Antidumping: Stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from Korea,
[Federal Register: January 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 20)]
[Notices]
[Page 4486-4490]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31ja07-30]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-580-834]
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils From the Republic of Korea; Final Results and Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On April 10, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils (SSSSC) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) (71 FR 18074). This review covers five producers/exporters of the subject merchandise to the United States. The period of review (POR) is July 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005. We are rescinding the review with respect to eight companies because they had no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR.
Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes in the margin calculation for DaiYang Metal Co., Ltd. (DMC), a respondent in this review. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled ``Final Results of Review.''
[[Page 4487]]
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 31, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irina Itkin or Brianne Riker, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone: (202) 482- 0656 and (202) 482-0629, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This review covers the following five producers/exporters: Boorim Corporation (Boorim), Dae Kyung Corporation (Dae Kyung), Dine Trading Co., Ltd. (Dine), DMC, and Dosko Co., Ltd. (Dosko).
On April 10, 2006, the Department published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on SSSSC from Korea. See Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea; Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 18074 (April 10, 2006) (Preliminary Results).
Prior to the preliminary results, the following companies informed the Department that they had no shipments to the United States during the POR: BNG Steel Co. (BNG), Hyundai Corporation (Hyundai), NIC International Co., Ltd. (NIC), Pohang Iron and Steel Co., Ltd. (POSCO), Samkyung Corporation (Samkyung), Sammi Corporation (Sammi), Samwon Precision Metals Co., Ltd. (Samwon), and Sun Woo Tech Company (Sun Woo). We reviewed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data and confirmed that there were no entries of subject merchandise from any of these companies. Consequently, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and consistent with our practice, we are rescinding our review for BNG, Hyundai, NIC, POSCO, Samkyoung, Sammi, Samwon, and Sun Woo. For further discussion, see the ``Partial Rescission of Review'' section of this notice, below.
We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results of review. In May 2006, we received case briefs and rebuttal briefs from the petitioners (i.e., Allegheny Ludlum Corporation, AK Steel Corporation, North American Stainless, United Auto Workers Local 3303, Zanesville Armco Independent Organization, Inc., and the United Steelworkers) and DMC.
Scope of the Order
The products covered are certain stainless steel sheet and strip in coils. Stainless steel is an alloy steel containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or without other elements. The subject sheet and strip is a flat-rolled product in coils that is greater than 9.5 millimeters in width and less than 4.75 millimeters in thickness, and that is annealed or otherwise heat treated and pickled or otherwise descaled. The subject sheet and strip may also be further processed (e.g., cold-rolled, polished, aluminized, coated, etc.) provided that it maintains the specific dimensions of sheet and strip following such processing.
The merchandise subject to this order is classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) at subheadings: 7219.13.0031, 7219.13.0051, 7219.13.0071, 7219.1300.81,\1\ 7219.14.0030, 7219.14.0065, 7219.14.0090, 7219.32.0005, 7219.32.0020, 7219.32.0025, 7219.32.0035, 7219.32.0036, 7219.32.0038, 7219.32.0042, 7219.32.0044, 7219.33.0005, 7219.33.0020, 7219.33.0025, 7219.33.0035, 7219.33.0036, 7219.33.0038, 7219.33.0042, 7219.33.0044, 7219.34.0005, 7219.34.0020, 7219.34.0025, 7219.34.0030, 7219.34.0035, 7219.35.0005, 7219.35.0015, 7219.35.0030, 7219.35.0035, 7219.90.0010, 7219.90.0020, 7219.90.0025, 7219.90.0060, 7219.90.0080, 7220.12.1000, 7220.12.5000, 7220.20.1010, 7220.20.1015, 7220.20.1060, 7220.20.1080, 7220.20.6005, 7220.20.6010, 7220.20.6015, 7220.20.6060, 7220.20.6080, 7220.20.7005, 7220.20.7010, 7220.20.7015, 7220.20.7060, 7220.20.7080, 7220.20.8000, 7220.20.9030, 7220.20.9060, 7220.90.0010, 7220.90.0015, 7220.90.0060, and 7220.90.0080. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise under review is dispositive.
