains products are described below.
On September 8, 2004, the the specific dimensions of sheet and Flapper valve steel is defined as
Department issued an antidumping duty strip following such processing. stainless steel strip in coils containing,
questionnaire to Mexinox. Mexinox The merchandise subject to this order by weight, between 0.37 and 0.43
submitted its response to section A of is currently classifiable in the percent carbon, between 1.15 and 1.35
the questionnaire on October 8, 2004, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the percent molybdenum, and between 0.20
and its response to sections B through United States (HTS) at subheadings: and 0.80 percent manganese. This steel
E of the questionnaire on November 10, 7219.13.00.31, 7219.13.00.51, also contains, by weight, phosphorus of
2004. On January 28, 2005, the 7219.13.00.71, 7219.13.00.81, 0.025 percent or less, silicon of between

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:13 Aug 05, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM 08AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 151 / Monday, August 8, 2005 / Notices 45677

0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of available under proprietary trade names 1.1 percent, sulfur of 0.020 percent or
0.020 percent or less. The product is such as ‘‘Arnokrome III.’’2 less, and includes between 0.20 and
manufactured by means of vacuum arc Certain electrical resistance alloy steel 0.30 percent copper and between 0.20
remelting, with inclusion controls for is also excluded from the scope of this and 0.50 percent cobalt. This steel is
sulphide of no more than 0.04 percent order. This product is defined as a non– sold under proprietary names such as
and for oxide of no more than 0.05 magnetic stainless steel manufactured to ‘‘GIN4 Mo.’’ The second excluded
percent. Flapper valve steel has a tensile American Society of Testing and stainless steel strip in coils is similar to
strength of between 210 and 300 ksi, Materials (ASTM) specification B344 AISI 420–J2 and contains, by weight,
yield strength of between 170 and 270 and containing, by weight, 36 percent carbon of between 0.62 and 0.70
ksi, plus or minus 8 ksi, and a hardness nickel, 18 percent chromium, and 46 percent, silicon of between 0.20 and
(Hv) of between 460 and 590. Flapper percent iron, and is most notable for its 0.50 percent, manganese of between
valve steel is most commonly used to resistance to high temperature 0.45 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no
produce specialty flapper valves for corrosion. It has a melting point of 1390 more than 0.025 percent and sulfur of
compressors. degrees Celsius and displays a creep no more than 0.020 percent. This steel
rupture limit of 4 kilograms per square has a carbide density on average of 100
Also excluded is a product referred to
millimeter at 1000 degrees Celsius. This carbide particles per square micron. An
as suspension foil, a specialty steel
steel is most commonly used in the example of this product is ‘‘GIN5’’ steel.
product used in the manufacture of
production of heating ribbons for circuit The third specialty steel has a chemical
suspension assemblies for computer
breakers and industrial furnaces, and in composition similar to AISI 420 F, with
disk drives. Suspension foil is described
rheostats for railway locomotives. The carbon of between 0.37 and 0.43
as 302/304 grade or 202 grade stainless
product is currently available under percent, molybdenum of between 1.15
steel of a thickness between 14 and 127
proprietary trade names such as ‘‘Gilphy and 1.35 percent, but lower manganese
microns, with a thickness tolerance of
36.’’3 of between 0.20 and 0.80 percent,
plus–or-minus 2.01 microns, and
Certain martensitic precipitation– phosphorus of no more than
surface glossiness of 200 to 700 percent
hardenable stainless steel is also 0.025percent, silicon of between 0.20
Gs. Suspension foil must be supplied in
excluded from the scope of this order. and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of no more
