Oil Country Tubular Goods From Argentina, Italy, Japan, and Korea; Final Results of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews of Antidumping Duty Orders, 59074-59075 [E6-16607]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
59074
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Notices
specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i).1
The domestic interested parties claimed
International Trade Administration
interested party status under section
771(9)(C) of the Act as U.S. producers,
[A–351–810, A–475–816, A–588–835, A–580– manufacturers, and wholesalers of the
825]
domestic like product. We received
complete substantive responses from the
Oil Country Tubular Goods From
domestic interested parties in all four
Argentina, Italy, Japan, and Korea;
cases within the deadline specified in
Final Results of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’)
19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). We received a
Reviews of Antidumping Duty Orders
inadequate response from respondent
interested parties of the AD order from
AGENCY: Import Administration,
Argentina, and no responses from
International Trade Administration,
respondent interested parties with
Department of Commerce.
respect to the AD orders from Italy,
SUMMARY: On June 1, 2006, the
Japan, and Korea. As a result, pursuant
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19
Department’’) initiated the second
CFR. 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the
sunset reviews of the antidumping duty
Department has conducted expedited
(‘‘AD’’) orders on oil country tubular
reviews of these AD orders.
goods (‘‘OCTG’’) from Argentina, Italy,
Scope of the Orders
Japan, and Korea pursuant to section
751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
Argentina, Italy, Japan, Korea
amended (‘‘the Act’’). On the basis of
The products covered by these orders
notices of intent to participate, and
adequate substantive responses filed on consists of oil country tubular goods,
behalf of the domestic interested parties, hollow steel products of circular crossand inadequate responses received from section, including only oil well casing
and tubing, of iron (other than cast iron)
respondent interested parties, the
or steel (both carbon and alloy), whether
Department has conducted expedited
seamless or welded, whether or not
sunset reviews, pursuant to section
conforming to American Petroleum
751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR
Institute (API) or non-API
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). As a result of
specifications, whether finished or
these sunset reviews, the Department
unfinished (including green tubes and
finds that revocation of the AD orders
limited service OCTG products). The
would be likely to lead to continuation
or recurrence of dumping at the margins scope does not cover casing or tubing
pipe containing 10.5 percent or more of
indicated in the ‘‘Final Results of
chromium, or drill pipe. The products
Review’’ section of this notice.
subject to this review are currently
DATES: Effective Date: October 6, 2006.
classified in the following Harmonized
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tariff Schedule of the United States
Martha Douthit, Fred Baker, or Dana
(‘‘HTSUS’’) subheadings: 7304.20.10.10,
Mermelstein, AD/CVD Operations,
7304.20.10.20, 7304.20.10.30,
Office 6–7, Import Administration,
7304.20.10.40, 7304.20.10.50,
International Trade Administration,
7304.20.10.60, 7304.20.10.80,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
7304.20.20.10, 7304.20.20.20,
Street & Constitution Avenue, NW.,
7304.20.20.30, 7304.20.20.40,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
7304.20.20.50, 7304.20.20.60,
482–5050, (202) 482–2924, or (202) 482–
7304.20.20.80, 7304.20.30.10,
1391, respectively.
7304.20.30.20, 7304.20.30.30,
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
7304.20.30.40, 7304.20.30.50,
7304.20.30.60, 7304.20.30.80,
Background
7304.20.40.10, 7304.20.40.20,
On June 1, 2006, the Department
7304.20.40.30, 7304.20.40.40,
initiated sunset reviews of the AD
7304.20.40.50, 7304.20.40.60,
orders on OCTG from Argentina, Italy,
7304.20.40.80, 7304.20.50.15,
Japan, and Korea pursuant to section
7304.20.50.30, 7304.20.50.45,
751(c) of the Act. See Initiation of Five7304.20.50.60, 7304.20.50.75,
Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews, 71 FR 31153
7304.20.60.15, 7304.20.60.30,
(June 1, 2006). The Department received 7304.20.60.45, 7304.20.60.60,
notices of intent to participate from
7304.20.60.75, 7305.20.20.00,
IPSCO Tubulars, Inc., Lone Star Steel
Company, Koppel Steel (‘‘NS Group’’),
1 U.S. Steel and USS/Kobe Steel were petitioners
Maverick Tube Corporation, Newport
in the investigation. U.S. Steel notes that Lorain
Steel Company (‘‘NS Group’’), V&M Star Tubular Company LLC became the successor-inLP, and United States Steel Corporation interest to USS/Kobe Steel in August 1999. In
December 1999, U.S. Steel took ownership of 100
(‘‘U.S. Steel’’) (collectively ‘‘domestic
% of the equity of Lorain Tubular, making U.S.
interested parties’’), within the deadline Steel the owner of Lorain Tubular.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:52 Oct 05, 2006
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7305.20.40.00, 7305.20.60.00,
7305.20.80.00, 7306.20.10.30,
7306.20.10.90, 7306.20.20.00,
7306.20.30.00, 7306.20.40.00,
7306.20.60.10, 7306.20.60.50,
7306.20.80.10, and 7306.20.80.50.
