Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico: Notice of NAFTA Panel Decision Not In Harmony With Final Results of Administrative Review, 12761 [E7-4912]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 52 / Monday, March 19, 2007 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–201–817] Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico: Notice of NAFTA Panel Decision Not In Harmony With Final Results of Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On January 16, 2007, a Bi– National Panel (‘‘Panel’’) constituted under the North American Free Trade Agreement (‘‘NAFTA’’) affirmed the U.S. Department of Commerce’s (‘‘the Department’s’’) redetermination on remand of the final results of the fourth antidumping duty administrative review on oil country tubular goods from Mexico. See In the Matter of: Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Review and Determination Not to Revoke, USA–MEX–2001–1904–05 (January 16, 2007) (‘‘NAFTA Final Decision’’). This case arises out of the Department’s determination in the final results of administrative review covering the period August 1, 1998, to July 31, 1999. See Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico: Final Results of Antidumping Review and Determination Not To Revoke in Part, 66 FR 15832 and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (‘‘Final Results’’). Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (‘‘Timken’’), the Department is notifying the public that the NAFTA Final Decision and the Notice of Final Panel Action are not in harmony with the Department’s Final Results. EFFECTIVE DATE: March 19, 2007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Drury or Angelica Mendoza, AD/CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0195 or (202) 482– 3019, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For the Final Results, the Department reviewed sales to the United States by Hylsa S.A. de C.V. (‘‘Hylsa’’) and Tubos de Aceros de Mexico, S.A. (‘‘TAMSA’’), both Mexican producers of OCTG. Both TAMSA and Hylsa requested revocation from the Order in accordance with 19 CFR § 351.222(e)(1). The Department declined to revoke the order in part with ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES AGENCY: VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:27 Mar 16, 2007 Jkt 211001 respect to TAMSA, as it determined that TAMSA ‘‘did not sell the subject merchandise in the United States in commercial quantities in each of the three years cited by TAMSA to support its request for revocation.’’ See Final Results, Issues and Decision Memorandum at page 10. The Department declined to revoke the order in part with respect to Hylsa due to the finding of a dumping margin in the review. Id. at 23. Subsequent to the completion of the fourth administrative review, both Hylsa and TAMSA challenged the Department’s findings and requested that a Bi–National Panel review the final determination. The Panel issued a decision on January 27, 2006, upholding the Department’s determinations with respect to TAMSA, but remanding the review to the Department with respect to Hylsa (to recalculate Hylsa’s packing cost and cost of production on a product–specific basis). See In the Matter of: Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Determination Not to Revoke, USA–MEX–01–1904–05 (January 27, 2006) (‘‘NAFTA First Decision’’). In accordance with the NAFTA First Decision, the Department filed its remand results on April 27, 2006. Based on the instructions of the Panel, the Department recalculated Hylsa’s packing and cost of production by product costs and calculated a new antidumping duty margin for Hylsa, resulting in a margin of zero. The Department proceeded to conduct a revocation analysis, but found that Hylsa did not ship in commercial quantities to the U.S. market during the time period under consideration and found that the finding of dumping by Hylsa in the ninth administrative review was relevant to the determination whether the antidumping duty order was otherwise necessary to offset dumping. Based on these factors, the Department declined to revoke the order. See Redetermination on Remand, Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico: Fourth Administrative Review, April 27, 2006. On August 11, 2006, the Panel again remanded the decision to the Department for further consideration. See In the Matter of: Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Determination Not to Revoke, USA– MEX–01–1904–05 (August 11, 2006) (‘‘NAFTA Second Decision’’). The Panel PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 12761 rejected the Department’s reliance on the results of the ninth administrative review and also directed the Department to reexamine its revocation analysis ‘‘in light of the issues raised by the Panel.’’ Id. at 21. In accordance with the Second Decision, the Department reexamined Hylsa’s request for revocation under 19 CFR § 351.222(e)(1) and determined that Hylsa had not made sales in commercial quantities for the three review periods under analysis. See Redetermination on Remand, Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico: Fourth Administrative Review, October 5, 2006, at 13–16. On January 16, 2007, the Panel affirmed the Department’s second remand redetermination. See NAFTA Final Decision. The Panel issued its Notice of Final Panel Action on February 2, 2007. In Timken, the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), the Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with a Department determination, and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. Timken, 393 F.2d at 341. Because NAFTA panels step into the shoes of the courts they are replacing, they must apply the law of the national court that would otherwise review the administrative determination. Therefore, we are publishing notice that the Panel’s February 2, 2007, Notice of Final Panel Action and its January 16, 2007, NAFTA Final Decision are not in harmony with the Department’s Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise pending the expiration of the period of appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court decision. In the event the Panel’s ruling is not appealed, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to revise the liquidation rates covering the subject merchandise. This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of the Act. Dated: March 8, 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7–4912 Filed 3–16–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM 19MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 52 (Monday, March 19, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 12761]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4912]



[[Page 12761]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-201-817]


Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico: Notice of NAFTA Panel 
Decision Not In Harmony With Final Results of Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On January 16, 2007, a Bi-National Panel (``Panel'') 
constituted under the North American Free Trade Agreement (``NAFTA'') 
affirmed the U.S. Department of Commerce's (``the Department's'') 
redetermination on remand of the final results of the fourth 
antidumping duty administrative review on oil country tubular goods 
from Mexico. See In the Matter of: Oil Country Tubular Goods from 
Mexico; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Review and Determination Not 
to Revoke, USA-MEX-2001-1904-05 (January 16, 2007) (``NAFTA Final 
Decision''). This case arises out of the Department's determination in 
the final results of administrative review covering the period August 
1, 1998, to July 31, 1999. See Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico: 
Final Results of Antidumping Review and Determination Not To Revoke in 
Part, 66 FR 15832 and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum 
(``Final Results''). Consistent with the decision of the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Timken Co. v. United 
States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (``Timken''), the Department is 
notifying the public that the NAFTA Final Decision and the Notice of 
Final Panel Action are not in harmony with the Department's Final 
Results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 19, 2007

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  John Drury or Angelica Mendoza, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 
20230; telephone: (202) 482-0195 or (202) 482-3019, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For the Final Results, the Department 
reviewed sales to the United States by Hylsa S.A. de C.V. (``Hylsa'') 
and Tubos de Aceros de Mexico, S.A. (``TAMSA''), both Mexican producers 
of OCTG. Both TAMSA and Hylsa requested revocation from the Order in 
accordance with 19 CFR Sec.  351.222(e)(1). The Department declined to 
revoke the order in part with respect to TAMSA, as it determined that 
TAMSA ``did not sell the subject merchandise in the United States in 
commercial quantities in each of the three years cited by TAMSA to 
support its request for revocation.'' See Final Results, Issues and 
Decision Memorandum at page 10. The Department declined to revoke the 
order in part with respect to Hylsa due to the finding of a dumping 
margin in the review. Id. at 23.
    Subsequent to the completion of the fourth administrative review, 
both Hylsa and TAMSA challenged the Department's findings and requested 
that a Bi-National Panel review the final determination. The Panel 
issued a decision on January 27, 2006, upholding the Department's 
determinations with respect to TAMSA, but remanding the review to the 
Department with respect to Hylsa (to recalculate Hylsa's packing cost 
and cost of production on a product-specific basis). See In the Matter 
of: Oil Country Tubular Goods from Mexico; Final Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review and Determination Not to Revoke, USA-MEX-01-
1904-05 (January 27, 2006) (``NAFTA First Decision'').
    In accordance with the NAFTA First Decision, the Department filed 
its remand results on April 27, 2006. Based on the instructions of the 
Panel, the Department recalculated Hylsa's packing and cost of 
production by product costs and calculated a new antidumping duty 
margin for Hylsa, resulting in a margin of zero. The Department 
proceeded to conduct a revocation analysis, but found that Hylsa did 
not ship in commercial quantities to the U.S. market during the time 
period under consideration and found that the finding of dumping by 
Hylsa in the ninth administrative review was relevant to the 
determination whether the antidumping duty order was otherwise 
necessary to offset dumping. Based on these factors, the Department 
declined to revoke the order. See Redetermination on Remand, Oil 
Country Tubular Goods from Mexico: Fourth Administrative Review, April 
27, 2006.
    On August 11, 2006, the Panel again remanded the decision to the 
Department for further consideration. See In the Matter of: Oil Country 
Tubular Goods from Mexico; Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review and Determination Not to Revoke, USA-MEX-01-1904-
05 (August 11, 2006) (``NAFTA Second Decision''). The Panel rejected 
the Department's reliance on the results of the ninth administrative 
review and also directed the Department to reexamine its revocation 
analysis ``in light of the issues raised by the Panel.'' Id. at 21. In 
accordance with the Second Decision, the Department reexamined Hylsa's 
request for revocation under 19 CFR Sec.  351.222(e)(1) and determined 
that Hylsa had not made sales in commercial quantities for the three 
review periods under analysis. See Redetermination on Remand, Oil 
Country Tubular Goods from Mexico: Fourth Administrative Review, 
October 5, 2006, at 13-16.
    On January 16, 2007, the Panel affirmed the Department's second 
remand redetermination. See NAFTA Final Decision. The Panel issued its 
Notice of Final Panel Action on February 2, 2007.
    In Timken, the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to section 
516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), the 
Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not ``in 
harmony'' with a Department determination, and must suspend liquidation 
of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. Timken, 393 F.2d at 
341. Because NAFTA panels step into the shoes of the courts they are 
replacing, they must apply the law of the national court that would 
otherwise review the administrative determination. Therefore, we are 
publishing notice that the Panel's February 2, 2007, Notice of Final 
Panel Action and its January 16, 2007, NAFTA Final Decision are not in 
harmony with the Department's Final Results. This notice is published 
in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, 
the Department will continue the suspension of liquidation of the 
subject merchandise pending the expiration of the period of appeal or, 
if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court decision. In the 
event the Panel's ruling is not appealed, the Department will instruct 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection to revise the liquidation rates 
covering the subject merchandise.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 
516A(c)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: March 8, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-4912 Filed 3-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S