coil widths of not more than 407 mm,
This high–strength, ductile stainless than 0.020 percent. This product is
and with a mass of 225 kg or less. Roll
steel product is designated under the supplied with a hardness of more than
marks may only be visible on one side,
Unified Numbering System (UNS) as Hv 500 guaranteed after customer
with no scratches of measurable depth.
S45500–grade steel, and contains, by processing, and is supplied as, for
The material must exhibit residual
weight, 11 to 13 percent chromium, and example, ‘‘GIN6.’’6
stresses of 2 mm maximum deflection,
and flatness of 1.6 mm over 685 mm 7 to 10 percent nickel. Carbon, Sales Made Through Affiliated
length. manganese, silicon and molybdenum Resellers
each comprise, by weight, 0.05 percent
Certain stainless steel foil for or less, with phosphorus and sulfur A. U.S. Market
automotive catalytic converters is also each comprising, by weight, 0.03 Mexinox USA, a wholly–owned
excluded from the scope of this order. percent or less. This steel has copper, subsidiary of Mexinox S.A., which is a
This stainless steel strip in coils is a niobium, and titanium added to achieve subsidiary of ThyssenKrupp AG, the
specialty foil with a thickness of aging, and will exhibit yield strengths as lead holding company for steel
between 20 and 110 microns used to high as 1700 Mpa and ultimate tensile operations in the ThyssenKrupp Group,
produce a metallic substrate with a strengths as high as 1750 Mpa after sold subject merchandise in the United
honeycomb structure for use in aging, with elongation percentages of 3 States during the POR to unaffiliated
automotive catalytic converters. The percent or less in 50 mm. It is generally customers. Mexinox USA also made
steel contains, by weight, carbon of no provided in thicknesses between 0.635 sales of subject merchandise to affiliated
more than 0.030 percent, silicon of no and 0.787 mm, and in widths of 25.4 company, Ken–Mac, located in the
more than 1.0 percent, manganese of no mm. This product is most commonly United States. Ken–Mac is an operating
more than 1.0 percent, chromium of used in the manufacture of television division of ThyssenKrupp Materials
between 19 and 22 percent, aluminum tubes and is currently available under Inc., a subsidiary of ThyssenKrupp USA
of no less than 5.0 percent, phosphorus proprietary trade names such as Inc. (TKUSA), which is the primary
of no more than 0.045 percent, sulfur of ‘‘Durphynox 17.’’4 holding company for ThyssenKrupp AG
no more than 0.03 percent, lanthanum Finally, three specialty stainless steels in the U.S. market. Ken–Mac further
of between 0.002 and 0.05 percent, and typically used in certain industrial manufactured and/or resold the subject
total rare earth elements of more than blades and surgical and medical merchandise to unaffiliated customers
0.06 percent, with the balance iron. instruments are also excluded from the in the United States. See Mexinox’s
Permanent magnet iron–chromium- scope of this order. These include October 8, 2004, questionnaire response
cobalt alloy stainless strip is also stainless steel strip in coils used in the at A–10, A–18 and A–37 through A–38.
excluded from the scope of this order. production of textile cutting tools (e.g., For purposes of this review, we have
This ductile stainless steel strip carpet knives).5 This steel is similar to included both Mexinox USA’s and Ken–
contains, by weight, 26 to 30 percent ASTM grade 440F, but containing, by Mac’s sales of subject merchandise to
chromium, and 7 to 10 percent cobalt, weight, 0.5 to 0.7 percent of unaffiliated customers in the United
with the remainder of iron, in widths molybdenum. The steel also contains, States in our sales analysis.
B. Home Market
228.6 mm or less, and a thickness by weight, carbon of between 1.0 and Mexinox Trading, S.A. de C.V.
between 0.127 and 1.270 mm. It exhibits
(Mexinox Trading), a wholly–owned
magnetic remanence between 9,000 and 2 ‘‘Arnokrome III’’ is a trademark of the Arnold

