Amended Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe From the People's Republic of China, 22130-22135 [E8-8953]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
22130
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 80 / Thursday, April 24, 2008 / Notices
Dated: April 9, 2008.
W. Ray Dorsett,
Acting State Conservationist, Natural
Resources Conservation Service, Richmond,
Virginia.
[FR Doc. E8–8950 Filed 4–23–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–16–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Natural Resources Conservation
Service
Upper East Canyon Creek Watershed
Stream Restoration Projects
Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) in Utah,
U.S. Department of Agriculture.
ACTION: Notice of a Finding of No
Significant Impact.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(c)
of the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969; the Council on
Environmental Quality Regulations (40
CFR part 1500); and the Natural
Resources Conservation Service
Guidelines (7 CFR part 650); the Natural
Resources Conservation Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, gives notice
that an environmental impact statement
is not being prepared for UPPER EAST
CANYON CREEK WATERSHED
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECTS,
Summit County, Utah.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sylvia A. Gillen, State Conservationist,
Natural Resources Conservation Service,
Wallace F. Bennett Federal Building,
125 South State Street, Room 4402, Salt
Lake City, Utah 84138–1100; telephone
number (801) 524–4550.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
environmental assessment of this
federally assisted action indicates that
the project will not cause significant
local, regional, or national impacts on
the environment. As a result of these
findings, Sylvia A. Gillen, State
Conservationist, has determined that the
preparation and review of an
environmental impact statement is not
needed for this project.
Assessment (EA) was prepared in order
to make a reasoned and informed
decision in selecting which alternative
to implement and also to determine if
the proposed action is a major federal
action that would significantly affect the
quality of the human environment. The
proposed action will implement stream
and riparian restoration projects along
East Canyon Creek and its tributaries in
voluntary cooperation with willing
landowners. The purpose of the
proposed action is to reduce the erosion
of sediments that transport phosphorus
to East Canyon Creek. The proposed
action is needed because non-point
source pollution was identified as a
possible cause of water quality
impairments in the watershed by the
Utah Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ). East Canyon Creek from
the reservoir to the headwaters is on
Utah’s 303(d) list for total phosphorus
and dissolved oxygen. Eroded
sediments in surface runoff are the
primary mechanism for phosphorus
transport.
The Notice of a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) has been
forwarded to the Environmental
Protection Agency and to various
Federal, State and local agencies and
interested parties. A limited number of
copies of the FONSI and the EA are
available to fill single copy requests at
the above address. Basic data developed
during the environmental assessment
are on file and may be reviewed by
contacting Sylvia A. Gillen. No
administrative action on
implementation of the proposal will be
taken until 30 days after the date of this
publication in the Federal Register.
Dated: April 18, 2008.
Sylvia A. Gillen,
State Conservationist, Natural Resources
Conservation Service, Utah.
[FR Doc. E8–8952 Filed 4–23–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–16–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Upper East Canyon Creek Watershed
Stream Restoration Projects
[A–570–910]
Notice of a Finding of No Significant
Impact
During Fiscal Year 2006, Congress
appropriated funds through a
Congressional Earmark to NRCS to
provide technical and financial
assistance to Snyderville Basin Water
Reclamation District to implement a
Non-point Source Pollution Reduction
Project in the Upper East Canyon Creek
Watershed. An Environmental
Amended Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Circular
Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe
From the People’s Republic of China
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:15 Apr 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 24, 2008.
SUMMARY: On January 15, 2008, the
Department published in the Federal
Register its preliminary determination
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
that circular welded carbon quality steel
pipe (‘‘CWP’’) from the People’s
Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) is being, or
is likely to be, sold in the United States
at less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’), as
provided in section 733 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). See
Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel
Pipe From the People’s Republic of
China: Notice of Preliminary
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Postponement of Final
Determination, 73 FR 2445, 2451
(January 15, 2008) (‘‘Preliminary
Determination’’). On April 7, 2008,
Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe Co., Ltd,
(‘‘Yulong’’), the only participating
mandatory respondent remaining in this
investigation, notified the Department
that it was withdrawing from the
proceeding. Based on the circumstances
described below, the Department of
Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’) is
amending the preliminary
determination in the antidumping duty
investigation of CWP from the PRC. This
amended preliminary determination
results in revised antidumping rates.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Martin, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–3936.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Case History
On January 15, 2008, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
Preliminary Determination that CWP
from the PRC is being, or is likely to be,
sold in the United States at LTFV, as
provided in section 733 of the Act. In
the Preliminary Determination, the
Department calculated a zero percent
margin for Yulong, and included
Yulong’s zero percent preliminary
margin in calculating the rate applied to
the separate rate companies, and relied
upon Yulong’s individual sales margins
in corroborating the rate assigned to the
PRC-wide entity. See Preliminary
Determination.