\1\ Due to changes to the HTSUS numbers in 2001, 7219.13.0030, 7219.13.0050, 7219.13.0070, and 7219.13.0080 are now 7219.13.0031, 7219.13.0051, 7219.13.0071, and 7219.13.0081, respectively.
Excluded from the scope of this order are the following: 1) sheet and strip that is not annealed or otherwise heat treated and pickled or otherwise descaled; 2) sheet and strip that is cut to length; 3) plate (i.e., flat-rolled stainless steel products of a thickness of 4.75 millimeters or more); 4) flat wire (i.e., cold-rolled sections, with a prepared edge, rectangular in shape, of a width of not more than 9.5 millimeters); and 5) razor blade steel. Razor blade steel is a flat- rolled product of stainless steel, not further worked than cold-rolled (cold- reduced), in coils, of a width of not more than 23 millimeters and a thickness of 0.266 millimeters or less, containing, by weight, 12.5 to 14.5 percent chromium, and certified at the time of entry to be used in the manufacture of razor blades. See Chapter 72 of the HTSUS, ``Additional U.S. Note'' 1(d).
Flapper valve steel is also excluded from the scope. Flapper valve steel is defined as stainless steel strip in coils containing, by weight, between 0.37 and 0.43 percent carbon, between 1.15 and 1.35 percent molybdenum, and between 0.20 and 0.80 percent manganese. This steel also contains, by weight, phosphorus of 0.025 percent or less, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of 0.020 percent or less. The product is manufactured by means of vacuum arc remelting, with inclusion controls for sulphide of no more than 0.04 percent and for oxide of no more than 0.05 percent. Flapper valve steel has a tensile strength of between 210 and 300 ksi, yield strength of between 170 and 270 ksi, 8 ksi, and a hardness (Hv) of between 460 and 590. Flapper valve steel is most commonly used to produce specialty flapper valves in compressors.
Also excluded is a product referred to as suspension foil, a specialty steel product that is used in the manufacture of suspension assemblies for computer disk drives. Suspension foil is described as 302/304 grade or 202 grade stainless steel of a thickness between 14 and 127 microns, with a thickness tolerance of 2.01 microns, and surface glossiness of 200 to 700 percent Gs. Suspension foil must be supplied in coil widths of not more than 407 millimeters, and with a mass of 225 kilograms or less. Roll marks may only be visible on one side, with no scratches of measurable depth. The material must exhibit residual stresses of two millimeter depth. The material must exhibit residual stresses of two millimeters maximum deflection, and flatness of 1.6 millimeters over 685 millimeters length.
Certain stainless steel foil for automotive catalytic converters is also excluded from the scope of this order. This stainless steel strip in coils is a specialty foil with a thickness of between 20 and 110 microns used to produce a metallic substrate with a honeycomb structure for use in automotive catalytic converters. The steel contains, by weight, carbon of no more than 0.030 percent, silicon of no
[[Page 4488]]
more than one percent, manganese of no more than one percent, chromium of between 19 and 22 percent, aluminum of no less than 5.0 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.045 percent, sulfur of no more than 0.03 percent, lanthanum of less than 0.002 or greater than 0.05 percent, and total rare earth elements of more than 0.06 percent, with the balance iron.
Permanent magnet iron-chromium-cobalt alloy stainless strip is also excluded from the scope of this order. This ductile stainless steel strip contains, by weight, 26 to 30 percent chromium, and seven to 10 percent cobalt, with the remainder of iron, in widths 228.6 millimeters or less, and a thickness between 0.127 and 1.270 millimeters. It exhibits magnetic remanence between 9,000 and 12,000 gauss, and a coercivity of between 50 and 300 oersteds. This product is most commonly used in electronic sensors and is currently available under proprietary trade names such as ``Arnokrome III.''\2\
\2\ ``Arnokrome III'' is a trademark of the Arnold Engineering Company.