Engineering Company. subsidiary of Mexinox S.A., resells the

12,000 gauss, and a coercivity of 3 ‘‘Gilphy 36’’ is a trademark of Imphy, S.A. foreign like product as well as other
between 50 and 300 oersteds. This 4 ‘‘Durphynox 17’’ is a trademark of Imphy, S.A.
product is most commonly used in 5 This list of uses is illustrative and provided for 6 ‘‘GIN4 Mo,’’ ‘‘GIN5’’ and ‘‘GIN6’’ are the
electronic sensors and is currently descriptive purposes only. proprietary grades of Hitachi Metals America, Ltd.

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:13 Aug 05, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM 08AUN1
45678 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 151 / Monday, August 8, 2005 / Notices

merchandise in the home market. because evidence on the record CEP level and there is no basis for
Mexinox reported its sales to Mexinox indicates that final prices are not fixed determining whether the difference in
Trading during the POR. These sales until the material is sought to be the levels between NV and CEP affects
represented a small portion of released for shipment and invoicing. price comparability, we adjust NV
Mexinox’s total sales of the foreign like See Mexinox’s October 8, 2004, under section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act
product in the home market and were questionnaire response at A–35. (the CEP offset provision). See, e.g.,
less than five percent of home market Final Determination of Sales at Less
Product Comparisons
sales. See, e.g., Mexinox’s October 8, Than Fair Value: Greenhouse Tomatoes
2004, questionnaire response at A–3 to In accordance with section 771(16) of From Canada, 67 FR 8781 (February 26,
A–4 and its May 23, 2005, supplemental the Act we considered all products 2002); see also Notice of Final
questionnaire response at Attachment produced by Mexinox S.A. covered by Determination of Sales at Less Than
A–28 (quantity and value chart). the description in the ‘‘Scope of the Fair Value: Certain Cut–to-Length
Because Mexinox Trading’s sales of the Order’’ section, above, and sold in the Carbon Steel Plate from South Africa,
foreign like product were less than five home market during the POR, to be 62 FR 61731 (November 19, 1997) and
percent of home market sales of the foreign like products for purposes of Certain Hot–Rolled Flat–Rolled Carbon
foreign like product, in accordance with determining appropriate product Quality Steel Products from Brazil;
19 CFR 351.403(d), we did not require comparisons to U.S. sales. We relied on Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Mexinox to report downstream sales by nine characteristics to match U.S. sales Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR
Mexinox Trading to its first unaffiliated of subject merchandise to comparison 17406 (April 6, 2005). For CEP sales, we
customers. This treatment is also sales of the foreign like product (listed consider only the selling activities
consistent with that employed in past in order of priority): (1) grade; (2) cold/ reflected in the price after the deduction
administrative reviews of S4 in coils hot rolled; (3) gauge; (4) surface finish; of expenses and CEP profit under
from Mexico. See, e.g., Stainless Steel (5) metallic coating; (6) non–metallic section 772(d) of the Act. See Micron
Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico; coating; (7) width; (8) temper; and (9) Technology Inc. v. United States, 243
Final Results of Antidumping Duty edge trim. Where there were no sales of F.3d 1301, 1314–1315 (Fed. Cir. 2001).
Administrative Review, 70 FR 3677 identical merchandise in the home We expect that, if the claimed LOTs are
(January 26, 2005) (S4 in Coils from market to compare to U.S. sales, we the same, the functions and activities of
Mexico 2002–2003 Final Results). compared U.S. sales to the next most the seller should be similar. Conversely,
similar foreign like product on the basis if a party claims that the LOTs are
Fair Value Comparisons of the characteristics and reporting different for different groups of sales,
To determine whether sales of S4 in instructions listed in the Department’s the functions and activities of the seller
