Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe From Romania: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination Not To Revoke Order in Part, 7237-7240 [E5-586]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 28 / Friday, February 11, 2005 / Notices
supported by relevant evidence
including information from U.S. import
statistics, the New York Board of Trade,
industry studies and reports, the USDA,
and press reports from a variety of
sources. We have assessed the
allegations and supporting evidence
regarding material injury and causation,
and we have determined that these
allegations are properly supported by
adequate evidence and meet the
statutory requirements for initiation. See
the ‘‘Initiation Checklist’’ at Attachment
III.
Regarding the existing antidumping
order on FCOJ from Brazil, the
petitioners stated in their January 6,
2005, petition supplement that the
existing order has had a very limited
effect in preventing the dumping alleged
in the petition. According to the
petitioners, the FCOJ pricing evident in
the marketplace (both before and after
the hurricane damage in the fall of 2004)
confirms that the current order has
ceased to have any corrective impact. In
addition, the petitioners point out that,
because the existing order only covers
FCOJ, not NFC, it has no impact in
preventing damage inflicted by dumped
NFC from Brazil.
Brazil are causing material injury, or
threatening to cause material injury, to
a U.S. industry. A negative ITC
determination will result in the
investigation being terminated;
otherwise, this investigation will
proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: February 7, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E5–587 Filed 2–10–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–485–805]
Certain Small Diameter Carbon and
Alloy Seamless Standard, Line, and
Pressure Pipe From Romania: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Final
Determination Not To Revoke Order in
Part
ITC Notification
We have notified the ITC of our
initiation as required by section 732(d)
of the Act.
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 7, 2004, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of the antidumping duty
administrative review of certain small
diameter carbon and alloy seamless
standard, line, and pressure pipe
(seamless pipe) from Romania. This
review covers one manufacturer/
exporter of the subject merchandise.
The period of review (POR) is August 1,
2002, through July 31, 2003. Based on
our analysis of comments received,
these final results differ from the
preliminary results. The final results are
listed below in the ‘‘Final Results of
Review’’ section.
EFFECTIVE DATES: February 11, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Layton or Erin Begnal, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 8, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–0371 and (202)
482–1442, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine
no later than March 7, 2005, whether
there is a reasonable indication that
imports of certain orange juice from
Background
The Department published the
preliminary results of the antidumping
duty administrative review of seamless
pipe from Romania. See Certain Small
Initiation of Antidumping Investigation
Based upon our examination of the
petition on certain orange juice, we have
found that it meets the requirements of
section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are
initiating an antidumping duty
investigation to determine whether
imports of certain orange juice from
Brazil are being, or are likely to be, sold
in the United States at less than fair
value. Unless this deadline is extended
pursuant to section 733(b)(1)(A) of the
Act, we will make our preliminary
determination no later than 140 days
after the date of this initiation.
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section
732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, a copy of the
public version of the petition has been
provided to the representatives of the
government of Brazil. We will attempt
to provide a copy of the public version
of the petition to each exporter named
in the petition, as provided for under 19
CFR 351.203(c)(2).
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:18 Feb 10, 2005
Jkt 205001
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7237
Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless
Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe From
Romania: Preliminary Results and
Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Preliminary
Determination Not To Revoke in Part, 69
FR 54119 (September 7, 2004)
(Preliminary Results). The review covers
one manufacturer/exporter, S.C.
Silcotub S.A. (Silcotub).
Romania’s designation as a nonmarket-economy (NME) country
remained in effect until January 1,
2003.1 Because the first five months of
the POR fell before Romania’s
graduation to market-economy status
and the last seven months of this POR
came after its graduation, in its
antidumping questionnaire to Silcotub,
dated November 14, 2003, the
Department determined that it would
treat Romania as an NME country from
August 1, 2002, through December 31,
2002, and a market-economy (ME)
country from January 1, 2003, through
July 31, 2003. The first part of this
notice refers to the NME portion of the
POR (NME POR) and the Department’s
NME methodology, and the second part
of this notice refers to the ME portion
of the POR (ME POR) and the
Department’s ME methodology. In the
section of this notice entitled Final
Results of the Review, we have
calculated a weighted-average dumping
margin reflecting the margin we
calculated for the NME POR and the
dumping margin we calculated for the
ME POR. This weighted-average figure
reflects the margin of dumping for the
entire POR.
We invited parties to comment on our
preliminary results of review. Silcotub
filed a brief on November 12, 2004, and
a rebuttal brief on November 18, 2004.
On December 10, 2004, the Department
rejected Silcotub’s case brief because it
contained new factual information.2
1 In Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy
Seamless Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe from
Romania: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 68 FR 12672, 12673 (March
17, 2003), the Department reviewed the non-marketeconomy status of Romania and determined to
reclassify Romania as a market economy for
purposes of antidumping and countervailing duty
proceedings,pursuant to section 771(18)(A) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (The Act), effective
January 1, 2003. See Memorandum from Lawrence
Norton, Import Policy Analyst, to Joseph Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration: Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy
Seamless Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe from
Romania—Non-Market Economy Status Review
(March 10, 2003).
