Paragraph entered by Atlantic migration, in order for SteelFirst articles to display correctly on Metal Bulletin.
The minister has accepted recommendations made by the Trade Measures Review Officer (TMRO) and has requested the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (ACBPS) to reinvestigate, ACBPS said in a statement on Tuesday May 7.
The TMRO’s recommendations arose from its review of the minister’s decision to publish a notice in respect of HRC from Japan, South Korea, Malaysia and Taiwan. The notice of the review was given on February 2.
The applicants for review were Hyundai Steel, OneSteel Australian Tube Mills, Posco, GM Holden and BlueScope Steel.
As a result of the TMRO’s recommendations, the ceo of ACBPS has been directed to reinvestigate certain findings in relation to the decision to publish a dumping duty notice:
1) the calculation of the dumping margin for Hyundai Steel, in order to correct apparent errors in it;
2) whether there were in fact sufficient grounds to warrant setting the measures by reference to prices other than those in the investigation period and, if so, the preferable methodology for adjustment of those prices;
3) whether it would be preferable to structure the conditions attaching to the imposition of dumping duties on imports for the automotive industry in such a way that imports that are acknowledged by Customs and Border Protection not to be causing or likely to cause injury to BlueScope are not liable to duty under the dumping duty notice in the first instance (and only exempt if subsequently exempted under section 8(7) of the Customs Tariff (Anti-dumping) Act 1975); and
4) why pickled and oiled HRC from countries Korea, Malaysia and Taiwan sold to and used in the automotive sector should not be treated in the same manner as Japanese imports of pickled and oiled HRC for the automotive sector.
The ACBPS ceo is required to conduct the investigation in accordance with the minister’s requirements and give the minister a report of the reinvestigation concerning the finding or findings by June 13.
Officers conducting the reinvestigation will not be those who undertook the original investigation and no new information or conclusions may be considered in a reinvestigation, according to the statement.