coils from Mexico to the United States September 8, 2004, questionnaire. should be dissimilar. See Porcelain–on-
were made at less than fair value, we Steel Cookware from Mexico: Final
Level of Trade
compared the CEP to NV, as described Results of Administrative Review, 65 FR
in the ‘‘Constructed Export Price’’ and In accordance with section 30068 (May 10, 2000).
‘‘Normal Value’’ sections of this notice, 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to the extent We obtained information from
below. In accordance with section practicable, we base NV on sales made Mexinox regarding the marketing stages
777A(d)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as in the comparison market at the same involved in making the reported foreign
amended (the Act), we compared level of trade (LOT) as the export market and U.S. sales. Mexinox
individual CEPs to monthly weighted– transaction. There is one LOT in the provided a description of all selling
average NVs. comparison market, the NV LOT, which activities performed, along with a
is defined as the starting price of the flowchart and tables comparing the
Transactions Reviewed comparison sales in the home market or, levels of trade and degrees of intensity
For its home market and U.S. sales, when NV is based on constructed value among each channel of distribution and
Mexinox reported the date of invoice as (CV), we use the sales from which type in both markets. See Mexinox’s
the date of sale. This is consistent with selling, general, and administrative October 8, 2004, questionnaire response
the Department’s stated preference for (SG&A) expenses and profit are derived. at A–30 through A–35 and Attachments
using the invoice date as the date of With respect to CEP transactions in the A–4–A through A–4–C. Mexinox sold
sale, unless a date other than the date U.S. market, the CEP LOT is defined as S4 in coils to end–users and retailers/
of invoice better reflects the date on the level of the constructed sale from distributors in the home market and to
which the exporter or producer the exporter to the importer. See end–users and distributors/service
establishes the material terms of sale. 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. centers in the U.S.
See 19 CFR 351.401(i). Mexinox To determine whether NV sales are at With respect to the home market,
indicated the invoice date represented a different LOT than CEP sales, we Mexinox identified two channels of
the date when the material terms of examine stages in the marketing process distribution described as follows: 1)
sales (i.e., price and quantity) are and selling functions along the chain of direct shipments (i.e., products
definitively set, and that up to the date distribution between the producer and produced to order) and 2) sales from
of shipment and invoicing, these terms the unaffiliated customer. See 19 CFR inventory. See Mexinox’s October 8,
were subject to change. See, e.g., 351.412(c)(2). If the comparison–market 2004, questionnaire response at A–22
Mexinox’s October 8, 2004, sales are at a different LOT, and the through A–23. We compared the selling
questionnaire response at A–35 and A– difference affects price comparability, as functions performed across all home
41. Mexinox stated that sale orders may manifested in a pattern of consistent market channels of distribution. In
include provisional prices and price differences between the sales on certain activities such as pre–sale
customers may adjust the quantity of an which NV is based and comparison– technical assistance, process customer
order up to the date of shipment. See market sales at the LOT of the export orders, sample analysis, prototypes and
March 7, 2005, supplemental transaction, we make an LOT trial lots, freight and delivery, price
questionnaire response at 12. We have adjustment under section 773(a)(7)(A) of negotiation/customer communications,
preliminarily determined the date of the Act. For CEP sales, if the NV level sales calls and visits and warranty
invoice is the appropriate date of sale is more remote from the factory than the services, the level of intensity for direct

