Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (the Department) is initiating a changed circumstances administrative review of the antidumping duty order of carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod (steel wire rod) from Canada  in response to a request from Mittal Canada Inc. (Mittal), a Canadian exporter of steel wire rod from Canada to the United States. Mittal has requested that the Department conduct a changed circumstances review to determine that it is the successor-in-interest to Ispat Sidbec Inc. (Ispat), and as a result to find that steel wire rod manufactured and exported by Mittal should be accorded the same treatment previously accorded to Ispat in regards to the antidumping order on steel wire rod from Canada.
March 9, 2005.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel O'Brien or David Neubacher, at (202) 482-1376 or (202) 482-5823, respectively; AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
On October 29, 2002, the Department published in the Federal Register an antidumping duty order on steel wire rod from Canada. See Antidumping Order. One of the companies subject to the investigation was Ispat. On January 14, 2005, Mittal requested that the Department determine that it had become the successor-in-interest of Ispat. See Letter from Ispat to Assistant Secretary for Import administration, Re: Expedited Changed Circumstances Review to Determine that Mittal Canada Inc is the successor-in-interest to Ispat Sidbec Inc./Administrative Review of Antidumping Duty Order Regarding Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Canada (January 14, 2005).
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to this order is certain hot-rolled products of carbon steel and alloy steel, in coils, of approximately round cross section, 5.00 mm or more, but less than 19.00 mm, in solid cross-sectional diameter.
Specifically excluded are steel products possessing the above-noted physical characteristics and meeting the HTSUS definitions for (a) stainless steel; (b) tool steel; (c) high nickel steel; (d) ball bearing steel; and (e) concrete reinforcing bars and rods. Also excluded are (f) free machining steel products (i.e., products that contain by weight one or more of the following elements: 0.03 percent or more of lead, 0.05 percent or more of bismuth, 0.08 percent or more of sulfur, more than 0.04 percent of phosphorus, more than 0.05 percent of selenium, or more than 0.01 percent of tellurium). Start Printed Page 11613
Also excluded from the scope are 1080 grade tire cord quality wire rod and 1080 grade tire bead quality wire rod. This grade 1080 tire cord quality rod is defined as: (i) Grade 1080 tire cord quality wire rod measuring 5.0 mm or more but not more than 6.0 mm in cross-sectional diameter; (ii) with an average partial decarburization of no more than 70 microns in depth (maximum individual 200 microns); (iii) having no non-deformable inclusions greater than 20 microns and no deformable inclusions greater than 35 microns; (iv) having a carbon segregation per heat average of 3.0 or better using European Method NFA 04-114; (v) having a surface quality with no surface defects of a length greater than 0.15 mm; (vi) capable of being drawn to a diameter of 0.30 mm or less with 3 or fewer breaks per ton, and (vii) containing by weight the following elements in the proportions shown: (1) 0.78 percent or more of carbon, (2) less than 0.01 percent of aluminum, (3) 0.040 percent or less, in the aggregate, of phosphorus and sulfur, (4) 0.006 percent or less of nitrogen, and (5) not more than 0.15 percent, in the aggregate, of copper, nickel and chromium.
This grade 1080 tire bead quality rod is defined as: (i) Grade 1080 tire bead quality wire rod measuring 5.5 mm or more but not more than 7.0 mm in cross-sectional diameter; (ii) with an average partial decarburization of no more than 70 microns in depth (maximum individual 200 microns); (iii) having no non-deformable inclusions greater than 20 microns and no deformable inclusions greater than 35 microns; (iv) having a carbon segregation per heat average of 3.0 or better using European Method NFA 04-114; (v) having a surface quality with no surface defects of a length greater than 0.2 mm; (vi) capable of being drawn to a diameter of 0.78 mm or larger with 0.5 or fewer breaks per ton; and (vii) containing by weight the following elements in the proportions shown: (1) 0.78 percent or more of carbon, (2) less than 0.01 percent of soluble aluminum, (3) 0.040 percent or less, in the aggregate, of phosphorus and sulfur, (4) 0.008 percent or less of nitrogen, and (5) either not more than 0.15 percent, in the aggregate, of copper, nickel and chromium (if chromium is not specified), or not more than 0.10 percent in the aggregate of copper and nickel and a chromium content of 0.24 to 0.30 percent (if chromium is specified).
