ARCHIVED - Anti-dumping and Countervailing Program

This page has been archived.

Final Determination - Concrete Reinforcing Bar

OTTAWA, May 2, 2001

4258-111
AD-1247

STATEMENT OF REASONS

Concerning the making of a final determination of dumping with respect to

CERTAIN CONCRETE REINFORCING BAR ORIGINATING IN OR EXPORTED FROM THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA, JAPAN, THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA, THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA, THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND, CHINESE TAIPEI AND UKRAINE

DECISION

Pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of the Special Import Measures Act, the Commissioner of Customs and Revenue has today made a final determination of dumping concerning hot-rolled deformed carbon or low alloy steel concrete reinforcing bar in straight lengths or coils, originating in or exported from the Republic of Indonesia, Japan, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Moldova, the Republic of Poland, Chinese Taipei and Ukraine.

This Statement of Reasons is also available in French.
Cet énoncé des motifs est également disponible en français.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

SUMMARY

On November 3, 2000, the Commissioner of Customs and Revenue (Commissioner) initiated an investigation respecting the alleged injurious dumping into Canada of certain concrete reinforcing bar (rebar) originating in or exported from the Republic of Indonesia (Indonesia), Japan, the Republic of Latvia (Latvia), the Republic of Moldova (Moldova), the Republic of Poland (Poland), Chinese Taipei and Ukraine. The investigation was initiated in response to a complaint filed by Stelco Inc. of Hamilton, Ontario.

On January 2, 2001, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (Tribunal) made a preliminary determination that the evidence disclosed a reasonable indication that the alleged dumping of the subject goods has caused injury to the domestic industry. The Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA) subsequently made a preliminary determination of dumping on February 1, 2001.

Based on the results of the CCRA's investigation, the Commissioner is satisfied that the subject goods have been dumped and that the margins of dumping are not insignificant. Accordingly, the Commissioner has made a final determination of dumping in accordance with paragraph 41(1)(a) of the Special Import Measures Act (SIMA).

The Tribunal's inquiry concerning the question of injury to the Canadian industry is continuing. Provisional duties for the subject goods originating in or exported from Indonesia, Japan, Latvia, Moldova, Poland, Chinese Taipei and Ukraine will continue to be assessed until the Tribunal issues its finding.

INTERESTED PARTIES

Complainant

The complainant, Stelco Inc., filed the complaint on behalf of its three wholly owned manufacturing units - Hilton Works, AltaSteel Limited and Stelco McMaster Ltée. For the purposes of this report, references to Stelco include all three entities.

The following other rebar producers in Canada - Co-Steel Inc.; Gerdau Courtice; Gerdau MRM Steel; Ispat-Sidbec Inc. and Slater Steel Inc. - all expressed their support for the complaint in letters to the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA).

Exporters

The CCRA investigation revealed that 15 exporters shipped the subject goods to Canada during the period of investigation.

Importers

The CCRA investigation revealed that 23 importers imported the subject goods into Canada during the period of investigation.

BACKGROUND

Since June 1999, there have been two separate dumping investigations initiated with respect to imports of rebar as a result of complaints filed by the Canadian industry.

A previous investigation in respect of rebar from the Republic of Cuba, the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey was initiated by the CCRA on June 16, 1999, as a result of a complaint filed by Co-Steel, culminating in an injury finding by the Tribunal on January 12, 2000.

In the current investigation, Stelco filed the complaint on September 29, 2000, following a number of discussions and meetings with the CCRA.

On October 19, 2000, the CCRA informed Stelco that the complaint was properly documented and also notified the governments of Indonesia, Japan, Latvia, Moldova, Poland, Chinese Taipei and Ukraine that a complaint had been filed respecting the alleged dumping. On November 3, 2000, the Commissioner initiated a dumping investigation and notified the Tribunal of that decision. The Tribunal subsequently initiated a preliminary injury inquiry into whether the evidence discloses a reasonable indication of injury, retardation or threat of injury caused by the dumping of the goods.

On January 2, 2001, the Tribunal concluded that the evidence disclosed a reasonable indication that the alleged dumping has caused injury. On February 1, 2001, the Commissioner made a preliminary determination of dumping with respect to the subject goods and provisional duties have been in place since that date.