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:13 Aug 05, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM 08AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 151 / Monday, August 8, 2005 / Notices 45679

shipments and sales through inventory the U.S. customer. For example, in seller affiliated with the producer or
were identical, while only a few comparing Mexinox’s selling activities, exporter, to a purchaser not affiliated
functions such as inventory we find there are more functions with the producer or exporter. Mexinox
maintenance and just–in-time performed in the home market which properly classified all of its U.S. sales of
performance differed. Within its two are not a part of CEP transactions (e.g., subject merchandise as CEP transactions
channels of distribution, Mexinox S.A. technical assistance, sample analysis, because such sales were made in the
made sales to both affiliated and prototypes and trial lots, price United States by Mexinox’s affiliate,
unaffiliated distributors/retailers and negotiation/customer communications, Mexinox USA, to unaffiliated
end–users, all requiring smaller volume inventory maintenance, just–in-time purchasers. We based CEP on packed
transactions, technical assistance, deliveries, sales calls and visits, and prices to unaffiliated purchasers in the
frequent sales calls and visits and other warranty services). For selling activities United States. We made adjustments for
similar selling services. See October 8, performed in both markets (e.g., process billing adjustments, discounts and
2004, at A–25 and Attachments A–4–B customer orders, freight and delivery), rebates, and commissions, where
and A–4–C. While we find slight we find that Mexinox performed each of applicable. We also made deductions for
differences in the level of intensity of these at a higher level of intensity in the movement expenses in accordance with
these selling activities performed for home market than in the U.S. market. section 772(c)(2)(A) of the Act. These
direct shipments and sales through We note that CEP sales from Mexinox to expenses included, where appropriate:
inventory to both end–users and Mexinox USA generally occur at the foreign inland freight, foreign brokerage
retailers, these differences are minor beginning of the distribution chain and and handling, inland insurance, ocean
and do not establish distinct, multiple more closely resemble that of an ex– freight (for sales to Puerto Rico), U.S.
levels of trade in Mexico. Based on our factory sale. In contrast, all sales in the customs duties, U.S. inland freight, U.S.
analysis of all of Mexinox’s home home market occur closer to the end of brokerage, and U.S. warehousing
market selling functions, we find that all the distribution chain and involve expenses. As directed by section
home market sales were made at the smaller individual transaction volumes, 772(d)(1) of the Act, we deducted those
same LOT, the NV LOT. which require more selling functions to selling expenses associated with
With respect to the U.S. market, be performed. See Mexinox’s October 8, economic activities occurring in the
Mexinox indicated that it made CEP 2004, questionnaire response at A–30 United States, including direct selling
sales through its U.S. affiliate, Mexinox through A–35 and Attachments A–4–A expenses (i.e., credit costs, warranty
USA, through the following four through A–4–C. See also Mexinox’s July expenses, and another expense not
channels of distribution: 1) direct 14, 2005, supplemental questionnaire subject to public disclosure), inventory
shipments to unaffiliated customers; 2) response at 3 to 6. From the evidence on carrying costs, and other indirect selling
stock sales from the San Luis Potosi the record, we conclude that the NV expenses. We also made an adjustment
(SLP) factory; 3) sales to unaffiliated LOT is at a more advanced stage than for profit in accordance with section
customers through Mexinox USA’s the CEP LOT. 772(d)(3) of the Act. We used the
inventory/warehouses; and 4) sales Since we found that the home market adjustments as reported by Mexinox,
through Ken–Mac. Ken–Mac is an and U.S. sales were made at different except we recalculated the U.S. indirect
affiliated service center located in the LOTs, we examined whether an LOT selling expense ratio. See Analysis of
United States which purchases S4 in adjustment or a CEP offset may be Data Submitted by ThyssenKrupp
coils produced by Mexinox and Ken– appropriate in this review. As we found Mexinox S.A. de C.V. for the
Mac then resells (after, in some only one LOT in the home market, it
Preliminary Results of the Antidumping
instances, further manufacturing the was not possible to make an LOT
Duty Administrative Review of S4 in
merchandise) to unaffiliated U.S. adjustment to home market sales,
Coils from Mexico (Preliminary
customers. We compared the selling because such an adjustment is
Analysis Memorandum) from Angela
activities performed in each channel dependent on our ability to identify a
Strom and Maryanne Burke to the File
and found the same selling functions pattern of consistent price differences
dated August 1, 2005.
(e.g., price negotiation/customer between the home market sales on
communications, sales calls, warranty which NV is based and home market For sales in which the material was
services and freight/delivery sales at the LOT of the export sent to an unaffiliated U.S. processor to
arrangements) were performed at the transaction. See 19 CFR be further processed, we made an
same relative level of intensity in all 351.412(d)(1)(ii). Furthermore, we have adjustment based on the transaction–
channels of distribution. See October 8, no other information that provides an specific further–processing amounts
2004, questionnaire response at appropriate basis for determining an reported by Mexinox. In addition, the
Attachment A 4–C. Accordingly, we LOT adjustment. Because the data U.S. affiliated reseller Ken–Mac
find all CEP sales constitute one LOT, available do not form an appropriate performed some further manufacturing
the CEP LOT, in the U.S. market. basis for making an LOT adjustment, of some of Mexinox’s U.S. sales. For
We then compared the CEP LOT to and because the NV LOT is at a more these sales, we deducted the cost of
the NV LOT. The CEP LOT is based on advanced stage of distribution than the further processing in accordance with
the selling activities associated with the CEP LOT, we have made a CEP offset to section 772(d)(2) of the Act. In
transaction between Mexinox and its NV in accordance with section calculating the cost of further
affiliated importer, Mexinox USA; 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act. manufacturing for Ken–Mac, we relied
whereas the NV LOT is based on the upon Ken–Mac’s reported cost of further
selling activities associated with the Constructed Export Price manufacturing materials, labor and
transactions with unaffiliated customers In accordance with section 772(b) of overhead, plus amounts for further
in the home market. From our analysis, the Act, CEP is the price at which the manufacturing general and
we found that the selling functions subject merchandise is first sold (or administrative expenses (G&A), as
performed for home market customers agreed to be sold) in the United States reported in the May 23, 2005,
are either performed at a higher degree before or after the date of importation by supplemental questionnaire response
of intensity or are greater in number or for the account of the producer or and incorporated the revised financial
than the selling functions performed for exporter of such merchandise, or by a expense ratio (INTEX). See the

