Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 1997 / Notices 51581

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–274–802]

Notice of Preliminary Determination of

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and

Postponement of Final Determination:

Steel Wire Rod From Trinidad and

Tobago

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Abdelali Elouaradia or Alexander

Braier, Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th

Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone:

(202) 482–2243 or (202) 482–3818,

respectively.

The Applicable Statute

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as

amended (the Act), are references to the

provisions effective January 1, 1995, the

effective date of the amendments made

to the Act by the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (‘‘URAA’’). In addition,

unless otherwise indicated, all citations

to the Department’s regulations are

references to the provisions codified at

19 CFR Part 353 (April 1997). Although

the Department’s new regulations,

codified at 19 CFR 351 (62 FR 27296,

May 19, 1997), do not govern these

proceedings, citations to those

regulations are provided, where

appropriate, to explain current

departmental practice.

Preliminary Determination

We preliminarily determine that steel

wire rod (‘‘SWR’’) from Trinidad &

Tobago is being, or is likely to be, sold

in the United States at less than fair

value (‘‘LTFV’’), as provided in section

733 of the Act. The estimated margins

are shown in the ‘‘Suspension of

Liquidation’’ section of this notice.

Case History

Since the initiation of this

investigation on March 18, 1997 (See

Initiation of Antidumping Duty

Investigations: Steel Wire Rod from

Canada, Germany, Trinidad and

Tobago, and Venezuela, 62 FR 13854

(March 24, 1997) (‘‘Initiation’’), the

following events have occurred:

On April 14, 1997, the United States

International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’)

notified the Department of Commerce

(‘‘the Department’’) of its affirmative

preliminary injury determination in this

case.

On April 21, 1997, the Department

issued the antidumping duty

questionnaire to counsel for the

following producer/exporter of steel

wire rod to the United States: Caribbean

Ispat, ltd. (CIL). The questionnaire is

divided into four sections: Section A

requests general information concerning

a company’s corporate structure and

business practices, the merchandise

under investigation that it sells, and the

sales of the merchandise in all of its

markets. Sections B and C request home

market sales listings and U.S. sales

listings, respectively. Section D requests

information on the cost of production

(‘‘COP’’) of the foreign like product and

the constructed value (‘‘CV’’) of the

subject merchandise.

During April and May 1997, the

Department received interested party

comments regarding modifications to

the product characteristic reporting

requirements. On May 22, 1997, the

Department issued revised product

characteristic reporting instructions.

CIL submitted its questionnaire

responses in May and June 1997. The

Department issued supplemental

requests for information in June, July,

August and September 1997 and

received the supplemental responses to

these requests in June, July, August and

September 1997. Petitioners in this

investigation (Connecticut Steel Group,

Co-Steel Raritan, GS Industries, Inc.,

Keystone Steel & Wire Co., North Star

Steel Texas, Inc., and Northwestern

Steel & Wire Co.) filed comments on

CIL’s questionnaire responses in June,

July, August, and September 1997.

On July 3, 1997, petitioners made a

timely request for a postponement of the

preliminary determination in this

investigation and the companion

investigations of steel wire rod from

Canada, Germany, and Venezuela to

September 24, 1997. On July 14, 1997,

the Department postponed the

preliminary determinations in these

investigations until September 24, 1997,

in accordance with section 733(c)(1) of

the Act (See Notice of Postponement of

Preliminary Antidumping Duty

Determinations: Canada, Germany,

Trinidad and Tobago, and Venezuela,

62 FR 38257 (July 17, 1997).

Postponement of Final Determination

On September 22, 1997, CIL, the only

respondent participating in this

investigation, requested that, pursuant

to section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act, in the

event of an affirmative preliminary

determination in this investigation, the

Department postpone its final

determination, until not later than 135

days after the date of publication of the

affirmative preliminary in the Federal

Register. In accordance with section 735

(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 353.2(b),

inasmuch as our preliminary

determination is affirmative, CIL

accounts for a significant proportion of

exports of the subject merchandise, and

we have not identified any compelling

reasons for denying this request, we are

granting CIL’s request and postponing

the final determination. Suspension of

liquidation will be extended

accordingly. See Final Determination of

Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain

Pasta From Italy, 61 FR 30326 (June 14,

1996).