PRODUCT INFORMATION

Definition

For the purpose of this investigation, the subject goods are defined as:

hot-rolled deformed carbon or low alloy steel concrete reinforcing bar in straight lengths or coils, originating in or exported from Indonesia, Japan, Latvia, Moldova, Poland, Chinese Taipei and Ukraine.

Product Information

For further clarity, the subject goods include all hot-rolled deformed bar, rolled from billet steel, rail steel, axle steel, or low alloy-steel.

The subject goods exclude the following:

• plain round bar;
• rebar that a processor has further worked or fabricated (other than cut); and
• coated rebar

Rebar is produced in Canada in accordance with the National Standard of Canada CAN/CSA-G30.18-M92 for Billet-Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement (the National Standard) prepared by the Standards Association and approved by the Standards Council of Canada.

The following are the most common bar designation numbers with the corresponding diameter in millimetres in brackets: 10 (11.3), 15 (16.0), 20 (19.5), 25 (25.2), 30 (29.9), 35 (35.7), 45 (43.7), 55 (56.4). Rebar sizes are commonly referred to as the bar designation number combined with the letter "M". Thus 10M rebar is rebar with a bar designation number of 10 and a diameter of 11.3 millimetres.

The National Standard identifies two grades of rebar, namely regular or "R" and weldable or "W". R grades are intended for general applications while W grades are used where welding, bending or ductility are of special concern.

The National Standard also identifies yield strength levels of 300, 400, and 500. The grade and yield strength of rebar is identified by combining yield strength number with grade. Thus "400R" is regular rebar with a yield strength of 400, and "500W" is weldable rebar with a yield strength of 500.

The standard lengths for rebar are 6 metres (20 feet), 12 metres (40 feet) and 18 metres (60 feet) although they could be cut and sold in other lengths as specified by customers.

Production Process

Deformed steel concrete reinforcing bar is produced using ferrous scrap metal as the principal raw material. The scrap metal is melted in an electric arc furnace and is further processed in a ladle arc-refining unit. The molten steel is then continuously cast into rectangular billets of steel that are cut to length. The billets are then rolled into various sizes of rebar, which is cut to various lengths depending on the customers' requirements.

Deformed rebar is rolled with deformations on the bar, which provides gripping power so that concrete adheres to the bar and provides reinforcing value. The deformations must conform to requirements set out in the National Standards.

Product Application

Deformed rebar of all sizes is used almost exclusively in the construction industry to provide structural reinforcement to concrete structures. Residential markets primarily use rebar in smaller sizes, while the heavy construction and fabrication markets use most of the larger sizes of rebar.

CLASSIFICATION OF IMPORTS

The subject reinforcing bar is properly classified under the following Harmonized System (HS) classification numbers:

7213.10.00.00
7214.20.00.00

THE CANADIAN INDUSTRY

In addition to Alta Steel Ltd. of Edmonton, Alberta; Stelco McMaster Ltée of Contrecoeur, Quebec and Hilton Works of Hamilton, Ontario, all manufacturing units of Stelco Inc. of Hamilton, Ontario, there are five other Canadian producers of rebar: Co-Steel Inc. of Whitby, Ontario; Gerdau Courtice of Cambridge, Ontario; Gerdau MRM Steel of Selkirk, Manitoba; Ispat Sidbec Inc. of Montréal, Québec; and Slater Steel Inc. of North York, Ontario.

THE CANADIAN MARKET

In its complaint, Stelco provided information on the Canadian market for rebar. The estimate of the size of the Canadian rebar market was based on information from Statistics Canada Primary Iron and Steel reports on domestic production and Statistics Canada trade data on imports.

The CCRA substantiated the information on imports supplied by the complainant from its internal information system, Facility for Information Retrieval Management (FIRM) and reviewed customs entry documentation from the named countries. This also included subject goods that were shipped from the United States of America (United States) during the period of the investigation, October 1, 1999 to May 31, 2000. Appendix 1, details the volume of dumped imports for the period of investigation.

RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION

Normal values are usually based on overall profitable sales in the exporter's home market, or in the absence of those sales, on the basis of full costs of the goods plus an amount for profit. In the absence of such data, the Minister must specify the method for the determination of the normal values. In addition, where the government of the country of export has a monopoly of its export trade and it substantially determines domestic prices in respect of the goods under investigation, section 20 of SIMA applies when goods are shipped directly to Canada. When section 20 is applicable, normal values are generally determined on the basis of overall profitable domestic sales or the full cost of the goods plus an amount for profit, in a surrogate country.

The export price of goods shipped to Canada is the lesser of the exporter's selling price or the importer's purchase price, less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods. Normally, the export price is the exporter's selling price.

When the export price is less than the normal value, the difference is the margin of dumping. Margins of dumping are expressed as a percentage of normal value.

In conducting its investigation, the CCRA requested identified exporters and importers to provide sales and cost information necessary to determine the normal values and export prices of the subject goods. This included exporters that were located in the United States and shipped the subject goods to Canada from the United States. The dumping investigation covered all subject goods released into Canada during the period of investigation, October 1, 1999 to May 31, 2000 that originated in the named countries.

With respect to Latvia, Moldova and Ukraine, in addition to the exporter, the CCRA also sent a request for information to the governments of these countries to obtain information necessary to determine whether the conditions of section 20 of SIMA are applicable to their steel sectors.

The CCRA received complete responses from the government of Latvia and the government of Ukraine. Verification meetings were held with representatives of the government of Latvia in Riga and with representatives of the government of Ukraine in Kiev in order to verify their responses.

Concerning exporter responses, complete responses were received from the exporters located in Japan, Latvia and Ukraine. A partial response was received from the exporter in Moldova.

The determinations of normal value, export price and the margin of dumping are discussed below. For exporters that did not cooperate or did not provide a complete response to the request for information, the normal values were determined by ministerial specification and are based on the export price advanced by 69.2 per cent. This advance is based on the highest margin of dumping found in this investigation for a co-operative exporter.

1. Indonesia

The sole exporter did not provide a response to the CCRA's request for information. For imports from this exporter, normal values were determined by advancing the export price of the subject goods by 69.2 per cent pursuant to a ministerial specification under subsection 29(1) of SIMA, using the facts available.

Export prices were determined pursuant to section 24 of SIMA on the basis of the lesser of the exporter's selling price and the importer's purchase price. As this exporter did not co-operate the CCRA used the declared importer's purchase price from the customs documentation to determine the export price.

During the period of investigation, 100 per cent of the subject goods exported from Indonesia to Canada were found to be dumped. The weighted average margin of dumping was 40.9 per cent, expressed as a percentage of normal value or 69.2 per cent when expressed as a percentage of export price. The margin of dumping is not insignificant as it is above the required 2 per cent threshold.

1. 2. Japan

Complete responses to the CCRA's request for information were received from Mitsuboshi Metal Industry Co., Limited (MMIC), the manufacturer and exporter of the subject goods and from Mitsubishi Corporation (MC), the vendor of these goods. Verification meetings were held at MMIC's premises in Tsubame and at MC's premises in Tokyo. No other Japanese exporters provided a response to the CCRA's request for information.

2.1 Mitsuboshi Metal Industry Co., Limited

The CCRA has determined that MMIC, the manufacturer was also the exporter of the goods for SIMA purposes and MC had acted as a vendor in the transactions.

(a) Normal Value

Normal values for one of the shipments were determined pursuant to section 15 of SIMA based on MMIC's overall profitable domestic sales. Adjustments to the domestic selling prices were allowed for delivery costs pursuant to section 7 of the Special Import Measures Regulations (SIMR) and for differences in payment terms between the importer and the domestic customers pursuant to paragraph 5(d) of SIMR.

Normal values for another shipment were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA based on the aggregate of MMIC's cost of production, selling, administrative and other costs, and an amount for profit. The profit amount was determined pursuant to paragraph 11(b) of SIMR, using the overall profit from the domestic sales of like goods made by MMIC.

(b) Export Price

Export prices were determined pursuant to section 24 of SIMA on the basis of the lesser of the exporter's selling price and the importer's purchase price. In all cases, the exporter's selling price was the lower of the two prices.