2 See Letter from Department of Commerce to
Silcotub regarding 2002–2003 Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain
Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless
Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe from Romania
(December 3, 2004).
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
7238
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 28 / Friday, February 11, 2005 / Notices
Silcotub filed a redacted case brief on
December 14, 2004. The domestic
interested party, United States Steel
Corporation (U.S. Steel), filed a case
brief on November 12, 2004, and a
rebuttal brief on November 18, 2004. On
January 5, 2005, we issued a letter
requesting parties to comment on two
issues: (1) The most appropriate
methodology for the Department to use
in calculating an all-others rate for
future entries; and (2) whether it was
more appropriate to calculate the
company-specific cash-deposit rate
based on the weighted-average margin
reflecting sales from both the ME and
NME portions of the POR or on sales
from the ME portion alone. We received
comments on these issues from U.S.
Steel on January 11, 2005.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the order are
seamless carbon and alloy (other than
stainless) steel standard, line, and
pressure pipes and redraw hollows
produced, or equivalent, to the ASTM
A–53, ASTM A–106, ASTM A–333,
ASTM A–334, ASTM A–335, ASTM A–
589, ASTM A–795, and the API 5L
specifications and meeting the physical
parameters described below, regardless
of application. The scope of the order
also includes all products used in
standard, line, or pressure pipe
applications and meeting the physical
parameters described below, regardless
of specification. Specifically included
within the scope of the order are
seamless pipes and redraw hollows, less
than or equal to 4.5 inches (114.3 mm)
in outside diameter, regardless of wallthickness, manufacturing process (hot
finished or cold-drawn), end finish
(plain end, beveled end, upset end,
threaded, or threaded and coupled), or
surface finish.
The seamless pipes subject to the
order are currently classifiable under
the subheadings 7304.10.10.20,
7304.10.50.20, 7304.31.30.00,
7304.31.60.50, 7304.39.00.16,
7304.39.00.20, 7304.39.00.24,
7304.39.00.28, 7304.39.00.32,
7304.51.50.05, 7304.51.50.60,
7304.59.60.00, 7304.59.80.10,
7304.59.80.15, 7304.59.80.20, and
7304.59.80.25 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).
Specifications, Characteristics, and
Uses: Seamless pressure pipes are
intended for the conveyance of water,
steam, petrochemicals, chemicals, oil
products, natural gas and other liquids
and gasses in industrial piping systems.
They may carry these substances at
elevated pressures and temperatures
and may be subject to the application of
external heat. Seamless carbon steel
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:18 Feb 10, 2005
Jkt 205001
pressure pipe meeting the ASTM A–106
standard may be used in temperatures of
up to 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, at
various ASME code stress levels. Alloy
pipes made to ASTM A–335 standard
must be used if temperatures and stress
levels exceed those allowed for ASTM
A–106. Seamless pressure pipes sold in
the United States are commonly
produced to the ASTM A–106 standard.
Seamless standard pipes are most
commonly produced to the ASTM A–53
specification and generally are not
intended for high temperature service.
They are intended for the low
temperature and pressure conveyance of
water, steam, natural gas, air and other
liquids and gasses in plumbing and
heating systems, air conditioning units,
automatic sprinkler systems, and other
related uses. Standard pipes (depending
on type and code) may carry liquids at
elevated temperatures but must not
exceed relevant ASME code
requirements. If exceptionally low
temperature uses or conditions are
anticipated, standard pipe may be
manufactured to ASTM A–333 or ASTM
A–334 specifications.
Seamless line pipes are intended for
the conveyance of oil and natural gas or
other fluids in pipe lines. Seamless line
pipes are produced to the API 5L
specification.
Seamless water well pipe (ASTM A–
589) and seamless galvanized pipe for
fire protection uses (ASTM A–795) are
used for the conveyance of water.
Seamless pipes are commonly
produced and certified to meet ASTM
A–106, ASTM A–53, API 5L–B, and API
5L–X42 specifications. To avoid
maintaining separate production runs
and separate inventories, manufacturers
typically triple or quadruple certify the
pipes by meeting the metallurgical
requirements and performing the
required tests pursuant to the respective
specifications. Since distributors sell the
vast majority of this product, they can
thereby maintain a single inventory to
service all customers.
The primary application of ASTM A–
106 pressure pipes and triple or
quadruple certified pipes is use in
pressure piping systems by refineries,
petrochemical plants, and chemical
plants. Other applications are in power
generation plants (electrical-fossil fuel
or nuclear), and in some oil field uses
(on shore and off shore) such as for
separator lines, gathering lines and
metering runs. A minor application of
this product is for use as oil and gas
distribution lines for commercial
applications. These applications
constitute the majority of the market for
the subject seamless pipes. However,
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
ASTM A–106 pipes may be used in
some boiler applications.