Scope of Investigation

The products covered by this

investigation are certain hot-rolled

carbon steel and alloy steel products, in

coils, of approximately round cross

section, between 5.00 mm (0.20 inch)

and 19.0 mm (0.75 inch), inclusive, in

solid cross-sectional diameter.

Specifically excluded are steel products

possessing the above noted physical

characteristics and meeting the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (HTSUS) definitions for

(a) stainless steel; (b) tool steel; (c) high

nickel steel; (d) ball bearing steel; (e)

free machining steel that contains by

weight 0.03 percent or more of lead,

0.05 percent or more of bismuth, 0.08

percent or more of sulfur, more than 0.4

percent of phosphorus, more than 0.05

percent of selenium, and/or more than

0.01 percent of tellurium; or (f) concrete

reinforcing bars and rods.

The following products are also

excluded from the scope of this

investigation:

Coiled products 5.50 mm or less in

true diameter with an average partial

decarburization per coil of no more than

70 microns in depth, no inclusions

greater than 20 microns, containing by

weight the following: carbon greater

than or equal to 0.68 percent; aluminum

less than or equal to 0.005 percent;

phosphorous plus sulfur less than or

equal to 0.040 percent; maximum

combined copper, nickel and chromium

content of 0.13 percent; and nitrogen

less than or equal to 0.006 percent. This

product is commonly referred to as

‘‘Tire Cord Wire Rod.’’

Coiled products 7.9 to 18 mm in

diameter, with a partial decarburization

of 75 microns or less in depth and

seams no more than 75 microns in

depth; containing 0.48 to 0.73 percent

carbon by weight. This product is

commonly referred to as ‘‘Valve Spring

Quality Wire Rod.’’

The products under investigation are

currently classifiable under subheadings
51582 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 1997 / Notices

7213.91.3000, 7213.91.4500,

7213.91.6000, 7213.99.0030,

7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0000, and

7227.90.6050 of the HTSUS. Although

the HTSUS subheadings are provided

for convenience and customs purposes,

our written description of the scope of

this investigation is dispositive.

North American Wire Products

Corporation (NAW), an importer of the

subject merchandise from Germany, has

requested that the Department exclude

steel wire rod used to manufacture pipe

wrapping wire from the scope of the

antidumping and countervailing duty

investigations. Petitioners have not

agreed to this scope exclusion. For

purposes of the preliminary

determination, we have not excluded

steel wire rod for manufacturing pipe

wrapping wire from the scope.

Period of Investigation

The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is

January 1, 1996 through December 31,

1996.

Product Comparisons

In accordance with section 771(16) of

the Act, we considered all products

produced by the respondent, covered by

the description in the Scope of

Investigation section, above, and sold in

the home market during the POI, to be

foreign like products for purposes of

determining appropriate product

comparisons to U.S. sales. Where there

were no sales of identical merchandise

in the home market to compare to U.S.

sales, we compared U.S. sales to the

next most similar foreign like product

on the basis of the characteristics listed

in the antidumping duty questionnaire

and the May 22, 1997, reporting

instructions.

Consistent with our practice, we

compared prime merchandise sold in

the United States to prime merchandise

sold in the home market, and secondary

merchandise to secondary merchandise.

See, e.g., Ceratin Cold-rolled Carbon

Steel Flat Products from the

Netherlands; Final Results of

Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review, 61 FR 48465 (September 13,

1996).

Fair Value Comparisons

To determine whether sales of steel

wire rod sold by CIL to the United

States were made at less than fair value,

we compared the Export Price (‘‘EP’’) to

the normal value (‘‘NV’’), as described

in the ‘‘EP’’ and ‘‘Normal Value’’

sections of this notice below. In

accordance with section

777A(d)(1)(A)(i), we calculated

weighted-average EPs for comparisons

to weighted-average NVs.