(c) Margin of Dumping

During the period of investigation, 100 per cent of the goods exported to Canada from MMIC were found to be dumped and the margin of dumping ranged from 33.6 per cent to 40.9 per cent. The weighted average margin of dumping was 37.3 per cent when expressed as a percentage of normal value or 59.5 per cent when expressed as a percentage of export price.

2.2 Other Japanese Exporters

No other exporters provided a response to the CCRA's request for information. For imports from these exporters, normal values were determined by advancing the export price of the subject goods by 69.2 per cent pursuant to a ministerial specification under subsection 29(1) of SIMA, using the facts available.

Export prices were determined pursuant to section 24 of SIMA on the basis of the lesser of the exporter's selling price and the importer's purchase price. As these exporters did not co-operate the CCRA used the declared importer's purchase price from the customs documentation to determine the export price.

During the period of investigation, 100 per cent of the subject goods exported to Canada from the exporters that did not cooperate, were found to be dumped. The weighted average margin of dumping was 40.9 per cent, expressed as a percentage of normal value or 69.2 per cent when expressed as a percentage of export price.

In summary, for all exports from Japan, the margin of dumping is not insignificant as it is above the required 2 per cent threshold.

1. 3. Latvia

In the current investigation, information was requested from the Latvian government and the exporter at the initiation of the investigation in order for the Commissioner to form an opinion as to whether or not the conditions of section 20 of SIMA exist in respect of the steel sector. The CCRA received full cooperation from the government and the exporter. A complete analysis of the information dealing with the prevailing economic conditions in Latvia was conducted before the final stage of the investigation. Information obtained by the CCRA from other publicly available sources was also reviewed.

The analysis and verifications of the submissions revealed that the government of Latvia does not have a monopoly or a substantial monopoly of its export trade in the steel sector and therefore section 20 of SIMA does not apply.

3.1 Liepajas Metalurgs

As indicated, a complete response to the request for information was received from Liepajas Metalurgs (LM) the sole manufacturer and the exporter of the subject goods. Verification meetings were held at LM's premises in Liepajas, Latvia.

Normal Value

There were insufficient sales of like goods in the domestic market to allow the establishment of normal values under section 15 of SIMA. In addition, normal values could not be constructed under paragraph 19(b), based on the aggregate of the cost of production, selling, administrative and other costs, and a reasonable amount for profit, as the amount for profit was not available as described in paragraph 11(1)(b) of SIMR. In this instance there was no profit on domestic sales of like goods, goods of the same general category, or goods that are of the group or range of goods that is next largest to the goods of the same general category. Accordingly, normal values were determined under section 29(1) of SIMA, using the facts available. As the CCRA was able to verify costs of production, selling, administrative and other expenses, normal values were calculated using the aggregate of LM's cost of production, selling, administrative and other costs of the subject goods, plus an amount for profit. The profit amount is based on the weighted average profit calculated for co-operative producers of subject goods covered by the previous Tribunal finding on rebar.

Export Price

Export prices were determined pursuant to section 24 of SIMA on the basis of the exporter's selling price, less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods.

(c) Margin of Dumping

During the period of investigation, 79.4 per cent of the goods exported to Canada from LM were found to be dumped and the margin of dumping ranged from 2.6 per cent to 9.4 per cent. The weighted average margin of dumping was 3.9 per cent when expressed as a percentage of normal value or 4.1 per cent when expressed as a percentage of export price. The margin of dumping is not insignificant as it is above the required 2 per cent threshold.

1. 4. Moldova

Requests for information were sent to the government of Moldova and the sole Moldovan exporter in order to obtain the information necessary to determine whether the conditions of section 20 of SIMA are applicable in respect of the steel sector. The government of Moldova did not provide a response to the CCRA's request for information and the Moldovan exporter, Moldova Steel Works (MSW), provided a response to the export sales section of the request for information.

In the absence of a response from the government of Moldova, the CCRA cannot conclusively determine whether section 20 applies to the steel sector, as sufficient information has not been furnished. Accordingly, for imports from MSW, normal values were determined by advancing the export price of the subject goods by 69.2 per cent pursuant to a ministerial specification under subsection 29(1) of SIMA, using the facts available.