Redraw hollows are any unfinished
pipe or ‘‘hollow profiles’’ of carbon or
alloy steel transformed by hot rolling or
cold drawing/hydrostatic testing or
other methods to enable the material to
be sold under ASTM A–53, ASTM A–
106, ASTM A–333, ASTM A–334,
ASTM A–335, ASTM A–589, ASTM A–
795, and API 5L specifications.
The scope of the order includes all
seamless pipe meeting the physical
parameters described above and
produced to one of the specifications
listed above, regardless of application,
with the exception of the specific
exclusions discussed below, and
whether or not also certified to a noncovered specification. Standard, line,
and pressure applications and the
above-listed specifications are defining
characteristics of the scope of the order.
Therefore, seamless pipes meeting the
physical description above, but not
produced to the ASTM A–53, ASTM A–
106, ASTM A–333, ASTM A–334,
ASTM A–335, ASTM A–589, ASTM A–
795, and API 5L specifications shall be
covered if used in a standard, line, or
pressure application, with the exception
of the specific exclusions discussed
below.
For example, there are certain other
ASTM specifications of pipe which,
because of overlapping characteristics,
could potentially be used in ASTM A–
106 applications. These specifications
generally include ASTM A–161, ASTM
A–192, ASTM A–210, ASTM A–252,
ASTM A–501, ASTM A–523, ASTM A–
524, and ASTM A–618. When such
pipes are used in a standard, line, or
pressure pipe application, with the
exception of the specific exclusions
discussed below, such products are
covered by the scope of the order.
Specifically excluded from the scope
of the order are boiler tubing and
mechanical tubing, if such products are
not produced to ASTM A–53, ASTM A–
106, ASTM A–333, ASTM A–334,
ASTM A–335, ASTM A–589, ASTM A–
795, and API 5L specifications and are
not used in standard, line, or pressure
pipe applications. In addition, finished
and unfinished OCTG are excluded
from the scope of the order, if covered
by the scope of another antidumping
duty order from the same country. If not
covered by such an OCTG order,
finished and unfinished OCTG are
included in this scope when used in
standard, line or pressure applications.
With regard to the excluded products
listed above, the Department will not
instruct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to require end-use
certification until such time as
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 28 / Friday, February 11, 2005 / Notices
petitioner or other interested parties
provide to the Department a reasonable
basis to believe or suspect that the
products are being used in a covered
application. If such information is
provided, we will require end-use
certification only for the product(s) (or
specification(s)) for which evidence is
provided that such products are being
used in covered applications as
described above. For example, if, based
on evidence provided by petitioner, the
Department finds a reasonable basis to
believe or suspect that seamless pipe
produced to the A–161 specification is
being used in a standard, line or
pressure application, we will require
end-use certifications for imports of that
specification. Normally we will require
only the importer of record to certify to
the end use of the imported
merchandise. If it later proves necessary
for adequate implementation, we may
also require producers who export such
products to the United States to provide
such certification on invoices
accompanying shipments to the United
States.
Although the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, our written description of the
merchandise subject to this scope is
dispositive.
Separate Rates
Because we are conducting this
review in accordance with 19 CFR
351.408, we are applying our NME
methodology for Silcotub in the first
five months of this review (AugustDecember 2002). Silcotub has requested
a separate, company-specific
antidumping duty rate in this review. In
the preliminary results, we found that
Silcotub had met the criteria for the
application of separate antidumping
duty rates. See Preliminary Results. We
have not received any other information
since the preliminary results which
would warrant reconsideration of our
separate rates determination with
respect to this company. Therefore, we
determine that Silcotub should be
assigned a rate separate from the NME
entity for the NME portion of this
administrative review period.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this review
are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and
Decision Memorandum’’ (Decision
Memorandum) from Barbara E. Tillman,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Import Administration, to Joseph E.
Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration, dated February
4, 2005, which is hereby adopted by this
notice.
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:18 Feb 10, 2005
Jkt 205001
A list of the issues which parties have
raised and to which we have responded
in the Decision Memorandum is
attached to this notice as an Appendix.
Parties can find a complete discussion
of all issues raised in this review and
the corresponding recommendations in
this public memorandum, which is on
file in the Central Records Unit, room
B–099 of the main Commerce building.
In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the Internet at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and
electronic version of the Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Fair Value Comparisons
We calculated constructed export
price (CEP) and normal value (NV)
based on the same methodology we
used in the preliminary results. Changes
to ocean freight, unpaid freight for
billets, model-matching, home-market
credit expenses, U.S. credit expense,
inventory carrying costs, and the
indirect selling expenses of Duferco S.A.
are detailed in the analysis
memorandum and/or the Decision
Memorandum.