Level of Trade

In accordance with section

773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to the extent

practicable, we determine NV based on

sales in the comparison market at the

same level of trade (LOT) as the EP. The

NV LOT is that of the starting-price

sales in the comparison market or, when

NV is based on constructed value (CV),

that of the sales from which we derive

selling, general and administrative

(SG&A) expenses and profit. For EP, the

U.S. LOT is also the level of the startingprice sale, which is usually the sale

from the exporter to the importer. For

CEP, it is the level of the constructed

sale from the exporter to the importer.

To determine whether NV sales are at

a different LOT than the EP sales, we

examine stages in the marketing process

and selling functions along the chain of

distribution between the producer and

the unaffiliated customer. If the

comparison-market sales are at a

different LOT, and the difference affects

price comparability, as manifested in a

pattern of consistent price differences

between the sales on which NV is based

and comparison-market sales at the LOT

of the export transaction, we make an

LOT adjustment under section

773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. See Certain

Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipes

and Tubes From India: Preliminary

Results of New Shipper Antidumping

Duty Administrative Review, 62 FR

23760, 23761 (May 1, 1997).

Respondent claimed one LOT in the

NV market and one LOT in the U.S.

market. CIL did not claim an LOT

adjustment. To examine whether such

an adjustment was necessary, we

examined CIL’s distribution system,

including selling functions, classes of

customers, and selling expenses. We

noted that CIL’s selling expenses for the

POI were the same for all customers. We

found that the selling functions, which

included sales administration, billing,

maintaining inventory, and in some

cases arranging freight services, are

sufficiently similar in the U.S. and the

home market to consider them as one

level of trade. Based on the findings

noted above, we conclude that for these

preliminary results, CIL’s U.S. and

home market sales were made at the

same LOT.

Export Price

We based price in the United States

on EP, in accordance with subsections

772 (a) and (c) of the Act because the

subject merchandise was sold directly to

the first unaffiliated purchaser in the

United States prior to importation and

CEP was not otherwise warranted based

on the facts on the record.

We calculated EP based on packed

prices to the first unaffiliated customer

in the United States. We made

adjustments, where appropriate, for

international ocean freight, marine

insurance, U.S. brokerage and handling,

U.S. Customs duties and user fee, U.S.

inland freight from port to unaffiliated

customer, U.S. inland insurance and

survey fee in both the United States and

Trinidad in accordance with section

772(c)(2) of the Act.

Normal Value

In order to determine whether there is

a sufficient volume of sales in the home

market to serve as a viable basis for

calculating NV (i.e., if the aggregate

volume of home market sales of the

foreign like product is greater than five

percent of the aggregate volume of U.S.

sales), we compare the respondent’s

volume of home market sales of the

foreign like product to the volume of

U.S. sales of the subject merchandise, in

accordance with section 773(a)(1)(C) of

the Act. Since CIL’s aggregate volume of

home market sales of the foreign like

product was greater than five percent of

its aggregate volume of U.S. sales for the

subject merchandise, we determined

that the home market was viable.

Therefore, we have based NV on home

market sales.

Cost of Production Analysis

Pursuant to an allegation made by

petitioners, we initiated a cost of

production investigation in our notice of

initiation. See Notice of Initiation, 62 FR

13854 (March 24, 1997). Before making

any fair value comparisons, we

conducted the COP analysis described

below.

A. Calculation of COP

We calculated the COP based on the

sum of respondent’s cost of materials

and fabrication for the foreign like

product, plus amounts for home market

general expenses and packing costs in

accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the

Act. We have recalculated CIL’s general

and administrative amounts to include

only net foreign exchange losses related

to accounts payable . See Memorandum

to Chris Marsh From Taija Slaughter,

September 12, 1997.

B. Test of Home Market Prices

We used the respondent’s submitted

POI weighted-average COPs, as adjusted

(see above). We compared the weightedaverage COP figures to home market

sales of the foreign like product as

required under section 773(b) of the Act.

