20574 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 80 / Monday, April 27, 1998 / Notices

reviews, but covered in a previous

segment of these proceedings, the cash

deposit rates shall continue to be the

company-specific rates published for

the most recent period; (3) if the

exporter is not a firm covered in these

reviews, or the original investigations,

but the manufacturer is, the cash

deposit rates shall be those established

for the manufacturer of the merchandise

in the most recently completed segment

of these proceedings; and (4) if neither

the exporter nor the manufacturer is a

firm covered in these or any previous

reviews, the cash deposit rate will

continue to be 14.44 percent (for certain

cold-rolled carbon steel flat products)

and 17.70 percent (for certain corrosionresistant carbon steel flat products),

which were the ‘‘all others’’ rates in the

LTFV investigations.

These deposit requirements, when

imposed, shall remain in effect until

publication of the final results of the

next administrative review.

This notice also serves as final

reminder to importers of their

responsibility 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 double antidumping duties.

This notice also is the only reminder

to parties subject to administrative

protective order (APO) of their

responsibility concerning the return or

destruction of proprietary information

disclosed under APO in accordance

with 19 CFR 353.34(d). Failure to

comply is a violation of the APO.

These amended final results of

administrative review and notice are in

accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and

777(i)(1) of the Act.

Dated: April 17, 1998.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 98–11001 Filed 4–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–421–804]

Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat

Products From the Netherlands;

Amended Final Results of

Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Amended Final

Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review.

SUMMARY: On March 18, 1998, the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) published the final results

of its administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on cold-rolled

carbon steel flat products from the

Netherlands (63 FR 13204). The period

of review is August 1, 1995 through July

31, 1996. On March 18, 1998, the sole

respondent, Hoogovens Staal BV, and its

U.S. subsidiary, Hoogovens Steel USA,

Inc. (collectively, Hoogovens) filed a

timely request that the Department

correct certain clerical errors in these

final results. On March 25, 1998, the

petitioners (Bethlehem Steel

Corporation, U.S. Steel Company (a Unit

of USX Corporation), Inland Steel

Industries, Inc., Geneva Steel, Gulf

States Steel Inc. of Alabama, Sharon

Steel Corporation, and Lukens Steel

Company) filed a response claiming that

none of the errors alleged by Hoogovens

appeared to be ministerial in nature,

inasmuch as the Department followed

the allocation methodology described in

the final analysis memorandum. We are

publishing this amendment to the final

results of review in accordance with 19

CFR 353.28(c).

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 27, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Helen Kramer or Linda Ludwig, AD/

CVD Enforcement Group III, Office 8,

Import Administration, International

Trade Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0405 or

(202) 482–3833, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise stated, all citations

to the Tariff Act are references to the

provisions effective January 1, 1995, the

effective date of the amendments made

to the Tariff Act by the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (URAA). In addition,

unless otherwise indicated, all citations

to the Department’s regulations are to 19

CFR Part 353 (1997).

Scope of this Review

The products covered by this review

include cold-rolled (cold-reduced)

carbon steel flat-rolled products, of

rectangular shape, neither clad, plated

nor coated with metal, whether or not

painted, varnished or coated with

plastics or other nonmetallic substances,

in coils (whether or not in successively

superimposed layers) and of a width of

0.5 inch or greater, or in straight lengths

which, if of a thickness less than 4.75

millimeters, are of a width of 0.5 inch

or greater and which measures at least

10 times the thickness or if of a

thickness of 4.75 millimeters or more

are of a width which exceeds 150

millimeters and measures at least twice

the thickness, as currently classifiable in

the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS)

under item numbers 7209.15.0000,

7209.16.0030, 7209.16.0060,

7209.16.0090, 7209.17.0030,

7209.17.0060, 7209.17.0090,

7209.18.1530, 7209.18.1560,

7209.18.2550, 7209.18.6000,

7209.25.0000, 7209.26.0000,

7209.27.0000, 7209.28.0000,

7209.90.0000, 7210.70.3000,

7210.90.9000, 7211.23.1500,

7211.23.2000, 7211.23.3000,

7211.23.4500, 7211.23.6030,

7211.23.6060, 7211.23.6085,

7211.29.2030, 7211.29.2090,

7211.29.4500, 7211.29.6030,

7211.29.6080, 7211.90.0000,

7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000,

7212.50.0000, 7215.50.0015,

7215.50.0060, 7215.50.0090,

7215.90.5000, 7217.10.1000,

7217.10.2000, 7217.10.3000,

7217.10.7000, 7217.90.1000,

7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, and

7217.90.5090. Included in this review

are flat-rolled products of

nonrectangular cross-section where

such cross-section is achieved

subsequent to the rolling process (i.e.,

products which have been ‘‘worked

after rolling’’)—for example, products

which have been beveled or rounded at

the edges. Excluded from this review is

certain shadow mask steel, i.e.,

aluminum-killed, cold-rolled steel coil

that is open-coil annealed, has a carbon

content of less than 0.002 percent, is of

0.003 to 0.012 inch in thickness, 15 to

30 inches in width, and has an ultra flat,

isotropic surface. These HTS item

numbers are provided for convenience

and Customs purposes. The written

description remains dispositive.