Cost of Production
We calculated the cost of production
(COP) for the merchandise based on the
same methodology we used in the
preliminary results. We found that
Silcotub made sales below cost, and we
disregarded such sales where
appropriate.
No Revocation in Part
On August 29, 2003, Silcotub
requested that the Department revoke
the antidumping duty order in part with
regard to Silcotub based on the absence
of dumping pursuant to section
351.222(b)(2) of the Department’s
regulations. Silcotub submitted, along
with its revocation request, a
certification stating the following: (1)
The company did not sell subject
merchandise at less than NV during the
POR and in the future it would not sell
such merchandise at less than NV (see
section 351.222 (e)(1)(i)) of the
Department’s regulations); (2) the
company has sold subject merchandise
to the United States in commercial
quantities during each of the past three
years (see section 351.222(e)(1)(ii)) of
the Department’s regulations; and (3)
the company agreed to its immediate
reinstatement in the order, as long as
any exporter or producer is subject to
the order, if the Department concludes
that the company sold the subject
merchandise at less than NV subsequent
to the revocation. See sections
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7239
351.222(b)(2)(i)(B) and 351.222(e)(1)(iii)
of the Department’s regulations.
For these final results, the Department
has relied upon Silcotub’s sales activity
during the 2000–2001, 2001–2002, and
2002–2003 PORs in making its decision
regarding Silcotub’s revocation request.
Although Silcotub had two consecutive
years of sales at not less than NV,
Silcotub has not received a zero or de
minimis margin in the instant review.
Thus, Silcotub is not eligible for
consideration for revocation.
Accordingly, we determine not to
revoke the order with respect to
Silcotub’s sales of certain small
diameter carbon and alloy seamless
standard, line, and pressure pipe to the
United States.
All-Others Rate
As a result of Romania’s transition
from an NME to an ME during the
course of the POR, we invited comments
on the rate to be used as the all-others
rate for the proceeding. The Department
is has determined to apply an all-others
rate of 13.06 percent. See Decision
Memorandum at Comment 19
Final Results of Review
As a result of our review, we
determine that the following weightedaverage percentage margin exists for the
period August 1, 2002, through July 31,
2003:
Manufacturer/exporter
S.C. Silcotub S.A. .....................
Margin
(percent)
1.21
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and
CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on
all appropriate entries. In accordance
with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have
calculated importer-specific assessment
rates by dividing the dumping margin
found on the subject merchandise
examined by the entered value of such
merchandise. Where the importerspecific assessment rate is above de
minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess
antidumping duties on that importer’s
entries of subject merchandise. The
Department will issue appropriate
assessment instructions directly to CBP
within 15 days of publication of these
final results of review.
Cash-Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements
will be effective for all shipments of the
subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date of these final results of
administrative review, as provided by
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
7240
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 28 / Friday, February 11, 2005 / Notices
section 751(a) of the Act: (1) For the
company named above, the cash-deposit
rate will be the rate listed above; (2) for
merchandise exported by manufacturers
or exporters not covered in this review
but covered in a previous segment of
this proceeding, the cash-deposit rate
will continue to be the companyspecific rate published in the prior
segment of the proceeding in which that
manufacturer or exporter participated;
(3) if the exporter is not a firm covered
in this review or in any previous
segment of this proceeding but the
manufacturer is, the cash-deposit rate
will be that established for the
manufacturer of the merchandise in
these final results of review or in the
most recent segment of the proceeding
in which that manufacturer
participated; and (4) if neither the
exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm
covered in this or any previous review
conducted by the Department, the cash
deposit rate will be 13.06 percent. These
deposit requirements shall remain in
effect until publication of the final
results of the next administrative
review.
Comment 4: Indirect Selling Expenses of
Duferco S.A.
Comment 5: Indirect Selling Expenses of
Duferco Steel Inc.
Comment 6: Freight for Billets
Comment 7: Indexing Brokerage and
Handling Rate Using U.S. Producer Price
Index
Comment 8: Non-Market-Economy Packing
Costs
Comment 9: Ocean Freight Expenses for U.S.
Sales in the Non-Market-Economy
Portion of the POR
Comment 10: Treatment of the Schedule
Field in the Model-Matching
Methodology
Comment 11: Non-Market-Economy Natural
Gas Price
Comment 12: Start-Up Adjustment
Comment 13: Model-Matching Methodology
Comment 14: Ordinary Course of Trade
Comment 15: Home Market Credit Expense
Comment 16: DSI’s Credit Expense
Comment 17: Treatment of Negative Margins
Comment 18: Cash-Deposit Rate
Comment 19: All-Others Rate
Notification
This notice also serves as the final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)
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 in the
subsequent assessment of double
antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of
their responsibility concerning the
return/destruction or conversion to
judicial protective order of proprietary
information disclosed under APO in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3).
Failure to comply is a violation of the
APO.