Export prices were determined pursuant to section 24 of SIMA on the basis of the lesser of the exporter's selling price and the importer's purchase price. In all cases, the exporter's selling price was the lower of the two prices.

During the period of investigation, 100 per cent of the subject goods exported from Moldova to Canada were found to be dumped. The weighted average margin of dumping was 40.9 per cent, expressed as a percentage of normal value or 69.2 per cent when expressed as a percentage of export price. The margin of dumping is not insignificant as it is above the required 2 per cent threshold.

Moldovan origin goods were also shipped indirectly to Canada through the United States and therefore subsection 30(2) of SIMA is applicable. In situations where goods are shipped indirectly to Canada, the CCRA is required to determine the normal value of the goods, in the country of origin and in the country of export. Where the normal value in the country of origin is higher than the normal value determined in the country of export then both normal value and export price will be determined as if the goods were shipped directly from the country of origin. In the case of Moldova, the normal values were the same. For details on normal value and export price calculations for subject goods shipped from the United States, refer to point 8.

1. 5. Poland

The sole exporter did not provide a response to the CCRA's request for information. For imports from this exporter, normal values were determined by advancing the export price of the subject goods by 69.2 per cent pursuant to a ministerial specification under subsection 29(1) of SIMA, using the facts available.

Export prices were determined pursuant to section 24 of SIMA on the basis of the lesser of the exporter's selling price and the importer's purchase price. As this exporter did not co-operate the CCRA used the declared importer's purchase price from the customs documentation to determine the export price.

During the period of investigation, 100 per cent of the subject goods exported from Poland to Canada were found to be dumped. The weighted average margin of dumping was 40.9 per cent, expressed as a percentage of normal value or 69.2 per cent when expressed as a percentage of export price. The margin of dumping is not insignificant as it is above the required 2 per cent threshold.

1. 6. Chinese Taipei

The sole exporter did not provide a response to the CCRA's request for information. For imports from this exporter, normal values were determined by advancing the export price of the subject goods by 69.2 per cent pursuant to a ministerial specification under subsection 29(1) of SIMA, using the facts available.

Export prices were determined pursuant to section 24 of SIMA on the basis of the lesser of the exporter's selling price and the importer's purchase price. As this exporter did not co-operate the CCRA used the declared importer's purchase price from the customs documentation to determine the export price.

During the period of investigation, 100 per cent of the subject goods exported from Chinese Taipei to Canada were found to be dumped. The weighted average margin of dumping was 40.9 per cent, expressed as a percentage of normal value or 69.2 per cent when expressed as a percentage of export price. The margin of dumping is not insignificant as it is above the required 2 per cent threshold.

1. 7. Ukraine

In the current investigation, information was requested from the Ukrainian government and the exporter at the initiation of the investigation in order to obtain information necessary to determine whether the conditions of section 20 of SIMA exist in respect of the steel sector. The CCRA received full cooperation from the government and the exporter. A complete analysis of the information dealing with the prevailing economic conditions in Ukraine was conducted before the final stage of the investigation. Information obtained by the CCRA from other publicly available sources was also reviewed.

The analysis and verifications of the submissions revealed that the government of Ukraine does not have a monopoly or a substantial monopoly of its export trade in the steel sector and therefore section 20 of SIMA does not apply.

7.1 Krivorozhstal Steel Works

A complete response to the request for information was received from Krivorozhstal Iron and Steel Works (Krivorozhstal) the sole manufacturer and the exporter of the subject goods during the period of investigation. Verification meetings were held at Krivorozhstal's premises in Krivoi Rog, Ukraine.

(a) Normal Value

Information was submitted on domestic and export sales and related cost data that would ordinarily be used to determine normal values. However, it was established that during the investigation period, Krivorozhstal had procured significant raw materials and other inputs used in the production of rebar through barter. In addition, there was evidence of some barter transactions in the company's domestic sales. Due to the use of non-monetary transactions (barter) in the selling of the goods domestically and in the purchasing of raw materials, normal values were not based on domestic sales or the aggregate of the cost of production, selling, administrative and other costs, and an amount for profit.