Although the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, our written description of the
scope of these orders is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in these reviews are
addressed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum (‘‘Decision
Memorandum’’) from Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, to David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, dated September 29,
2006, which is hereby adopted by this
notice. Parties can find a complete
discussion of all issues raised in these
reviews 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 Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn,
under the heading October 2006. The
paper copy and electronic version of the
Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Final Results of Review
The Department determines that
revocation of the AD orders on OCTG
from Argentina, Italy, Japan, and Korea
would be likely to lead to continuation
or recurrence of dumping at the
following weighted-average percentage
margins:
Manufacturers/exporters/producers
Weighted-average margin
(percent)
Argentina
Siderca S.A.I.C .....................
Acindar Industria Argentina
de Aceros S.A ...................
All Others ..............................
1.36
60.73
1.36
Italy
Dalmine S.p.A .......................
Acciaierie Tubificio Arvedi
S.p.A .................................
General Sider Europa S.p.A
All Others ..............................
49.78
49.78
49.78
49.78
Japan
Nippon Steel Corporation .....
Sumitomo Metal Industries,
Ltd .....................................
All Others ..............................
E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM
06OCN1
44.20
44.20
44.20
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Notices
developed merchandise provision,
pursuant to section 781(d) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’).
See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order:
Korea
Petroleum Wax Candles from the
People’s Republic of China, 51 FR 30686
Union Steel Manufacturing
Company ...........................
12.17 (August 28, 1986) (‘‘Order’’). In
All Others ..............................
12.17 addition, we determine that mixed–wax
candles containing any amount of
Hyundai Steel Pipe Company, Ltd., succeeded by
petroleum are covered by the scope of
Hyundai Hysco, was exthe Order. We are also rescinding the
cluded from the order.
concurrently initiated1 minor alterations
anticircumvention inquiry.2 See
This notice serves as the only
Memorandum from Stephen J. Claeys,
reminder to parties subject to
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import
administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) Administration to David M. Spooner,
of their responsibility concerning the
Assistant Secretary, Import
return or destruction of proprietary
Administration, Subject: Issues and
information disclosed under APO in
Decision Memorandum for the Later–
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305.
Developed Merchandise
Timely notification of return/
Anticircumvention Inquiry of the
destruction of APO materials or
Antidumping Duty Order on Petroleum
conversion to judicial protective order is Wax Candles from the People’s Republic
hereby requested. Failure to comply
of China, (September 29, 2006) (‘‘Issues
with the regulations and the terms of an and Decision Memorandum’’).
APO is a sanctionable violation.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 6, 2006.
We are issuing and publishing the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex
results and notice in accordance with
Villanueva or Julia Hancock, AD/CVD
sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Operations, Office 9, Import
Act.
Administration, International Trade
Dated: September 29, 2006.
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Stephen J. Claeys,
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230;
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
telephone: (202) 482–3208 and (202)
Administration.
482–1394, respectively.
[FR Doc. E6–16607 Filed 10–5–06; 8:45 am]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Manufacturers/exporters/producers
Weighted-average margin
(percent)
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A–570–504
Later–Developed Merchandise
Anticircumvention Inquiry of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Petroleum
Wax Candles from the People’s
Republic of China: Affirmative Final
Determination of Circumvention of the
Antidumping Duty Order
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Affirmative Final
Determination of Circumvention of
Antidumping Duty Order
AGENCY:
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Final Determination
We determine that candles composed
of petroleum wax and over fifty percent
or more palm and/or other vegetable
oil–based waxes (‘‘mixed–wax candles’’)
are later–developed merchandise and
thus, are circumventing the
antidumping duty order on petroleum
wax candles from the People’s Republic
of China (‘‘PRC’’) under the later–
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:52 Oct 05, 2006
Jkt 211001
Background:
On June 2, 2006, the Department of
Commerce (‘‘the Department’’)
published the preliminary
circumvention determination. See
Notice of Affirmative Preliminary
Determination of Circumvention of
Antidumping Duty Order: Later–
Developed Merchandise
Anticircumvention Inquiry of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Petroleum
Wax Candles from the People’s Republic
of China, 71 FR 32033 (June 2, 2006)
(‘‘Preliminary Determination’’).