Certain electrical resistance alloy steel is also excluded from the scope of this order. This product is defined as a non-magnetic stainless steel manufactured to American Society of Testing and Materials specification B344 and containing, by weight, 36 percent nickel, 18 percent chromium, and 46 percent iron, and is most notable for its resistance to high temperature corrosion. It has a melting point of 1,390 degrees Celsius and displays a creep rupture limit of four kilograms per square millimeter at 1,000 degrees Celsius. This steel is most commonly used in the production of heating ribbons for circuit breakers and industrial furnaces, and in rheostats for railway locomotives. The product is currently available under proprietary trade names such as ``Gilphy 36.''\3\
\3\ ``Gilphy 36'' is a trademark of Imphy, S.A.
Certain martensitic precipitation-hardenable stainless steel is also excluded from the scope of this order. This high-strength, ductile stainless steel product is designated under the Unified Numbering System as S45500-grade steel, and contains, by weight, 11 to 13 percent chromium, and seven to 10 percent nickel. Carbon, manganese, silicon and molybdenum each comprise, by weight, 0.05 percent or less, with phosphorus and sulfur each comprising, by weight, 0.03 percent or less. This steel has copper, niobium, and titanium added to achieve aging, and will exhibit yield strengths as high as 1,700 Mpa and ultimate tensile strengths as high as 1,750 Mpa after aging, with elongation percentages of 3 percent or less in 50 millimeters. It is generally provided in thicknesses between 0.635 and 0.787 millimeters, and in widths of 25.4 millimeters. This product is most commonly used in the manufacture of television tubes and is currently available under proprietary trade names such as ``Durphynox 17.''\4\
\4\``Durphynox 17'' is a trademark of Imphy, S.A.
Finally, three specialty stainless steels typically used in certain industrial blades and surgical and medical instruments are also excluded from the scope of this order. These include stainless steel strip in coils used in the production of textile cutting tools (e.g., carpet knives).\5\ This steel is similar to AISI grade 420 but containing, by weight, 0.5 to 0.7 percent of molybdenum. The steel also contains, by weight, carbon of between 1.0 and 1.1 percent, sulfur of 0.020 percent or less, and includes between 0.20 and 0.30 percent copper and between 0.20 and 0.50 percent cobalt. This steel is sold under proprietary names such as ``GIN4 Mo.'' The second excluded stainless steel strip in coils is similar to AISI 420-J2 and contains, by weight, carbon of between 0.62 and 0.70 percent, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, manganese of between 0.45 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.025 percent, and sulfur of no more than 0.020 percent. This steel has a carbide density on average of 100 carbide particles per 100 square microns. An example of this product is ``GIN5'' steel. The third specialty steel has a chemical composition similar to AISI 420 F, with carbon of between 0.37 and 0.43 percent, molybdenum of between 1.15 and 1.35 percent, but lower manganese of between 0.20 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.025 percent, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of no more than 0.020 percent. This product is supplied with a hardness of more than Hv 500 guaranteed after customer processing, and is supplied as, for example, ``GIN6.''\6\
\5\ This list of uses is illustrative and provided for descriptive purposes only.
\6\ ``GIN4 Mo,'' ``GIN5,'' and ``GIN6'' are the proprietary grades of Hitachi Metals America, Ltd.
Period of Review
The POR is July 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005.
Partial Rescission of Review
As noted above, BNG, Hyundai, NIC, POSCO, Samkyoung, Sammi, Samwon, and Sun Woo had no shipments and/or entries of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. We have confirmed this with CBP data. See the November 9, 2005, memorandum to the file from Brianne Riker, entitled ``Placing U.S. Customs and Border Protection Data on the Record of the 2004 - 2005 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea.'' Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and consistent with the Department's practice, we are rescinding our review with respect to these companies. See, e.g., Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final Results, Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part, and Determination To Revoke in Part, 70 FR 67665, 67666 (Nov. 8, 2005); Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final Results, Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part, and Determination Not To Revoke in Part, 69 FR 64731, 64732 (Nov. 8, 2004); Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey; Final Results, Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part, and Determination Not To Revoke in Part, 68 FR 53127, 53128 (Sept. 9, 2003).