From January 28, 2008, through
February 1, 2008, the Department
conducted a verification of the U.S.
sales and factors of production reported
by Yulong. On February 27, 2008, the
Department issued its verification
report. See Memorandum from Thomas
Martin and Maisha Cryor, International
Trade Compliance Analysts, to the File,
‘‘Verification of the Sales and Factors
Response of Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe
Co., Ltd. (‘‘Yulong’’),’’ dated February
27, 2008.
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 80 / Thursday, April 24, 2008 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
We invited parties to comment on the
Preliminary Determination. On March
12, 2008, the Petitioners,1 Yulong, one
separate rate applicant, and two U.S.
importers of subject merchandise filed
case briefs. On March 19, 2008, the
Petitioners, Yulong, and one U.S.
importer filed rebuttal briefs. On March
24, 2008, the Department held a public
hearing.
On March 17, 2008, the Department
received an unsolicited letter from the
Director of a trading company registered
in Hong Kong, referred to hereafter as
Company X, in which it notified the
Department that it had learned from
industry sources that a PRC pipe
producer involved in this investigation
had claimed that it purchased hot-rolled
steel coil for the production of
merchandise subject to this
investigation from Company X. See
Memorandum from Abdelali Elouaradia,
Office Director, to the File, ‘‘Phone
Conversation With Trading Company,’’
dated March 27, 2008 (‘‘Trading
Company Memorandum’’), at
Attachment 1, which contains Company
X’s complaint letter. Company X claims
it had learned that a PRC pipe producer
submitted to the Department ‘‘fake’’
documents, including sales contracts,
commercial invoices, packing lists, and
mill test reports, under Company X’s
letterhead. Id. Company X clarified
during a subsequent phone conversation
with the Department that it had learned
that a PRC pipe producer told the
Department that the hot-rolled steel
coils allegedly purchased from
Company X were produced by nonChinese steel mills. Id. at 1. During the
telephone conversation, Company X
further clarified that it had not
purchased any hot-rolled steel in coils
directly from foreign steel producers,
nor purchased foreign-origin hot-rolled
steel coils indirectly through other
Chinese companies, and had not sold
any hot-rolled steel coils to any PRC
pipe producers involved in this
investigation. Id.
After reviewing the administrative
record of the proceeding, the
Department concluded that Yulong was
the only PRC pipe producer for which
Company X’s allegations could possibly
be applicable. See Memorandum from
Thomas Martin, International Trade
Compliance Analyst, to the File,
‘‘Supporting Documentation for Market
Economy Inputs Submitted to the
1 The Petitioners in this investigation are Allied
Tube & Conduit, Sharon Tube Company, IPSCO
Tubulars, Inc., Western Tube & Conduit
Corporation, Northwest Pipe Company, Wheatland
Tube Co., i.e., the Ad Hoc Coalition For Fair Pipe
Imports From China, and the United Steelworkers.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:15 Apr 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
Administrative Record,’’ dated
concurrently with this notice.
On March 27, 2007, the Department
issued a memorandum in which it
provided all interested parties an
opportunity to place on the record of
this investigation any new factual
information that is relevant to the issues
raised in Company X’s complaint letter
or the Department’s phone conversation
memorandum. See Memorandum from
Mark Manning, Program Manager, to the
File, ‘‘Schedule of Submissions,’’ dated
March 27, 2008. On March 28, 2008, the
Department issued to Yulong a letter in
which it noted that Yulong reported to
the Department certain commercial
invoices and other documentation
pertaining to one of its suppliers of hotrolled steel in coils. See letter from
Abdelali Elouaradia, Office Director, to
Yulong dated March 28, 2008. In this
letter, the Department asked Yulong to
comment on certain actions the
Department is considering taking with
respect to the documents Yulong
submitted to the Department that
involve this supplier.
On April 7, 2008, Yulong notified the
Department that: (1) It ‘‘refuses to
continue to contest the information
contained in the Department’s March
27, 2008, memorandum to the file;’’ (2)
‘‘Yulong will not participate any further
in these proceedings;’’ and (3) ‘‘Yulong
withdraws from the proceedings.’’ See
Letter to the Hon. Carlos M. Gutierrez,
Secretary of Commerce, from Jiangsu
Yulong Steel Pipe Co., Ltd., dated April
7, 2008 (‘‘Yulong Withdrawal Letter’’).