In determining whether to disregard

home-market sales made at prices below

the COP, we examined whether (1)
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 1997 / Notices 51583

within an extended period of time, such

sales were made in substantial

quantities, and (2) whether such sales

were made at prices which permitted

the recovery of all costs within a

reasonable period of time. On a productspecific basis, we compared the COP to

the home market prices, less any

applicable movement charges, rebates,

discounts, and direct and indirect

selling expenses.

C. Results of COP Test

Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C),

where less than 20 percent of the

respondent’s sales of a given product

were at prices less than the COP, we did

not disregard any below-cost sales of

that product because we determined

that the below-cost sales were not made

in ‘‘substantial quantities.’’ Where 20

percent or more of the respondent’s

sales of a given product during the POI

were at prices less than the COP, we

determined such sales to have been

made in ‘‘substantial quantities’’ within

an extended period of time in

accordance with section 773(b)(2)(B) of

the Act. In such cases, we also

determined that such sales were not

made at prices which would permit

recovery of all costs within a reasonable

period of time, in accordance with

section 773(b)(2)(D) of the Act and,

therefore, we disregarded the below-cost

sales. Where all sales of a specific

product were at prices below the COP,

we disregarded all sales of that product,

and calculated NV based on CV, in

accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the

Act.

D. Calculation of CV

In accordance with section 773(e) of

the Act, we calculated CV based on the

sum of respondent’s cost of materials,

fabrication, SG&A, interest expenses

and profit. As noted above, we

recalculated CIL’s general and

administrative amounts. In accordance

with section 773(e)(2)(A) of the Act, we

based SG&A and profit on the amounts

incurred and realized by the respondent

in connection with the production and

sale of the foreign like product in the

ordinary course of trade, for

consumption in the foreign country.

Price-to-Price Comparisons

For those product comparisons for

which there were sales at prices above

the COP, we based NV on prices to

home market customers. We made

adjustments, where appropriate, for

physical differences in the merchandise

in accordance with section

773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act.

We calculated NV based on prices to

unaffiliated home market customers. We

made deductions for discounts, rebates,

and inland freight. In addition, we made

circumstance-of-sale adjustments or

deductions for credit and warranty,

where appropriate. In accordance with

section 773(a)(6), we deducted home

market packing costs and added U.S.

packing costs.

Currency Conversions

In accordance with section 773(A) of

the Act, we made currency conversions

based on the official exchange rates in

effect on the dates of the U.S. sales as

certified by the Federal Reserve Bank.

Verification

As provided in section 782(i) of the

Act, we will verify all information relied

upon in making our final determination.

Suspension of Liquidation

In accordance with section 733(d) of

the Act, we are directing the Customs

Service to suspend liquidation of all

entries of steel wire rod from Trinidad

and Tobago, that are entered, or

withdrawn from warehouse, for

consumption on or after the date of

publication of this notice in the Federal

Register. Normally, we would instruct

the Customs Service to require a cash

deposit or the posting of a bond equal

to the weighted-average amount by

which the normal value exceeds the

export price, as indicated in the chart

below. However, the product under

investigation is also subject to a

concurrent countervailing duty

investigation. Article VI.5 of the General

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)

provides that ‘‘[n]o product * * * shall

be subject to both antidumping and

countervailing duties to compensate for

the same situation of dumping or export

subsidization.’’ This provision is

implemented by section 772(c)(1)(C) of

the Act. Since antidumping duties

cannot be assessed on the portion of the

margin attributed to export subsidies,

there is no reason to require a cash

deposit or bond for that amount.