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:13 Aug 05, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM 08AUN1
45680 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 151 / Monday, August 8, 2005 / Notices

Department’s Cost of Production and C. Cost of Production Analysis based on our comparison of prices to the
Constructed Value Calculation Because we disregarded sales of weighted–average COPs for the POR,
Adjustments for the Preliminary Results certain products made at prices below they were at prices which would not
- ThyssenKrupp Mexinox S.A. de C.V. the cost of production (COP) in the most permit the recovery of all costs within
(Cost Calculation Memorandum) from recently completed review of S4 in coils a reasonable period of time, in
Laurens Van Houten to the File and from Mexico (See, e.g., Stainless Steel accordance with section 773(b)(2)(D) of
Preliminary Analysis Memorandum, Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico; the Act.
both dated August 1, 2005. Final Results of Antidumping Duty Our cost test for Mexinox revealed
Administrative Review, 69 FR 6259 that, for home market sales of certain
Normal Value (February 10, 2004) (S4 in Coils from models, less than 20 percent of the sales
A. Selection of Comparison Market Mexico 2001–2002 Final Results), we of those models were at prices below the
To determine whether there is a had reasonable grounds to believe or COP. We therefore retained all such
sufficient volume of sales in the home suspect that sales of the foreign like sales in our analysis and used them as
market to serve as a viable basis for product under consideration for the the basis for determining NV. Our cost
calculating NV (i.e., the aggregate determination of NV in this review for test also indicated that, for certain
volume of home market sales of the Mexinox may have been made at prices models, more than 20 percent of the
foreign like product is greater than five below the COP, as provided by section home market sales of those models were
percent of the aggregate volume of U.S. 773(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act. Pursuant to sold at prices below the COP within an
sales), we compared Mexinox’s volume section 773(b)(1) of the Act, we initiated extended period of time and were at
of home market sales of the foreign like a COP investigation of sales by prices which would not permit the
product to the volume of its U.S. sales Mexinox. recovery of all costs within a reasonable
of the subject merchandise, in We recalculated Mexinox’s G&A and period of time. Thus, in accordance
accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B) of INTEX as described in the Cost with section 773(b)(1) of the Act, we
the Act. Because Mexinox’s aggregate Calculation Memorandum and excluded these below–cost sales from
volume of home market sales of the Preliminary Analysis Memorandum. We our analysis and used the remaining
foreign like product was greater than added material and fabrication costs for above–cost sales as the basis for
five percent of its aggregate volume of the foreign like product, plus amounts determining NV.
U.S. sales for the subject merchandise, for SG&A and packing costs, in D. Constructed Value
we determined the home market was accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the In accordance with section 773(e) of
viable. See, e.g., Mexinox’s May 23, Act. We then computed weighted– the Act, we calculated CV based on the
2005, supplemental questionnaire average COPs during the POR, and sum of Mexinox’s material and
response at Attachment A–28. compared the weighted–average COP fabrication costs, SG&A expenses, profit,
B. Affiliated–Party Transactions and figures to home market sales prices of and U.S. packing costs. We calculated
Arm’s–Length Test the foreign like product as required the COP component of CV as described
Sales to affiliated customers in the under section 773(b) of the Act, to above in the ‘‘Cost of Production
home market not made at arm’s–length determine whether these sales had been Analysis’’ section of this notice. In
prices are excluded from our analysis made at prices below the COP. On a accordance with section 773(e)(2)(A) of
because we consider them to be outside product–specific basis, we compared the Act, we based SG&A expenses and
the ordinary course of trade. See 19 CFR the COP to the home market prices net profit on the amounts incurred and
351.102(b). Consistent with 19 CFR of billing adjustments, discounts and realized by the respondent in
351.403(c) and (d) and agency practice, rebates, and any applicable movement connection with the production and sale
‘‘the Department may calculate NV charges. of the foreign like product in the
based on sales to affiliates if satisfied In determining whether to disregard ordinary course of trade, for
that the transactions were made at arm’s home market sales made at prices below consumption in the foreign country.
length.’’ See China Steel Corp. v. United the COP, we examined, in accordance E. Price–to-Price Comparisons
States, 264 F. Supp. 2d 1339, 1365 (CIT with sections 773(b)(1)(A) and (B) of the We calculated NV based on prices to
2003). To test whether the sales to Act, whether, within an extended unaffiliated customers or prices to
affiliates were made at arm’s–length period of time, such sales were made in affiliated customers we determined to
prices, we compared on a model– substantial quantities; and whether such be at arm’s length. We made
specific basis the starting prices of sales sales were made at prices which adjustments for billing adjustments,
to affiliated and unaffiliated customers permitted the recovery of all costs discounts, rebates and interest revenue,
net of all direct selling expenses, within a reasonable period of time in where appropriate. We made
discounts and rebates, movement the normal course of trade. Where less deductions, where appropriate, for
charges, and packing. Where prices to than 20 percent of the respondent’s foreign inland freight, insurance,
the affiliated party were, on average, home market sales of a given model handling, and warehousing, pursuant to
within a range of 98 to 102 percent of were at prices below the COP, we did section 773(a)(6)(B) of the Act. In
the price of identical or comparable not disregard any below–cost sales of addition, we made adjustments for
merchandise to the unaffiliated parties, that model because we determined that differences in cost attributable to
we determined that the sales made to the below–cost sales were not made differences in physical characteristics of
the affiliated party were at arm’s length. within an extended period of time and the merchandise pursuant to section
See Antidumping Proceedings: in ‘‘substantial quantities.’’ Where 20 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR
Affiliated Party Sales in the Ordinary percent or more of the respondent’s 351.411, as well as for differences in
Course of Trade, 67 FR 69186, 69194 home market sales of a given model circumstances of sale (COS) in
(November 15, 2002). We found that one were at prices less than the COP, we accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii)
affiliated home market customer failed disregarded the below–cost sales of the Act and 19 CFR 351.410. We
the arm’s length test and, in accordance because: (1) they were made within an made COS adjustments for imputed
with the Department’s practice, we extended period of time in ‘‘substantial credit expenses and warranty expenses.
excluded these sales from our analysis. quantities,’’ in accordance with sections As noted in the ‘‘Level of Trade’’ section
See section 773(f)(2) of the Act. 773(b)(2)(B) and (C) of the Act; and (2) of this notice, we also made an