Yulong also stated that it has ‘‘full
understanding that because of
{Yulong’s} lack of continued
participation in these proceedings, the
Department may find that Yulong has
failed to cooperate to the best of its
ability pursuant to section 776(b) of the
Tariff Act of 1930.’’ Id.
In sum, the Department notes the
following facts in this case: (1) Yulong
received a zero margin in the
Preliminary Determination; (2)
Company X has alleged that a PRC pipe
company involved in this investigation
submitted ‘‘fake’’ documents to the
Department; (3) Yulong has withdrawn
from this investigation and stated that it
does not contest the allegations made by
Company X and identified in the
Trading Company Memorandum; (4) in
the Preliminary Determination, the
Department included Yulong’s zero
percent preliminary margin in
calculating the rate applied to the
separate rate companies, and relied
upon Yulong’s individual sales margins
in corroborating the rate assigned to the
PRC-wide entity; and (5) any change to
Yulong’s preliminary margin will have
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22131
a significant impact on all margins
included in the Preliminary
Determination. In light of these facts,
the Department finds it necessary to
issue an amended preliminary
determination.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is
October 1, 2006, through March 31,
2007. This period corresponds to the
two most recent fiscal quarters prior to
the month of the filing of the petition,
i.e., June 2007. See 19 CFR
351.204(b)(1).
Scope of the Investigation
The scope of this investigation covers
certain welded carbon quality steel
pipes and tubes, of circular crosssection, and with an outside diameter of
0.372 inches (9.45 mm) or more, but not
more than 16 inches (406.4 mm),
whether or not stenciled, regardless of
wall thickness, surface finish (e.g.,
black, galvanized, or painted), end
finish (e.g., plain end, beveled end,
grooved, threaded, or threaded and
coupled), or industry specification (e.g.,
ASTM, proprietary, or other), generally
known as standard pipe and structural
pipe (they may also be referred to as
circular, structural, or mechanical
tubing).
Specifically, the term ‘‘carbon
quality’’ includes products in which (a)
Iron predominates, by weight, over each
of the other contained elements; (b) the
carbon content is 2 percent or less, by
weight; and (c) none of the elements
listed below exceeds the quantity, by
weight, as indicated:
(i) 1.80 percent of manganese;
(ii) 2.25 percent of silicon;
(iii) 1.00 percent of copper;
(iv) 0.50 percent of aluminum;
(v) 1.25 percent of chromium;
(vi) 0.30 percent of cobalt;
(vii) 0.40 percent of lead;
(viii) 1.25 percent of nickel;
(ix) 0.30 percent of tungsten;
(x) 0.15 percent of molybdenum;
(xi) 0.10 percent of niobium;
(xii) 0.41 percent of titanium;
(xiii) 0.15 percent of vanadium; or
(xiv) 0.15 percent of zirconium.
Standard pipe is made primarily to
American Society for Testing and
Materials (‘‘ASTM’’) specifications, but
can be made to other specifications.
Standard pipe is made primarily to
ASTM specifications A–53, A–135, and
A–795. Structural pipe is made
primarily to ASTM specifications A–252
and A–500. Standard and structural
pipe may also be produced to
proprietary specifications rather than to
industry specifications. This is often the
case, for example, with fence tubing.
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
22132
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 80 / Thursday, April 24, 2008 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Pipe multiple-stenciled to a standard
and/or structural specification and to
any other specification, such as the
American Petroleum Institute (‘‘API’’)
API–5L specification, is also covered by
the scope of this investigation when it
meets the physical description set forth
above and also has one or more of the
following characteristics: Is 32 feet in
length or less; is less than 2.0 inches (50
mm) in outside diameter; has a
galvanized and/or painted surface
finish; or has a threaded and/or coupled
end finish.
The scope of this investigation does
not include: (a) Pipe suitable for use in
boilers, superheaters, heat exchangers,
condensers, refining furnaces and
feedwater heaters, whether or not cold
drawn; (b) mechanical tubing, whether
or not cold-drawn; (c) finished electrical
conduit; (d) finished scaffolding; (e)
tube and pipe hollows for redrawing; (f)
oil country tubular goods produced to
API specifications; and (g) line pipe
produced to only API specifications.
