On November 12 and 25, 2008, the petitioners in the administrative review in question, i.e., AK Steel Corporation and Allegheny Technologies, Inc. filed timely sales-below-cost allegations against Hitachi Cable and NKKN, respectively. Accordingly, during the period December 2008 through July 2009, the DOC issued to Hitachi Cable and NKKN supplemental questionnaires with respect to the original questionnaire. The DOC received responses to these questionnaires during the period December 2008 through July 2009.
Following its postponement of the preliminary results of this review until July 31, 2009, the DOC conducted verifications of the questionnaire responses submitted by Hitachi Cable, NKKN, and one of NKKN's affiliated resellers, Nikkin Steel Co., Ltd. in May and June 2009. In comments submitted to the DOC on November 12, 2008, February 2, 2009, and February 23, 2009, the petitioners alleged that Hitachi Cable's sole US sale during the period of review was not a bona fide transaction, and requested that the DOC rescind the review of Hitachi Cable on this basis. Specifically, the petitioners have argued that the price, quantity, payment period and delivery terms were not consistent with normal commercial considerations for the product and producer concerned. They have concluded that, given the totality of the circumstances, there is no evidence to support a finding that the sale at issue was a bona fide commercial transaction reflective of normal commercial terms to be followed for future sales.
Based on the record information and the DOC's verification thereof, the DOC has preliminarily determined that Hitachi Cable's sale to the US constitutes a bona fide commercial transaction; the DOC has preliminarily determined that Hitachi Cable's sale to the US is a bona fide sale. The DOC has also confirmed at verification that the US sale at issue consisted of a sample of subject merchandise sold for testing purposes. Furthermore, the DOC has found that the delivery method Hitachi Cable employed for the US sale was not inconsistent with normal industry practice for small-quantity sales, as the same delivery method was used by the other respondent in this review, NKKN. Finally, with respect to the payment, Hitachi Cable established payment terms in accordance with its normal sales process, and provided a reasonable explanation at verification for why the timing of the actual payment was found inconsistent with the payment terms indicated on the sales documents.
Therefore, the DOC has preliminarily determined that weighted-average dumping margins exist for the respondents for the period July 1, 2007, through June 30, 2008, as follows:
Manufacturer/Exporter | Percent margin |
Hitachi Cable Limited | 0.00 |
Nippon Kinzoku Company Limited | 0.23 (de minimis) |
The cash deposit rate for each specific company listed above will be that established in the final results of this review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent, and therefore, de minimis, in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero and the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will be 40.18 percent, the all-others rate established in the less-than-fair-value investigation. These requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.