Cost of Production
As discussed in the Preliminary Results, we conducted an investigation to determine whether DMC made home market sales of the foreign like product during the POR at prices below its cost of production (COP) within the meaning of section 773(b)(1) of the Act. We performed the cost test for these final results following the same methodology as in the Preliminary Results.
We found that 20 percent or more of DMC's sales of a given product during the reporting period were at prices less than the weighted- average COP for this period. Thus, we determined that these below-cost sales were made in ``substantial quantities'' within an extended period of time and at prices which did not permit the recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time in the normal course of trade. See sections 773(b)(2)(B) - (D) of the Act.
Therefore, for purposes of these final results, we found that DMC made below-cost sales not in the ordinary course of trade. Consequently, we disregarded these sales and used the remaining sales as the basis for determining normal value pursuant to section 773(b)(1) of the Act.
Facts Available
In the preliminary results, we determined that, in accordance with section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act, the use of facts available was appropriate as the basis for the dumping margins for the
[[Page 4489]]
following producer/exporters: Boorim, Dae Kyung, Dine, and Dosko. We find that it continues to be appropriate to apply facts available to these respondents. Section 776(a) of the Act provides that the Department will apply ``facts otherwise available'' if, inter alia, necessary information is not available on the record or an interested party: (1) Withholds information that has been requested by the Department; (2) fails to provide such information within the deadlines established, or in the form or manner requested by the Department, subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 of the Act; (3) significantly impedes a proceeding; or (4) provides such information, but the information cannot be verified.
On August 19, 2005, the Department requested that Boorim, Dae Kyung, Dine, and Dosko respond to the Department's antidumping duty questionnaire. The deadline to file a response was September 27, 2005. The Department did not receive a response from Boorim, Dae Kyung, Dine, or Dosko. On November 4, 2005, the Department placed a memorandum on the record with information regarding delivery confirmation of the questionnaires to each company. See the November 4, 2005, memorandum to the file from Brianne Riker entitled, ``Placing Information on the Record of the 2004-2005 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Korea.'' Thus, because these companies did not respond to the Department's questionnaire, as in the preliminary results, the Department must use facts otherwise available with regard to Boorim, Dae Kyung, Dine, and Dosko, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A) and (C) of the Act of the Act. See Preliminary Results, 71 FR at 18076.
Adverse Facts Available
In selecting from among the facts otherwise available, section 776(b) of the Act authorizes the Department to use an adverse inference if the Department finds that an interested party failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with the request for information. See, e.g., Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Stainless Steel Bar from India, 70 FR 54023, 54025-26 (Sept. 13, 2005); see also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Negative Critical Circumstances: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Brazil, 67 FR 55792, 55794-96 (Aug. 30, 2002). Adverse inferences are appropriate ``to ensure that the party does not obtain a more favorable result by failing to cooperate than if it had cooperated fully.'' See Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H.R. Rep. No. 103-316, Vol. 1, at 870 (1994). Furthermore, ``affirmative evidence of bad faith on the part of a respondent is not required before the Department may make an adverse inference.'' See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27340 (May 19, 1997); Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States, 337 F.3d 1373, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (Nippon). We find that Boorim, Dae Kyung, Dine, and Dosko did not act to the best of their abilities in this proceeding, within the meaning of section 776(b) of the Act, because they failed to respond to the Department's questionnaire. Therefore, an adverse inference is warranted in selecting facts otherwise available. See Nippon, 337 F.3d at 1382-83.
Section 776(b) of the Act provides that the Department may use as adverse facts available (AFA), information derived from: 1) the petition; 2) the final determination in the investigation; 3) any previous review; or 4) any other information placed on the record.