International Trade Administration
Dated: February 4, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
This determination is issued and
published in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Appendix—Decision Memorandum
Comment 1: Romania As Its Own Surrogate
Country
Comment 2: Silcotub’s Market-Economy
General & Administrative Expense Ratio
Comment 3: Silcotub’s Financial Expense
Ratio
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:18 Feb 10, 2005
Jkt 205001
[FR Doc. E5–586 Filed 2–10–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A–427–814]
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils
From France: Final Results of
Antidumping Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 6, 2004, the
Department of Commerce (Department)
published the preliminary results of its
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain
stainless steel sheet and strip in coils
(SSSS) from France. See Stainless Steel
Sheet and Strip in Coils from France, 69
FR 47892 (August 6, 2004) (Preliminary
Results). This review covers all
shipments of this merchandise to the
United States during the period from
July 1, 2002, through June 30, 2003 by
Ugine & ALZ France, S.A. (UA France).
We gave interested parties an
opportunity to comment on the
Preliminary Results. Based on our
analysis of the comments received, we
have made changes to the Preliminary
Results. For the final dumping margins,
see the ‘‘Final Results of Review’’
section below.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 11, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sebastian Wright or Sean Carey at (202)
482–5254 and (202) 482–3964,
respectively; AD/CVD Operations,
Office 6, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 6, 2004, the Department
published the Preliminary Results
where we determined that U.S. sales
had been made below normal value
(NV). We invited parties to comment on
our Preliminary Results. On September
7, 2004, UA France and Petitioners 1
filed comments on our Preliminary
Results. On September 13, 2004, UA
France and Petitioners filed rebuttal
comments. Neither party requested a
hearing. The Department has now
completed this review in accordance
with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act).
Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order
For purposes of this administrative
review, the products covered by the
order are certain stainless steel sheet
and strip in coils. Stainless steel is an
alloy steel containing, by weight, 1.2
percent or less of carbon and 10.5
percent or more of chromium, with or
without other elements. The subject
sheet and strip is a flat-rolled product in
coils that is greater than 9.5 mm in
width and less than 4.75 mm in
thickness, and that is annealed or
otherwise heat treated and pickled or
otherwise descaled. The subject sheet
and strip may also be further processed
(e.g., cold-rolled, polished, aluminized,
coated, etc.) provided that it maintains
the specific dimensions of sheet and
strip following such processing.
The merchandise subject to this order
is currently classifiable in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (‘‘HTS’’) at subheadings:
7219.13.0031, 7219.13.0051,
7219.13.0071, 7219.1300.81 2
7219.14.0030, 7219.14.0065,
7219.14.0090, 7219.32.0005,
7219.32.0020, 7219.32.0025,
7219.32.0035, 7219.32.0036,
7219.32.0038, 7219.32.0042,
7219.32.0044, 7219.33.0005,
7219.33.0020, 7219.33.0025,
7219.33.0035, 7219.33.0036,
7219.33.0038, 7219.33.0042,
7219.33.0044, 7219.34.0005,
7219.34.0020, 7219.34.0025,
7219.34.0030, 7219.34.0035,
1 Allegheny Ludlum Corporation, AK Steel, Inc.,
North American Stainless, United Steelworkers of
America, AFL–CIO/CLC, Butler Armco Independent
Union, and Zanesville Armco Independent
Organization are the Petitioners in the case.
2 Due to changes to the HTS numbers in 2001,
7219.13.0030, 7219.13.0050, 7219.13.0070, and
7219.13.0080 are now 7219.13.0031, 7219.13.0051,
7219.13.0071, and 7219.13.0081, respectively.
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 28 (Friday, February 11, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7237-7240]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-586]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-485-805]
Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line,
and Pressure Pipe From Romania: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Final Determination Not To Revoke Order in
Part
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 7, 2004, the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary results of the antidumping duty
administrative review of certain small diameter carbon and alloy
seamless standard, line, and pressure pipe (seamless pipe) from
Romania. This review covers one manufacturer/exporter of the subject
merchandise. The period of review (POR) is August 1, 2002, through July
31, 2003. Based on our analysis of comments received, these final
results differ from the preliminary results. The final results are
listed below in the ``Final Results of Review'' section.
EFFECTIVE DATES: February 11, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Layton or Erin Begnal, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0371 and (202) 482-1442, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published the preliminary results of the antidumping
duty administrative review of seamless pipe from Romania. See Certain
Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line, and Pressure
Pipe From Romania: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary Determination
Not To Revoke in Part, 69 FR 54119 (September 7, 2004) (Preliminary
Results). The review covers one manufacturer/exporter, S.C. Silcotub
S.A. (Silcotub).