The Department has determined in

Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing

Duty Determination: Steel Wire Rod

from Trinidad and Tobago, 62 FR 41927

(August 4, 1997), that the product under

investigation benefitted from an export

subsidy. To obtain the most accurate

estimate of the antidumping duty, and

to fulfill our international obligations

arising under the GATT, we are

subtracting, for deposit purposes, the

cash deposit rate attributable to the

export subsidies found in the

countervailing duty investigation. For

Caribbean Ispat, Ltd., the attributable

rate is 3.45 percent. We are also

subtracting from the ‘‘All Others’’ rate

the cash deposit rate attributable to the

export subsidy included in the

countervailing duty investigation for the

All Others rate, 3.45 percent. Pursuant

to Article of 17.4 of the WTO Agreement

on Subsidies and Countervailing

Measures, in the absence of an

affirmative final determination the

Department will terminate the

suspension of liquidation in the

companion countervailing duty

investigation of steel wire rod from

Trinidad and Tobago, effective

December 2, 1997, which is 120 days

after the date of publication of that

preliminary determination.

Accordingly, on December 2, 1997, if

the ITC has not yet made an affirmative

injury determination in the

countervailing duty investigation, the

antidumping deposit rate will revert to

the full amount calculated in this

preliminary determination. These

suspension of liquidation instructions

will remain in effect until further notice.

Exporter/manufacturer

Weighted-average margin

percentage

Bonding

percentage

Caribbean

Ispat Limited ............. 13.00 9.55

All Others ...... 13.00 9.55

ITC Notification

In accordance with section 733(f) of

the Act, we have notified the ITC of our

determination. If our final

determination is affirmative, the ITC

will determine, before the later of 120

days after the date of this preliminary

determination or 45 days after our final

determination, whether these imports

are materially injuring, or threaten

material injury to, the U.S. industry.

Public Comment

Case briefs or other written comments

in at least six copies must be submitted

to the Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration no later than December

22, 1997, and rebuttal briefs, no later

than January 5, 1998. A list of

authorities used and an executive

summary of issues should accompany

any briefs submitted to the Department.

Such summary should be limited to five

pages total, including footnotes. In

accordance with section 774 of the Act,

we will hold a public hearing, if

requested, to afford interested parties an

opportunity to comment on arguments

raised in case or rebuttal briefs.

Tentatively, the hearing will be held on

January 9, 1998, at the U.S. Department

of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20230. Parties should
51584 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 1997 / Notices

confirm by telephone the time, date, and

place of the hearing 48 hours before the

scheduled time.

Interested parties who wish to request

a hearing, or to participate if one is

requested, must submit a written

request to the Assistant Secretary for

Import Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, Room 1870, within ten

days of the publication of this notice.

Requests should contain: (1) The party’s

name, address, and telephone number;

(2) the number of participants; and (3)

a list of the issues to be discussed. Oral

presentations will be limited to issues

raised in the briefs. If this investigation

proceeds normally, we will make our

final determination by 135 days after the

publication of this notice in the Federal

Register.

This determination is published

pursuant to section 733(d) of the Act.

Dated: September 24, 1997.

Robert S. LaRussa,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 97–26042 Filed 9–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–307–813]

Notice of Preliminary Determination of

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and

Postponement of Final Determination:

Steel Wire Rod From Venezuela

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David J. Goldberger or Daniel Manzoni,

Import Administration, International

Trade Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone:

(202) 482–4136 or (202) 482–1121,

respectively.

The Applicable Statute

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as

amended (‘‘the Act’’), are references to

the provisions effective January 1, 1995,

the effective date of the amendments

made to the Act by the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (‘‘URAA’’). In addition,

unless otherwise indicated, all citations

to the Department’s regulations are

references to the provisions codified at

19 CFR part 353 (April, 1997). Although

the Department’s new regulations,

codified at 19 CFR 351 (62 FR 27296,

May 19, 1997), do not govern this

investigation, citations to those

regulations are provided, where

appropriate, to explain current

Departmental practice.

Preliminary Determination

We preliminarily determine that steel

wire rod (‘‘SWR’’) from Venezuela is

being, or is likely to be, sold in the

United States at less than fair value

(‘‘LTFV’’), as provided in section 733 of

the Act. The estimated margins are

shown in the ‘‘Suspension of

Liquidation’’ section of this notice.