Accordingly, for Krivorozhstal, normal values were determined in accordance with subsection 29(1) of SIMA, based on the facts available. In view of the full cooperation provided by Krivorozhstal, normal values were determined on the basis of the weighted average selling price of the like goods of the co-operative producers of subject goods covered by the previous Tribunal finding on rebar, where those domestic sales permitted a proper comparison.

(b) Export Price

Export prices were determined pursuant to section 24 of SIMA on the basis of the exporter's selling price, less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods.

(c) Margin of Dumping

During the period of investigation, 100 per cent of the goods exported to Canada from Krivorozhstal were found to be dumped and the margin of dumping ranged from 13.0 per cent to 22.0 per cent. The weighted average margin of dumping was 15.7 per cent when expressed as a percentage of normal value or 18.6 per cent when expressed as a percentage of export price. The margin of dumping is not insignificant as it is above the required 2 per cent threshold.

Ukrainian origin goods were also shipped indirectly to Canada through the United States and therefore subsection 30(2) of SIMA is applicable. In situations where goods are shipped indirectly to Canada, the CCRA is required to determine the normal value of the goods, in the country of origin and in the country of export. Where the normal value in the country of origin is higher than the normal value determined in the country of export then both normal value and export price will be determined as if the goods were shipped directly from the country of origin. In the case of Ukraine, the normal value from the country of export was the higher of the two. For details on normal value and export price calculations for subject goods shipped from the United States, refer to point 8.

1. 8. United States of America Exporters

None of the United States exporters that had shipped the subject goods to Canada provided a response to the CCRA's request for information. For imports from these exporters, normal values were determined by advancing the export price of the subject goods by 69.2 per cent pursuant to a ministerial specification pursuant to subsection 29(1) of SIMA, using the facts available.

Export prices were determined pursuant to section 24 of SIMA on the basis of the lesser of the exporter's selling price and the importer's purchase price. As these exporters did not co-operate, the CCRA used the declared importer's purchase price from the customs documentation to determine the export price.

During the period of investigation, 100 per cent of the subject goods exported from the U.S. were found to be dumped. The weighted average margin of dumping was 40.9 per cent, expressed as a percentage of normal value or 69.2 per cent when expressed as a percentage of export price. The margin of dumping is not insignificant as it is above the required 2 per cent threshold.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

In making a final determination of dumping, the Commissioner must be satisfied that the goods have been dumped and that the margin of dumping is not insignificant. If the margin of dumping is less than 2 per cent of the export price of the goods, it is considered to be insignificant. As demonstrated in Appendix 2, the margins of dumping are well above the 2 per cent threshold level. The Commissioner is satisfied that the margin of dumping is not insignificant.

DECISION

Based on the results of the investigation, the Commissioner is satisfied that the subject goods have been dumped and that the margin of dumping is not insignificant. Accordingly, on May 2, 2001, the Commissioner has made a final determination of dumping pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA

FUTURE ACTION

The Canadian International Trade Tribunal's inquiry concerning the question of injury to production in Canada is continuing. The Tribunal will issue its finding by June 1, 2001.

Subject goods imported during the provisional period will continue to be assessed provisional duty as determined at the time of the preliminary determination of dumping. The provisional period began on February 1, 2001, the date of the preliminary determination of dumping, and will end on the date the Tribunal issues it's finding. For further details on the application of provisional duties, refer to the Statement of Reasons issued at the time of the preliminary determination of the investigation which is available on the CCRA internet web site at: www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/sima-lmsi/

If the Tribunal finds that the dumped goods have not caused injury and do not threaten to cause injury, all proceedings relating to this investigation will be terminated. In such a case, all provisional duty or security posted by importers will be returned and future imports will not be subject to anti-dumping duties.

If the Tribunal finds that the dumped goods have caused injury, the CCRA will finalize the anti-dumping duty payable on subject goods released from customs' possession during the provisional period pursuant to section 55 of SIMA. If the provisional duty paid is in excess of the final amount of anti-dumping duty payable, the excess duty paid will be refunded. Imports released from customs' possession after the date of the Tribunal's finding will be subject to anti-dumping duty equal to the margin of dumping. If anti-dumping duty is payable, such duty is hereby demanded pursuant to section 11 of SIMA.