Romania's designation as a non-market-economy (NME) country
remained in effect until January 1, 2003.\1\ Because the first five
months of the POR fell before Romania's graduation to market-economy
status and the last seven months of this POR came after its graduation,
in its antidumping questionnaire to Silcotub, dated November 14, 2003,
the Department determined that it would treat Romania as an NME country
from August 1, 2002, through December 31, 2002, and a market-economy
(ME) country from January 1, 2003, through July 31, 2003. The first
part of this notice refers to the NME portion of the POR (NME POR) and
the Department's NME methodology, and the second part of this notice
refers to the ME portion of the POR (ME POR) and the Department's ME
methodology. In the section of this notice entitled Final Results of
the Review, we have calculated a weighted-average dumping margin
reflecting the margin we calculated for the NME POR and the dumping
margin we calculated for the ME POR. This weighted-average figure
reflects the margin of dumping for the entire POR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless
Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe from Romania: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 68 FR 12672, 12673 (March
17, 2003), the Department reviewed the non-market-economy status of
Romania and determined to reclassify Romania as a market economy for
purposes of antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings,pursuant
to section 771(18)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (The
Act), effective January 1, 2003. See Memorandum from Lawrence
Norton, Import Policy Analyst, to Joseph Spetrini, Acting Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration: Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard,
Line, and Pressure Pipe from Romania--Non-Market Economy Status
Review (March 10, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results of review.
Silcotub filed a brief on November 12, 2004, and a rebuttal brief on
November 18, 2004. On December 10, 2004, the Department rejected
Silcotub's case brief because it contained new factual information.\2\
[[Page 7238]]
Silcotub filed a redacted case brief on December 14, 2004. The domestic
interested party, United States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel), filed a
case brief on November 12, 2004, and a rebuttal brief on November 18,
2004. On January 5, 2005, we issued a letter requesting parties to
comment on two issues: (1) The most appropriate methodology for the
Department to use in calculating an all-others rate for future entries;
and (2) whether it was more appropriate to calculate the company-
specific cash-deposit rate based on the weighted-average margin
reflecting sales from both the ME and NME portions of the POR or on
sales from the ME portion alone. We received comments on these issues
from U.S. Steel on January 11, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Letter from Department of Commerce to Silcotub regarding
2002-2003 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on
Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line, and
Pressure Pipe from Romania (December 3, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the order are seamless carbon and alloy
(other than stainless) steel standard, line, and pressure pipes and
redraw hollows produced, or equivalent, to the ASTM A-53, ASTM A-106,
ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-335, ASTM A-589, ASTM A-795, and the API
5L specifications and meeting the physical parameters described below,
regardless of application. The scope of the order also includes all
products used in standard, line, or pressure pipe applications and
meeting the physical parameters described below, regardless of
specification. Specifically included within the scope of the order are
seamless pipes and redraw hollows, less than or equal to 4.5 inches
(114.3 mm) in outside diameter, regardless of wall-thickness,
manufacturing process (hot finished or cold-drawn), end finish (plain
end, beveled end, upset end, threaded, or threaded and coupled), or
surface finish.
The seamless pipes subject to the order are currently classifiable
under the subheadings 7304.10.10.20, 7304.10.50.20, 7304.31.30.00,
7304.31.60.50, 7304.39.00.16, 7304.39.00.20, 7304.39.00.24,
7304.39.00.28, 7304.39.00.32, 7304.51.50.05, 7304.51.50.60,
7304.59.60.00, 7304.59.80.10, 7304.59.80.15, 7304.59.80.20, and
7304.59.80.25 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS).
Specifications, Characteristics, and Uses: Seamless pressure pipes
are intended for the conveyance of water, steam, petrochemicals,
chemicals, oil products, natural gas and other liquids and gasses in
industrial piping systems. They may carry these substances at elevated
pressures and temperatures and may be subject to the application of
external heat. Seamless carbon steel pressure pipe meeting the ASTM A-
106 standard may be used in temperatures of up to 1000 degrees
Fahrenheit, at various ASME code stress levels. Alloy pipes made to
ASTM A-335 standard must be used if temperatures and stress levels
exceed those allowed for ASTM A-106. Seamless pressure pipes sold in
the United States are commonly produced to the ASTM A-106 standard.
Seamless standard pipes are most commonly produced to the ASTM A-53
specification and generally are not intended for high temperature
service. They are intended for the low temperature and pressure
conveyance of water, steam, natural gas, air and other liquids and
gasses in plumbing and heating systems, air conditioning units,
automatic sprinkler systems, and other related uses. Standard pipes
(depending on type and code) may carry liquids at elevated temperatures
but must not exceed relevant ASME code requirements. If exceptionally
low temperature uses or conditions are anticipated, standard pipe may
be manufactured to ASTM A-333 or ASTM A-334 specifications.
Seamless line pipes are intended for the conveyance of oil and
natural gas or other fluids in pipe lines. Seamless line pipes are
produced to the API 5L specification.
Seamless water well pipe (ASTM A-589) and seamless galvanized pipe
for fire protection uses (ASTM A-795) are used for the conveyance of
water.