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:13 Aug 05, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM 08AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 151 / Monday, August 8, 2005 / Notices 45681

adjustment for the CEP offset in Mexinox has not provided all the Weighted
accordance with section 773(a)(7)(B) of information necessary to complete our Average
the Act. Finally, we deducted home analysis. Pursuant to section 776(a)(1) of Manufacturer / Exporter Margin
market packing costs and added U.S. (percent-
the Act, it is appropriate to use the facts age)
packing costs in accordance with otherwise available in calculating a
sections 773(a)(6)(A) and (B) of the Act. margin on Ken–Mac’s unattributed ThyssenKrupp Mexinox S.A. de
We used Mexinox’s adjustments and sales. Section 776(a)(1) of the Act C.V. ......................................... 3.01
deductions as reported, except for provides that the Department will,
certain handling expenses and imputed The Department will disclose
subject to section 782(d) of the Act, use
credit expenses. We have recalculated calculations performed within five days
the facts otherwise available in reaching
the handling expenses incurred by of the date of publication of this notice
home market affiliate, Mexinox Trading, a determination if ‘‘necessary
information is not available on the in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
and applied the revised ratio to those An interested party may request a
home market sales whereby Mexinox record.’’ For these preliminary results,
we have calculated a margin on Ken– hearing within thirty days of
reported a handling expense. We based publication of these preliminary results.
imputed credit expense on the short– Mac’s unattributed sales by applying the
See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Any hearing, if
term borrowing rate associated with the overall margin calculated on Mexinox’s
requested, will be held 37 days after the
currency of each home market sale other U.S. sales of subject merchandise date of publication, or the first business
transaction at issue. See Preliminary to the weighted–average price of Ken– day thereafter, unless the Department
Analysis Memorandum. Both Mac’s unattributed sales. This alters the date per 19 CFR 351.310(d).
methodologies are consistent with past methodology is consistent with that Interested parties may submit case briefs
administrative reviews of this case. See employed in past administrative no later than 30 days after the date of
e.g., S4 in Coils from Mexico 2002–2003 reviews of S4 in coils from Mexico. See, publication of these preliminary results
Final Results. e.g., S4 in Coils from Mexico 2002–2003 of review. Rebuttal briefs limited to
F. Price–to-CV Comparisons Final Results. issues raised in the case briefs, may be
In accordance with section 773(a)(4)
Prior to applying the overall margin filed no later than 35 days after the date
of the Act, we based NV on CV if we
calculated on other sales/resales of of publication of this notice. Parties who
were unable to find a home market
subject merchandise to Ken–Mac’s submit argument in these proceedings
match of such or similar merchandise.
unattributed sales, we calculated the are requested to submit with the
Where appropriate, we made
portion of the unattributed sales argument: 1) a statement of the issue, 2)
adjustments to CV in accordance with
quantity that could be reasonably a brief summary of the argument and 3)
section 773(a)(8) of the Act.
allocated to subject stainless steel a table of authorities. Further, parties
Facts Available submitting case briefs and/or rebuttal
merchandise purchased from Mexinox.
In accordance with section 776(a)(1) briefs are requested to provide the
We based our allocation on the relative
of the Act, for these preliminary results Department with an additional copy of
percentage (by volume) of subject
we find it necessary to use partial facts the public version of any such argument
stainless steel merchandise that Ken– on diskette. The Department will issue
available in those instances where the Mac had purchased from Mexinox as
respondent did not provide certain final results of this administrative
compared to the total stainless steel review, including the results of our
information necessary to conduct our merchandise it had purchased from all
analysis. analysis of the issues in any such
vendors. See Mexinox’s May 23, 2005, argument or at a hearing, within 120
In our September 8, 2004,
questionnaire at G–6, we requested that supplemental questionnaire response at days of publication of these preliminary
Mexinox provide sales and cost data for Attachment KMC–14. The Department results.
all affiliates involved with the finds that Mexinox, to the best of its Upon completion of this
production or sale of the merchandise ability, complied with the Department’s administrative review, the Department
under review during the POR in both request for information; thus, we have shall determine, and CBP shall assess,
home and U.S. markets. In its October not used an adverse inference, as antidumping duties on all appropriate
8, 2004, questionnaire response at A–2, provided under section 776(b) of the entries. In accordance with 19 CFR
Mexinox indicated that its affiliated Act, to calculate a margin on Ken–Mac’s 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate
reseller, Ken–Mac, sold subject unattributed sales. importer–specific ad valorem
merchandise in the United States during assessment rates for the merchandise
Currency Conversion based on the ratio of the total amount of
the POR. In its November 10, 2004,
submission at KMC–2, Mexinox We made currency conversions into antidumping duties calculated for the
provided data related to Ken–Mac’s U.S. dollars based on the exchange rates examined sales made during the POR to
resales of subject merchandise to in effect on the dates of the U.S. sales, the total customs value of the sales used
unaffiliated customers in the United as certified by the Federal Reserve Bank, to calculate those duties. The total
States, although Mexinox notified the customs value is based on the entered
in accordance with section 773A(a) of
Department that a small subset of sale value reported by Mexinox, for all U.S.
the Act.
transactions could not be traced to an entries of subject merchandise initially
original stock item or supplier. In its Preliminary Results of Review purchased for consumption to the
supplemental questionnaire response United States made during the POR. See
dated May 23, 2005, at 2, Mexinox As a result of our review we Preliminary Analysis Memorandum. In
reported those sale transactions preliminarily determine the following accordance with 19 CFR 356.8(a), the
(unattributed sales) where the origin of weighted–average dumping margin Department will issue appropriate
the original stock item could not be exists for the period July 1, 2003 assessment instructions directly to CBP
determined. through June 30, 2004: on or after 41 days following the
Because of the unknown origin of a publication of the final results of
certain number of Ken–Mac resales, review.

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:13 Aug 05, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM 08AUN1
45682 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 151 / Monday, August 8, 2005 / Notices