Additionally, on June 2, 2006, the
Department requested that interested
parties submit comments and
information addressing certain areas of
the analysis. See Letter to all Interested
Parties, from Edward C. Yang, Senior
1 See Notice of Initiation Anticircumention
Inquiries of Antidumping Duty Order: Petroleum
Wax Candles from the People’s Republic of China,
70 FR 10962 (March 7, 2005) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’).
2 The Department received a separate request
from Petitioners on October 12, 2004, to initiate an
inquiry to determine whether pursuant to section
781(c) of the Act, candles containing palm or
vegetable-based waxes as the majority ingredient
and exported to the United States are circumventing
the antidumping duty order on petroleum wax
candles from the PRC under the minor alterations
provision.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
59075
Enforcement Coordinator, China/NME
Unit, Import Administration, RE:
Anticircumvention Inquiry on Later–
Developed Merchandise: Petroleum Wax
Candles from the People’s Republic of
China, (June 2, 2006) (‘‘June 2, 2006,
Letter’’).
On June 23, 2006, the Department
received comments and information
from the following eight parties: (1) the
National Candle Association
(‘‘Petitioners’’); (2) China Chamber of
Commerce for Importers and Exporters
of Foodstuffs, Native Products and
Animal By–Products, the China Daily
Chemical Association and their
common members, (i.e., Dalian Gift Co.,
Ltd., Kingking A.C. Co., Ltd., Shanghai
Autumn Light Enterprise Co., Ltd.,
Aroma Consumer Products (Hangzhou)
Co., Ltd., Amstar Business Company
Limited, Zhongshan Zhongnam Candle
Manufacturer Co., Ltd., and Jiaxing
Moonlite Candle Art Co., Ltd.)
(‘‘CCCFNA’’); (3) Candle Corporation of
America (‘‘CCA’’); (4) Target
Corporation (‘‘Target’’); (5) Bed Bath &
Beyond, Christmas Tree Shops, Inc. and
Christmas Tree Shops’ subsidiary
Nantucket Distributing, Inc.; (6)
Amscan, Inc. (‘‘Amscan’’); (7) Shonfeld
USA, Inc. (‘‘Shonfeld’’) and (8) CVS
Stores (‘‘CVS’’).3
On July 7, 2006, the Department
received case briefs from the following
parties: (1) Petitioners; (2) CCCFNA; (3)
CCA; (4) Target; (5) Smart Marketing,
Kate Aspen, and Wisconsin Cheeseman
(‘‘SKW’’); (6) Christmas Tree Shops, Inc.
and Christmas Tree Shops’ subsidiary
Nantucket Distributing, Inc.;4 (7)
Amscan; (8) CVS and (9) Shonfeld.5
On July 13, 2006, Petitioners
submitted a letter stating that Target’s
case brief contained significant portions
of untimely submitted new, non–
publicly available information and
should be resubmitted without the new
information. On July 17, 2006, the
Department informed parties that it was
keeping the new information contained
within Target’s case brief and extended
the deadline for parties to submit
rebuttal briefs until July 24, 2006.
3 Bed Bath & Beyond, Christmas Tree Shops, Inc.
and Christmas Tree Shops’ subsidiary Nantucket
Distributing, Inc, Amscan, Shonfeld and CVS
submitted virtually identical information and
comments with the only difference being each
entity’s responses to some of the Department’s
questions contained in the June 2, 2006, letter.
4 Although Bed Bath & Beyond submitted
comments and new information with Christmas
Tree Shops’ subsidiary Nantucket Distributing, Inc.,
it did not file a case brief.
5 Christmas Tree Shops, Inc. and Christmas Tree
Shops’ subsidiary Nantucket Distributing, Inc.,
Amscan, CVS, and Shonfeld submitted four
individual briefs containing identical arguments.
These parties will be hereinafter be referred to as
‘‘Merchandisers.’’
E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM
06OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 194 (Friday, October 6, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59074-59075]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-16607]
[[Page 59074]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-351-810, A-475-816, A-588-835, A-580-825]
Oil Country Tubular Goods From Argentina, Italy, Japan, and
Korea; Final Results of Five-Year (``Sunset'') Reviews of Antidumping
Duty Orders
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On June 1, 2006, the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') initiated the second sunset reviews of the antidumping
duty (``AD'') orders on oil country tubular goods (``OCTG'') from
Argentina, Italy, Japan, and Korea pursuant to section 751(c) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). On the basis of notices
of intent to participate, and adequate substantive responses filed on
behalf of the domestic interested parties, and inadequate responses
received from respondent interested parties, the Department has
conducted expedited sunset reviews, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). As a result of these sunset
reviews, the Department finds that revocation of the AD orders would be
likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the margins
indicated in the ``Final Results of Review'' section of this notice.