The Department's practice, when selecting an AFA rate from among the possible sources of information, has been to ensure that the margin is sufficiently adverse ``as to effectuate the statutory purposes of the adverse facts available rule to induce respondents to provide the Department with complete and accurate information in a timely manner.'' See, e.g., Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Brazil: Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Negative Critical Circumstances, 67 FR 55792, 55796 (Aug. 30, 2002); Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Static Random Access Memory Semiconductors from Taiwan, 63 FR 8909, 8932 (Feb. 23, 1998). Additionally, the Department's practice has been to assign the highest margin determined for any party in the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation or in any administrative review of a specific order to respondents who have failed to cooperate with the Department. See, e.g., Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 71 FR 40064, 40066 (July 14, 2006); Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel Products from the People's Republic of China, 65 FR 34660 (May 31, 2000), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at the ``Facts Available'' section.
In order to ensure that the margin is sufficiently adverse so as to induce cooperation, we have assigned a rate of 58.79 percent, which was the rate alleged in the petition, as adjusted at the initiation of the LTFV investigation, to Boorim, Dae Kyung, Dine, and Dosko. This rate was assigned in a previous segment of this proceeding and is the highest rate determined for any respondent in any segment of this proceeding. See Notice of Amendment of Final Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from the Republic of Korea; and Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea, 66 FR 45279 (Aug. 28, 2001). The Department finds that this rate is sufficiently high as to effectuate the purpose of the facts available rule (i.e., we find that this rate is high enough to encourage participation in future segments of this proceeding in accordance with section 776(b) of the Act). We continue to find that the information upon which this margin is based has sufficient probative value to satisfy the requirements of section 776(c) of the Act. See Preliminary Results, 71 FR at 18077.
Neither Boorim, Dae Kyung, Dine, Dosko nor any other interested party submitted comments regarding the Department's preliminary corroboration analysis for purposes of the final results. Therefore, we have continued to assign to exports of the subject merchandise by Boorim, Dae Kyung, Dine, and Dosko the rate of 58.79 percent.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to this administrative review and to which we have responded are listed in the Appendix to this notice and addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum (Decision Memo), which is adopted by this notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099, of the main Department building.
In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The paper
copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made certain changes in the margin calculation for DMC. These changes are discussed in the relevant sections of the Decision Memo.
[[Page 4490]]
Final Results of Review
We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentages exist for the period July 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005:
Manufacturer/Producer/Exporter
Margin Percentage
Boorim Corporation..................................
58.79 Dae Kyung Corporation...............................
58.79 DaiYang Metal Co., Ltd..............................
3.77 Dine Trading Co., Ltd...............................
58.79 Dosko Co., Ltd......................................
58.79
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), because we have the reported entered value of DMC's U.S. sales, we have calculated importer-specific assessment rates for DMC based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of those sales. For Boorim, Dae Kyung, Dine, and Dosko, we will instruct CBP to liquidate entries at the rates indicated above. The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to CBP. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by companies included in these final results of review for which the reviewed companies did not know their merchandise was destined for the United States, as well as any companies for which we are rescinding the review based on claims of no shipments. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the All Others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of this notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of SSSSC from Korea entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates indicated above; (2) for previously investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, or in the LTFV investigation, but the manufacturer is, then the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 2.49 percent, the All Others rate established in the LTFV investigation.
These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
Appendix Issues in Decision Memo
-
Constructed Export Price (CEP) Offset 2. Offset for Countervailing (CVD) Duties 3. U.S. Indirect Selling Expense (ISE) Ratio 4. U.S. Date of Sale 5. Home Market Sale Date of Sale 6. Home Market Early Payment and Quantity Discounts 7. Home Market Credit Expenses 8. Whether to Apply an Adverse Inference to DMC's Reported Yield Information 9. DMC's Hot Coil Purchases
[FR Doc. E7-1462 Filed 1-30-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