If the Tribunal finds that the dumped goods threaten to cause injury, except for the fact that provisional duty was applied, anti-dumping duty will be assessed on the subject goods imported during the provisional period. If the Tribunal finds that the dumped goods threaten to cause injury, and the finding does not cover the provisional period, all provisional duty collected will be refunded and security posted will be discharged. Imports released from customs' after the date of the Tribunal's finding will be subject to an anti-dumping duty equal to the margin of dumping. If anti-dumping duty is payable, such duty is hereby demanded pursuant to section 11 of SIMA.

Specific normal values for the subject goods have been provided to the co-operating exporters for the final determination of dumping. Should the Tribunal make an injury finding, these normal values will come into effect the day after the date of the injury finding. Where specific normal values have not been issued, anti-dumping duty at a rate of 69.2 per cent of the export price will be payable on imports of the subject goods. To avoid the application of such an advance on export prices on their future shipments of the subject goods, exporters can submit to the CCRA information required to permit the determination of specific normal values for these products.

PUBLICATION

Notice of this final determination is being published in the Canada Gazette pursuant to paragraph 41(3)(a) of SIMA.

INFORMATION

This Statement of Reasons has been provided to persons directly interested in these proceedings. A free copy may be obtained upon request or from the CCRA's Web site at the address below. For further information, please contact one of the identified officers:

  Mail -
Canada Customs and Revenue Agency
Anti-dumping and Countervailing Directorate
191 Laurier Avenue West, 16^th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada
K1A 0L5

Telephone -
Richard Pragnell: (613) 954-0032
Iqbal Motani: (613) 952-7547
Jean-Louis Lapratte: (613) 954-7375

Telefax -
941-2612

e-mail -
Richard.Pragnell@ccra-adrc.gc.ca Iqbal.Motani@ccra-adrc.gc.ca
Jean-Louis.Lapratte@ccra-adrc.gc.ca

Website -
www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/sima-lmsi/
www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/sima-lmsi/

 

R.A. Séguin
A/Director General
Anti-dumping and Countervailing Directorate

Appendix 1

IMPORT VOLUMES

(October 1, 1999 to May 31, 2000)

Country of Export	Total Volume Imported (MTonnes)	Volume of Dumped Goods (POI)	Percent of Total Imports
Indonesia	20,282	100 %	6.9 %
Japan	33,594	100 %	11.4 %
Latvia	27,228	79.4 %	9.2 %
Moldova	20,064	100 %	6.8 %
Poland	9,658	100 %	3.3 %
Chinese Taipei	12,095	100 %	4.1 %
Ukraine	70,290	100 %	23.8 %
Total Named Countries	193,212		65.4 %
Total - Other Countries	102,146		34.6 %
TOTAL IMPORTS	295,358		100.0 %

Source: CCRA's internal information systems

APPENDIX 2

MARGINS OF DUMPING BY EXPORTER/COUNTRY

CERTAIN CONCRETE REINFORCING BAR

(October 1, 1999 to May 31, 2000)

Country/Exporter	Quantity of Goods Dumped (%)	Margin of Dumping Range (% of normal value)	Weighted Average Margin of Dumping (% of normal value)	Weighted Average Margin of Dumping (% of export price)
Indonesia - all exporters	100%	40.9%	40.9%	69.2%
Japan - Mitsuboshi Metal	100%	33.6% to 40.9%	37.3%	59.5%
Japan - other exporters	100%	40.9%	40.9%	69.2%
Japan - Country Total	100%		39.9%	66.3%
Latvia* - Liepajas Metalurgs	79.4%	2.6% to 9.4%	3.9%	4.1%
Moldova* - Moldova Steel Works	100%	40.9%	40.9%	69.2%
Poland - all exporters	100%	40.9%	40.9%	69.2%
Chinese Taipei - all exporters	100%	40.9%	40.9%	69.2%
Ukraine* - Krivorozhstal	100%	13.0% to 22.0%	15.7%	18.6%
All Other Exporters of Subject Goods	100%	40.9%	40.9%	69.2%

* There was only one exporter for each of Latvia, Moldova and Ukraine. Therefore the specific exporters totals are also the specific country totals.