DATES: Effective Date: October 6, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martha Douthit, Fred Baker, or Dana
Mermelstein, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6-7, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street & Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-5050, (202) 482-2924, or (202) 482-1391, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On June 1, 2006, the Department initiated sunset reviews of the AD
orders on OCTG from Argentina, Italy, Japan, and Korea pursuant to
section 751(c) of the Act. See Initiation of Five-Year (``Sunset'')
Reviews, 71 FR 31153 (June 1, 2006). The Department received notices of
intent to participate from IPSCO Tubulars, Inc., Lone Star Steel
Company, Koppel Steel (``NS Group''), Maverick Tube Corporation,
Newport Steel Company (``NS Group''), V&M Star LP, and United States
Steel Corporation (``U.S. Steel'') (collectively ``domestic interested
parties''), within the deadline specified in 19 CFR
351.218(d)(1)(i).\1\ The domestic interested parties claimed interested
party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act as U.S. producers,
manufacturers, and wholesalers of the domestic like product. We
received complete substantive responses from the domestic interested
parties in all four cases within the deadline specified in 19 CFR
351.218(d)(3)(i). We received a inadequate response from respondent
interested parties of the AD order from Argentina, and no responses
from respondent interested parties with respect to the AD orders from
Italy, Japan, and Korea. As a result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B)
of the Act and 19 CFR. 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the Department has
conducted expedited reviews of these AD orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Steel and USS/Kobe Steel were petitioners in the
investigation. U.S. Steel notes that Lorain Tubular Company LLC
became the successor-in-interest to USS/Kobe Steel in August 1999.
In December 1999, U.S. Steel took ownership of 100 % of the equity
of Lorain Tubular, making U.S. Steel the owner of Lorain Tubular.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Orders
Argentina, Italy, Japan, Korea
The products covered by these orders consists of oil country
tubular goods, hollow steel products of circular cross-section,
including only oil well casing and tubing, of iron (other than cast
iron) or steel (both carbon and alloy), whether seamless or welded,
whether or not conforming to American Petroleum Institute (API) or non-
API specifications, whether finished or unfinished (including green
tubes and limited service OCTG products). The scope does not cover
casing or tubing pipe containing 10.5 percent or more of chromium, or
drill pipe. The products subject to this review are currently
classified in the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (``HTSUS'') subheadings: 7304.20.10.10, 7304.20.10.20,
7304.20.10.30, 7304.20.10.40, 7304.20.10.50, 7304.20.10.60,
7304.20.10.80, 7304.20.20.10, 7304.20.20.20, 7304.20.20.30,
7304.20.20.40, 7304.20.20.50, 7304.20.20.60, 7304.20.20.80,
7304.20.30.10, 7304.20.30.20, 7304.20.30.30, 7304.20.30.40,
7304.20.30.50, 7304.20.30.60, 7304.20.30.80, 7304.20.40.10,
7304.20.40.20, 7304.20.40.30, 7304.20.40.40, 7304.20.40.50,
7304.20.40.60, 7304.20.40.80, 7304.20.50.15, 7304.20.50.30,
7304.20.50.45, 7304.20.50.60, 7304.20.50.75, 7304.20.60.15,
7304.20.60.30, 7304.20.60.45, 7304.20.60.60, 7304.20.60.75,
7305.20.20.00, 7305.20.40.00, 7305.20.60.00, 7305.20.80.00,
7306.20.10.30, 7306.20.10.90, 7306.20.20.00, 7306.20.30.00,
7306.20.40.00, 7306.20.60.10, 7306.20.60.50, 7306.20.80.10, and
7306.20.80.50.
Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and
customs purposes, our written description of the scope of these orders
is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in these reviews are addressed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum (``Decision Memorandum'') from Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to David M.
Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated September
29, 2006, which is hereby adopted by this notice. Parties can find a
complete discussion of all issues raised in these reviews 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 Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn, under
the heading October 2006. The paper copy and electronic version of the
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Final Results of Review
The Department determines that revocation of the AD orders on OCTG
from Argentina, Italy, Japan, and Korea would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of dumping at the following weighted-average
percentage margins:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
Manufacturers/exporters/producers average margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Argentina
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Siderca S.A.I.C......................................... 1.36
Acindar Industria Argentina de Aceros S.A............... 60.73
All Others.............................................. 1.36
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Italy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dalmine S.p.A........................................... 49.78
Acciaierie Tubificio Arvedi S.p.A....................... 49.78
General Sider Europa S.p.A.............................. 49.78
All Others.............................................. 49.78
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--Nippon Steel Corporation.............................. 44.20
Sumitomo Metal Industries, Ltd.......................... 44.20
All Others.............................................. 44.20
[[Page 59075]]
Korea
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Union Steel Manufacturing Company....................... 12.17
All Others.............................................. 12.17
Hyundai Steel Pipe Company, Ltd., succeeded by Hyundai
Hysco, was excluded from the order.....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice serves as 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 351.305. 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.
We are issuing and publishing the results and notice in accordance
with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: September 29, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6-16607 Filed 10-5-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