The POR is August 1, 1995, through

July 31, 1996. This review covers entries

of certain cold-rolled carbon steel flat
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 80 / Monday, April 27, 1998 / Notices 20575

products from the Netherlands by

Hoogovens Staal B.V. (Hoogovens).

Analysis of Comments Received

Hoogovens argues that the

Department inadvertently used the

wrong denominator to arrive at the per

ton factor in reclassifying Hoogovens’

warranty expenses as direct, rather than

indirect expenses. The Department

divided the total warranty expenses

incurred during the period of March

1994–July 1996 (‘‘window period’’) by

the total sales entered into the United

States during the period of review of

August 1995–July 1996, instead of the

total shipments during the window

period. According to Hoogovens, this

resulted in a considerable overstatement

of U.S. warranty expenses. For the home

market warranty expenses, the

Department used as the denominator the

home market sales during the window

period rather than the shipments,

resulting in a slight overstatement of per

ton expenses. Finally, after deducting

warranty expenses from the reported

home market indirect selling expenses

(ISE), the Department allocated the

remaining ISE on the basis of the

quantity sold. Hoogovens alleges that

the Department’s practice is to require

that ISE be reported as a percentage of

sales value rather than on the basis of

quantity.

Petitioners argue that the Department

allocated the expenses exactly as

described in its analysis memorandum.

Moreover, petitioners point out, the

Department found in its final results

that Hoogovens had improperly failed to

report its warranty expenses as direct

selling expenses based on the tonnages

sold. While petitioners argued in their

case brief that the Department should

deny any adjustment for the reported

expense in the home market, in

petitioners’ view the Department’s

decision to allocate these expenses

based on the tonnages in Hoogovens’

reported data is consistent with the

Department’s stated intention and

cannot be said to be a ministerial error.

Finally, petitioners argue that

Hoogovens’ questioning of the

Department’s allocation of ISE raises a

policy issue, not a ministerial error.

We agree in part with Hoogovens. For

these amended final results we have

corrected the denominators to

correspond to the same period as the

numerators. We disagree with the

petitioners’ claim that these were not

ministerial errors. We did not intend to

calculate a ratio in which the

denominator and numerator were based

on data covering different periods.

Accordingly, we find this error to be

ministerial within the meaning of 19

CFR 353.28(d).

In regard to the allocation of ISE, we

agree with petitioners that this raises a

methodological issue, not a ministerial

error. We believe that the Department’s

allocation based on quantity rather than

value is reasonable, and have adjusted

the denominator to correspond to the

quantities shipped in the home market

during the extended window period.

Amended Final Results of Review

As a result of our correction of

ministerial errors, we have determined

the margin to be:

Manufacturer/

exporter Period of review

Margin

(percent)

Hoogovens

Staal B.V. .. 8/1/95–7/31/96 4.32

Further, as a result of these

corrections, we find that there are

dumping margins on 84.3 percent of

Hoogovens’ U.S. sales by quantity. In

the absence of any information on the

record that the unaffiliated purchasers

in the United States will pay the

ultimately assessed duties, the

Department finds that respondent has

absorbed antidumping duties on 84.3

percent of its U.S. sales.

The Department shall determine, and

the Customs Service shall assess,

antidumping duties on all appropriate

entries. For assessment purposes, the

duty assessment rate will be a specific

amount per metric ton. The Department

will issue appraisement instructions

directly to the Customs Service.

Furthermore, the following deposit

requirements will be effective upon

publication of this notice of final results

of review for all shipments of coldrolled carbon steel flat products from

the Netherlands entered, or withdrawn

from warehouse, for consumption on or

after the publication date, as provided

for by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1)

The cash deposit rate for the reviewed

company will be the rate for that firm

as stated above; (2) if the exporter is not

a firm covered in this review, or the

original less than fair value (LTFV)

investigation, but the manufacturer is,

the cash deposit rate will be the rate

established for the most recent period

for the manufacturer of the

merchandise; and (3) if neither the

exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm

covered in this review, the cash deposit

rate will be 19.32 percent. This is the

‘‘all others’’ rate from the amended final

determination in the LTFV

investigation. See Amended Final

Determination Pursuant to CIT Decision:

Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat

Products from the Netherlands, 61 FR

47871. These deposit requirements,

when imposed, shall remain in effect

until publication of the final results of

the next administrative review.

This notice serves as a final reminder

to importers of their responsibility

under section 353.26 of the

Department’s regulations 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 double antidumping

duties.

This notice also serves as a reminder

to parties subject to administrative

protective order (APO) of their

responsibility concerning the

disposition of proprietary information

disclosed under APO in accordance

with section 353.34(d) of the

Department’s regulations. 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.

These amended final results of

administrative review and notice are in

accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the

Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19

CFR 353.28(c).

Dated: April 17, 1998.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 98–11000 Filed 4–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–351–827, A–580–833, A–201–821]

Initiation of Antidumping

Investigations: Emulsion StyreneButadiene Rubber from Brazil, the

Republic of Korea, and Mexico

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 27, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Genovese, at (202) 482–0498,

Import Administration, International

Trade Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington,

DC 20230.