Seamless pipes are commonly produced and certified to meet ASTM A-
106, ASTM A-53, API 5L-B, and API 5L-X42 specifications. To avoid
maintaining separate production runs and separate inventories,
manufacturers typically triple or quadruple certify the pipes by
meeting the metallurgical requirements and performing the required
tests pursuant to the respective specifications. Since distributors
sell the vast majority of this product, they can thereby maintain a
single inventory to service all customers.
The primary application of ASTM A-106 pressure pipes and triple or
quadruple certified pipes is use in pressure piping systems by
refineries, petrochemical plants, and chemical plants. Other
applications are in power generation plants (electrical-fossil fuel or
nuclear), and in some oil field uses (on shore and off shore) such as
for separator lines, gathering lines and metering runs. A minor
application of this product is for use as oil and gas distribution
lines for commercial applications. These applications constitute the
majority of the market for the subject seamless pipes. However, ASTM A-
106 pipes may be used in some boiler applications.
Redraw hollows are any unfinished pipe or ``hollow profiles'' of
carbon or alloy steel transformed by hot rolling or cold drawing/
hydrostatic testing or other methods to enable the material to be sold
under ASTM A-53, ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-335, ASTM
A-589, ASTM A-795, and API 5L specifications.
The scope of the order includes all seamless pipe meeting the
physical parameters described above and produced to one of the
specifications listed above, regardless of application, with the
exception of the specific exclusions discussed below, and whether or
not also certified to a non-covered specification. Standard, line, and
pressure applications and the above-listed specifications are defining
characteristics of the scope of the order. Therefore, seamless pipes
meeting the physical description above, but not produced to the ASTM A-
53, ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-335, ASTM A-589, ASTM A-
795, and API 5L specifications shall be covered if used in a standard,
line, or pressure application, with the exception of the specific
exclusions discussed below.
For example, there are certain other ASTM specifications of pipe
which, because of overlapping characteristics, could potentially be
used in ASTM A-106 applications. These specifications generally include
ASTM A-161, ASTM A-192, ASTM A-210, ASTM A-252, ASTM A-501, ASTM A-523,
ASTM A-524, and ASTM A-618. When such pipes are used in a standard,
line, or pressure pipe application, with the exception of the specific
exclusions discussed below, such products are covered by the scope of
the order.
Specifically excluded from the scope of the order are boiler tubing
and mechanical tubing, if such products are not produced to ASTM A-53,
ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-335, ASTM A-589, ASTM A-795,
and API 5L specifications and are not used in standard, line, or
pressure pipe applications. In addition, finished and unfinished OCTG
are excluded from the scope of the order, if covered by the scope of
another antidumping duty order from the same country. If not covered by
such an OCTG order, finished and unfinished OCTG are included in this
scope when used in standard, line or pressure applications.
With regard to the excluded products listed above, the Department
will not instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to require
end-use certification until such time as
[[Page 7239]]
petitioner or other interested parties provide to the Department a
reasonable basis to believe or suspect that the products are being used
in a covered application. If such information is provided, we will
require end-use certification only for the product(s) (or
specification(s)) for which evidence is provided that such products are
being used in covered applications as described above. For example, if,
based on evidence provided by petitioner, the Department finds a
reasonable basis to believe or suspect that seamless pipe produced to
the A-161 specification is being used in a standard, line or pressure
application, we will require end-use certifications for imports of that
specification. Normally we will require only the importer of record to
certify to the end use of the imported merchandise. If it later proves
necessary for adequate implementation, we may also require producers
who export such products to the United States to provide such
certification on invoices accompanying shipments to the United States.
Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and
customs purposes, our written description of the merchandise subject to
this scope is dispositive.
Separate Rates
Because we are conducting this review in accordance with 19 CFR
351.408, we are applying our NME methodology for Silcotub in the first
five months of this review (August-December 2002). Silcotub has
requested a separate, company-specific antidumping duty rate in this
review. In the preliminary results, we found that Silcotub had met the
criteria for the application of separate antidumping duty rates. See
Preliminary Results. We have not received any other information since
the preliminary results which would warrant reconsideration of our
separate rates determination with respect to this company. Therefore,
we determine that Silcotub should be assigned a rate separate from the
NME entity for the NME portion of this administrative review period.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision Memorandum''
(Decision Memorandum) from Barbara E. Tillman, Acting Deputy Assistant
Secretary, Import Administration, to Joseph E. Spetrini, Acting
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated February 4, 2005,
which is hereby adopted by this notice.
A list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have
responded in the Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as an
Appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised
in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public
memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099 of
the main Commerce building.
In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be
accessed directly on the Internet at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The
paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are
identical in content.
Fair Value Comparisons
We calculated constructed export price (CEP) and normal value (NV)
based on the same methodology we used in the preliminary results.