Case History

Since the initiation of this

investigation on March 18, 1997 (see

Notice of Initiation of Antidumping

Duty Investigations: Steel Wire Rod from

Canada, Germany, Trinidad and

Tobago, and Venezuela, 62 FR 13854,

(March 24, 1997), (‘‘Notice of

Initiation’’), the following events have

occurred:

On April 14, 1997, the United States

International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’)

notified the Department of Commerce

(‘‘the Department’’) of its affirmative

preliminary injury determination in this

case.

On April 21, 1997, the Department

issued the antidumping duty

questionnaire to CVG Siderurgica Del

Orinoco C.A. (‘‘Sidor’’), the sole

exporter of the subject merchandise

from Venezuela. The questionnaire is

divided into four sections: Section A

requests general information concerning

Sidor’s company corporate structure

and business practices, the merchandise

under investigation that it sells, and the

sales of the merchandise in all of its

markets. Sections B and C request home

market sales listings and U.S. sales

listings, respectively. Section D requests

information on the cost of production

(‘‘COP’’) of the foreign like product and

the constructed value (‘‘CV’’) of the

subject merchandise.

During April and May 1997, the

Department received interested party

comments regarding modifications to

the product characteristic reporting

requirements. On May 22, 1997, the

Department issued revised product

characteristic reporting instructions.

Sidor submitted its questionnaire

responses in May and June, 1997. The

Department issued supplemental

requests for information in June, July,

and August, 1997, and received the

supplemental responses to these

requests in July, August, and September,

1997. Petitioners in this investigation

(Connecticut Steel Group, Co-Steel

Raritan, GS Industries, Inc., Keystone

Steel & Wire Co., North Star Steel Texas,

Inc., and Northwestern Steel & Wire Co.)

filed comments on Sidor’s questionnaire

responses in May, June, July, August,

and September, 1997.

On July 3, 1997, petitioners made a

timely request that the Department

postpone the preliminary determination

in this investigation and the companion

investigations of SWR from Canada,

Trinidad and Tobago, and Germany to

September 24, 1997. We did so on July

14, 1997, in accordance with section

733(c)(1) of the Act (see Notice of

Postponement of Preliminary

Determinations: Steel Wire Rod from

Canada, Germany, Trinidad and

Tobago, and Venezuela (62 FR 38257,

July 17, 1997 )).

Postponement of Final Determination

and Extension of Provisional Measures

Pursuant to section 735(a)(2)(A) of the

Act and section 353.20(b)(1) of the

Department’s interim regulations, on

September 10, 1997, Sidor requested

that, in the event of an affirmative

preliminary determination in this

investigation, the Department postpone

its final determination until not later

than 135 days after the publication of

this notice in the Federal Register. In

accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of

the Act, because our preliminary

determination is affirmative, the

respondent accounting for all of the

exports of the subject merchandise has

requested postponement, and no

compelling reasons for denial exist, we

are postponing the final determination.

Suspension of liquidation will be

extended accordingly (see Preliminary

Determination of Sales at Less than Fair

Value and Postponement of Final

Determinations: Open-End Spun Rayon

Singles Yarn From Austria, 62 FR

14399, 14400 (March 26, 1997); see also

Final Determination of Sales at Less

Than Fair Value: Certain Pasta from

Italy, 61 FR 30326 (June 14, 1996)).

Scope of Investigation

The products covered by this

investigation are certain hot-rolled

carbon steel and alloy steel products, in

coils, of approximately round cross

section, between 5.00 mm (0.20 inch)

and 19.0 mm (0.75 inch), inclusive, in

solid cross-sectional diameter.

Specifically excluded are steel products

possessing the above noted physical

characteristics and meeting the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (HTSUS) definitions for

(a) stainless steel; (b) tool steel; (c) high

nickel steel; (d) ball bearing steel; (e)

free machining steel that contains by

weight 0.03 percent or more of lead,

0.05 percent or more of bismuth, 0.08

percent or more of sulfur, more than 0.4