For purposes of the grade 1080 tire cord quality wire rod and the grade 1080 tire bead quality wire rod, an inclusion will be considered to be deformable if its ratio of length (measured along the axis—that is, the direction of rolling—of the rod) over thickness (measured on the same inclusion in a direction perpendicular to the axis of the rod) is equal to or greater than three. The size of an inclusion for purposes of the 20 microns and 35 microns limitations is the measurement of the largest dimension observed on a longitudinal section measured in a direction perpendicular to the axis of the rod. This measurement methodology applies only to inclusions on certain grade 1080 tire cord quality wire rod and certain grade 1080 tire bead quality wire rod that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after July 24, 2003.
The designation of the products as “tire cord quality” or “tire bead quality” indicates the acceptability of the product for use in the production of tire cord, tire bead, or wire for use in other rubber reinforcement applications such as hose wire. These quality designations are presumed to indicate that these products are being used in tire cord, tire bead, and other rubber reinforcement applications, and such merchandise intended for the tire cord, tire bead, or other rubber reinforcement applications is not included in the scope. However, should petitioners or other interested parties provide a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that there exists a pattern of importation of such products for other than those applications, end-use certification for the importation of such products may be required. Under such circumstances, only the importers of record would normally be required to certify the end use of the imported merchandise.
All products meeting the physical description of subject merchandise that are not specifically excluded are included in this scope.
The products under review are currently classifiable under subheadings 7213.91.3010, 7213.91.3090, 7213.91.4510, 7213.91.4590, 7213.91.6010, 7213.91.6090, 7213.99.0031, 7213.99.0038, 7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0010, 7227.20.0020, 7227.20.0090, 7227.20.0095, 7227.90.6051, 7227.90.6053, 7227.90.6058, and 7227.90.6059 of the HTSUS. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive.
Initiation of Changed Circumstances Review
Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department will conduct a changed circumstances review upon request from an interested party or receipt of information concerning an antidumping duty order, when either of these shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review of the order. In this case, the Department finds that the information submitted by Mittal provides sufficient evidence of changed circumstances to warrant a review to determine whether Mittal is the successor-in-interest to Ispat. Thus, in accordance with section 751(b) of the Act, the Department is initiating a changed circumstances review to determine whether Mittal is the successor-in-interest to Ispat for purposes of determining antidumping duty liability with respect to imports of steel wire rod from Canada produced and exported by Ispat and whether the order as applied to Ispat should apply to subject merchandise manufactured and exported by Mittal.
In making a successor-in-interest determination, the Department examines several factors including, but not limited to, changes in: (1) Management; (2) production facilities; (3) supplier relationships; and (4) customer base. See, e.g., Notice of Final Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan, 67 FR 58 (Jan. 2, 2002); Brass Sheet and Strip from Canada: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460, 20462 (May 13, 1992). While no single factor or combination of these factors will necessarily provide a dispositive indication of a successor-in-interest relationship, the Department will generally consider the new company to be the successor to the previous company if the new company's resulting operation is not materially dissimilar to that of its predecessor. See, e.g., Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon from Norway; Final Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 64 FR 9979 (March 1, 1999); Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Israel; Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR 6944 (February 14, 1994). Thus, if the evidence demonstrates that, with respect to the production and sale of the subject merchandise, the new company operates as the same business entity as the former company, the Department will accord the new company the same antidumping treatment as its predecessor.
With regard to Ispat, Mittal claims that the production facilities and contractual relationships with suppliers and customers remained unchanged after Mittal assumed control of the company. According to Mittal, its assets Start Printed Page 11614have remained essentially the same as those of Ispat.
Mittal has requested that the Department initiate an expedited review pursuant to section 751(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(iii). However, because it is the Department's practice to examine changes in management and customer base as part of its analysis in such a determination, and Mittal has not addressed these factors, we are denying its request to conduct the changed circumstances review on an expedited basis.
The Department will publish in the Federal Register a notice of preliminary results of changed circumstances review, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(i) (2004), which will set forth the factual and legal conclusions upon which our preliminary results are based, and a description of any action proposed based on those results. Interested parties may submit comments for consideration in the Department's preliminary results not later than 60 days after publication of this notice. Responses to those comments may be submitted not later than 10 days following submission of the comments. All written comments must be submitted in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303 (2004), and must be served on all interested parties on the Department's service list in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f) (2004). The Department will issue its final results of review within 270 days after the date on which the changed circumstances review is initiated, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.216(e) (2004), and will publish these results in the Federal Register.
The current requirement for a cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties on all subject merchandise will continue unless and until it is modified pursuant to the final results of this changed circumstances review.
This notice is in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216 and 351.222 of the Department's regulations.Start Signature
Dated: March 3, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E5-996 Filed 3-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P