Furthermore, the following deposit DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Background

requirements will be effective upon The Department published an
completion of the final results of this International Trade Administration antidumping duty order on S4 from
administrative review for all shipments Germany on July 27, 1999. Notice of
of S4 in coils from Mexico entered, or [A–428–825] Amended Final Determination of Sales
withdrawn from warehouse, for at Less than Fair Value and
consumption on or after the publication Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils Antidumping Duty Order; Stainless
date of the final results of this From Germany; Notice of Preliminary Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from
administrative review, as provided by Results of Antidumping Duty Germany, 64 FR 40557 (July 27, 1999)
section 751(a)(1) of the Act: Administrative Review (Antidumping Duty Order). On July 1,
2004, the Department published the
(1) The cash deposit rate for Mexinox AGENCY: Import Administration, ‘‘Notice of Opportunity to Request
will be the rate established in the International Trade Administration, Administrative Review’’ of S4 from
final results of review; Department of Commerce. Germany for the period July 1, 2003,
(2) If the exporter is not a firm SUMMARY: In response to a request from through June 30, 2004. Antidumping or
covered in this review or the less– Allegheny Ludlum, North American Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or
than-fair–value (LTFV) Stainless, Local 3303 United Auto Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
investigation, but the manufacturer Workers, United Steelworkers of To Request Administrative Review, 69
is, the cash deposit rate will be the America, AFL–CIO/CLC, and Zanesville FR 39903 (July 1, 2004).
rate established for the most recent Armco Independent Organization On July 30, 2004, petitioners
period for the manufacturer of the (collectively, petitioners), the requested an administrative review of
merchandise; and Department of Commerce (the TKN’s sales for the period July 1, 2003,
Department) is conducting an through June 30, 2004. On August 30,
(3) If neither the exporter nor the 2004, we published in the Federal
administrative review of the
manufacturer is a firm covered in antidumping duty order on stainless Register a notice of initiation of this
this or any previous review, or the steel sheet and strip in coils (S4) from antidumping duty administrative
LTFV investigation conducted by Germany. The review covers exports of review. Initiation of Antidumping and
the Department, the cash deposit the subject merchandise to the United Countervailing Duty Administrative
rate will be the ‘‘all others’’ rate States of the collapsed parties, Reviews and Requests for Revocation in
from the investigation (30.85 ThyssenKrupp Nirosta GmbH Part, 69 FR 52857 (August 30, 2004).
percent). See Notice of Amended (ThyssenKrupp Nirosta), ThyssenKrupp On September 8, 2004, the
Final Determination of Sales at Less VDM GmbH (TKVDM), and Department issued an antidumping duty
Than Fair Value and Antidumping ThyssenKrupp Nirosta Prazisionsband questionnaire to TKN. TKN submitted
Duty Order; Stainless Steel Sheet GmbH (TKNP) (collectively, TKN). The its response to section A of the
and Strip in Coils from Mexico, 64 period of review (POR) is July 1, 2003, questionnaire on September 29, 2004,
FR 40560, 40562 (July 27, 1999). through June 30, 2004. and its response to sections B through
This notice also serves as a We preliminarily find that TKN made D of the questionnaire on November 9,
sales at less than normal value during 2004.1 On March 3, 2005, the
preliminary reminder to importers of
the POR. If these preliminary results are Department issued a supplemental
their responsibility under 19 CFR
adopted in our final results of this questionnaire requesting that TKN
351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding provide downstream sales data for
the reimbursement of antidumping review, we will instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (Customs) to certain affiliated parties in the home
duties prior to liquidation of the market. On March 7, 2005, TKN filed a
relevant entries during this review assess antidumping duties based on the
difference between the United States letter asking that it be required to report
period. Failure to comply with this downstream sales information for only
requirement could result in the Price (USP) and normal value (NV).
Interested parties are invited to two of the affiliated parties identified in
Secretary’s presumption that the Department’s March 3, 2005, letter,
reimbursement of antidumping duties comment on these preliminary results.
Parties who submit arguments in this ThyssenKrupp Schulte GmbH (TS) and
occurred and the subsequent assessment EBOR Edelstahl GmbH (EBOR). The
proceeding are requested to submit with
of double antidumping duties. Department granted TKN’s request and
the arguments: (1) a statement of the
We are issuing and publishing this issues, (2) a brief summary of the on March 28, 2005, TKN submitted
notice in accordance with sections arguments (no longer than five pages, home market sales information for TS
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. including footnotes) and (3) a table of and EBOR. On April 14, 2005, the
authorities. Department issued a supplemental
Dated: August 1, 2005. questionnaire for sections A, B, and C,
Joseph A. Spetrini, EFFECTIVE DATE: August 8, 2005.
1 Section A of the questionnaire requests general
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: information concerning a company’s corporate
[FR Doc. E5–4254 Filed 8–5–05; 8:45 am]
Deborah Scott, Tyler Weinhold, or structure and business practices, the merchandise
Robert James, AD/CVD Operations, under review that it sells, and the manner in which
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S it sells that merchandise in all of its markets.
Office 7, Import Administration, Section B requests a complete listing of all home
International Trade Administration, market sales, or, if the home market is not viable,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th of sales in the most appropriate third-country
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, market (this section is not applicable to respondents
in non-market economy cases). Section C requests
Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) a complete listing of U.S. sales. Section D requests
482–2657, (202) 482–1121 or (202) 482– information on the cost of production of the foreign
0649, respectively. like product and the constructed value of the
merchandise under review. Section E requests
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information on further manufacturing.

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:13 Aug 05, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM 08AUN1