Changes to ocean freight, unpaid freight for billets, model-matching,
home-market credit expenses, U.S. credit expense, inventory carrying
costs, and the indirect selling expenses of Duferco S.A. are detailed
in the analysis memorandum and/or the Decision Memorandum.
Cost of Production
We calculated the cost of production (COP) for the merchandise
based on the same methodology we used in the preliminary results. We
found that Silcotub made sales below cost, and we disregarded such
sales where appropriate.
No Revocation in Part
On August 29, 2003, Silcotub requested that the Department revoke
the antidumping duty order in part with regard to Silcotub based on the
absence of dumping pursuant to section 351.222(b)(2) of the
Department's regulations. Silcotub submitted, along with its revocation
request, a certification stating the following: (1) The company did not
sell subject merchandise at less than NV during the POR and in the
future it would not sell such merchandise at less than NV (see section
351.222 (e)(1)(i)) of the Department's regulations); (2) the company
has sold subject merchandise to the United States in commercial
quantities during each of the past three years (see section
351.222(e)(1)(ii)) of the Department's regulations; and (3) the company
agreed to its immediate reinstatement in the order, as long as any
exporter or producer is subject to the order, if the Department
concludes that the company sold the subject merchandise at less than NV
subsequent to the revocation. See sections 351.222(b)(2)(i)(B) and
351.222(e)(1)(iii) of the Department's regulations.
For these final results, the Department has relied upon Silcotub's
sales activity during the 2000-2001, 2001-2002, and 2002-2003 PORs in
making its decision regarding Silcotub's revocation request. Although
Silcotub had two consecutive years of sales at not less than NV,
Silcotub has not received a zero or de minimis margin in the instant
review. Thus, Silcotub is not eligible for consideration for
revocation. Accordingly, we determine not to revoke the order with
respect to Silcotub's sales of certain small diameter carbon and alloy
seamless standard, line, and pressure pipe to the United States.
All-Others Rate
As a result of Romania's transition from an NME to an ME during the
course of the POR, we invited comments on the rate to be used as the
all-others rate for the proceeding. The Department is has determined to
apply an all-others rate of 13.06 percent. See Decision Memorandum at
Comment 19
Final Results of Review
As a result of our review, we determine that the following
weighted-average percentage margin exists for the period August 1,
2002, through July 31, 2003:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Manufacturer/exporter (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
S.C. Silcotub S.A.......................................... 1.21
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), we have calculated importer-specific assessment rates by
dividing the dumping margin found on the subject merchandise examined
by the entered value of such merchandise. Where the importer-specific
assessment rate is above de minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess
antidumping duties on that importer's entries of subject merchandise.
The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly
to CBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of review.
Cash-Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements will be effective for all
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these
final results of administrative review, as provided by
[[Page 7240]]
section 751(a) of the Act: (1) For the company named above, the cash-
deposit rate will be the rate listed above; (2) for merchandise
exported by manufacturers or exporters not covered in this review but
covered in a previous segment of this proceeding, the cash-deposit rate
will continue to be the company-specific rate published in the prior
segment of the proceeding in which that manufacturer or exporter
participated; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review
or in any previous segment of this proceeding but the manufacturer is,
the cash-deposit rate will be that established for the manufacturer of
the merchandise in these final results of review or in the most recent
segment of the proceeding in which that manufacturer participated; and
(4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in
this or any previous review conducted by the Department, the cash
deposit rate will be 13.06 percent. These deposit requirements shall
remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next
administrative review.
Notification
This notice also serves as the final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 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 in the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return/destruction or conversion to judicial protective
order of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with
19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Failure to comply is a violation of the APO.
Dated: February 4, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
This determination is issued and published in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Appendix--Decision Memorandum
Comment 1: Romania As Its Own Surrogate Country
Comment 2: Silcotub's Market-Economy General & Administrative
Expense Ratio
Comment 3: Silcotub's Financial Expense Ratio
Comment 4: Indirect Selling Expenses of Duferco S.A.
Comment 5: Indirect Selling Expenses of Duferco Steel Inc.
Comment 6: Freight for Billets
Comment 7: Indexing Brokerage and Handling Rate Using U.S. Producer
Price Index
Comment 8: Non-Market-Economy Packing Costs
Comment 9: Ocean Freight Expenses for U.S. Sales in the Non-Market-
Economy Portion of the POR
Comment 10: Treatment of the Schedule Field in the Model-Matching
Methodology
Comment 11: Non-Market-Economy Natural Gas Price
Comment 12: Start-Up Adjustment
Comment 13: Model-Matching Methodology
Comment 14: Ordinary Course of Trade
Comment 15: Home Market Credit Expense
Comment 16: DSI's Credit Expense
Comment 17: Treatment of Negative Margins
Comment 18: Cash-Deposit Rate
Comment 19: All-Others Rate
[FR Doc. E5-586 Filed 2-10-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