The pipe products that are the subject
of this investigation are currently
classifiable in HTSUS statistical
reporting numbers 7306.30.10.00,
7306.30.50.25, 7306.30.50.32,
7306.30.50.40, 7306.30.50.55,
7306.30.50.85, 7306.30.50.90,
7306.50.10.00, 7306.50.50.50,
7306.50.50.70, 7306.19.10.10,
7306.19.10.50, 7306.19.51.10, and
7306.19.51.50. However, the product
description, and not the harmonized
tariff schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’) classification, is dispositive
of whether merchandise imported into
the United States falls within the scope
of the investigation.
Non-Market Economy Treatment
The Department considers the PRC to
be a non-market economy (‘‘NME’’)
country. In accordance with section
771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any
determination that a country is an NME
country shall remain in effect until
revoked by the administering authority.
See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From
the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Results of 2001–2002
Administrative Review and Partial
Rescission of Review, 68 FR 7500
(February 14, 2003), unchanged in
Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, from
the People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of 2001–2002 Administrative
Review and Partial Rescission of
Review, 68 FR 70488 (December 18,
2003). Therefore, in this preliminary
determination, we have treated the PRC
as an NME country and applied our
current NME methodology.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:15 Apr 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
Adverse Facts Available
Sections 776(a)(1) and (2) of the Act
provide that the Department shall apply
‘‘facts otherwise available’’ if, inter alia,
necessary information is not on the
record or an interested party: (A)
Withholds information requested by the
Department, (B) fails to provide such
information by the deadline, or in the
form or manner requested, (C)
significantly impedes a proceeding, or
(D) provides information that cannot be
verified, as provided by section 782(i) of
the Act.
Where the Department determines
that a response to a request for
information does not comply with the
request, section 782(d) of the Act
provides that the Department will so
inform the party submitting the
response and will, to the extent
practicable, provide that party the
opportunity to remedy or explain the
deficiency. If the party fails to remedy
the deficiency within the applicable
time limits, the Department may
disregard all or part of the original and
subsequent responses, subject to section
782(e) of the Act, as appropriate.
Pursuant to section 782(e) of the Act,
the Department shall not decline to
consider submitted information if all of
the following requirements are met: (1)
The information is submitted by the
established deadline; (2) the information
can be verified; (3) the information is
not so incomplete that it cannot serve as
a reliable basis for reaching the
applicable determination; (4) the
interested party has demonstrated that it
acted to the best of its ability; and (5)
the information can be used without
undue difficulties.
On April 7, 2008, Yulong informed
the Department that it would not
continue participation in the instant
investigation and does not contest the
allegations made by Company X and
identified in the Trading Company
Memorandum. See Yulong Withdrawal
Letter. In addition, because Yulong
ceased participation in the instant
investigation prior to submitting a
response to the Department’s March 28,
2008, request for comment concerning
certain actions under consideration by
the Department regarding documents
Yulong submitted during this
investigation, Yulong withheld
information requested by the
Department. Further, by not contesting
the allegations made by Company X
concerning a PRC pipe producer’s
purchases of the major input used to
produce subject merchandise, as
described in the Trading Company
Memorandum, Yulong has significantly
impeded the proceeding. In addition, by
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
withdrawing from the investigation and
no longer responding to the
Department’s requests for information,
Yulong has prevented the Department
from obtaining new information that
could be used to conduct additional
analyses to assess the validity of the
documents Yulong submitted during the
course of the investigation and during
verification. For these reasons, we find
that the use of facts available, pursuant
to sections 776(a)(2)(A), (C), and (D) of
the Act is appropriate in determining
the applicable dumping margin for
Yulong.
Yulong’s failure to contest the
information contained in the Trading
Company Memorandum, where
Company X alleged that a PRC pipe
company submitted false documents to
the Department concerning purchases of
hot-rolled steel coils, calls into question
the veracity of all information Yulong
submitted to the record. For this reason,
the Department cannot rely upon the
information Yulong submitted in its
factors of production database, U.S.
sales database, or separate rate
application, and has disregarded all
such information in making this
amended preliminary determination.
Since the Department cannot rely upon
information contained in Yulong’s
separate rate application, we can no
longer find that Yulong operates free of
government control and that it is
entitled to a separate rate. For this
reason, we have denied Yulong a
separate rate, and find that Yulong is
part of the PRC-wide entity. As part of
the PRC-wide entity, the Department’s
application of facts available to Yulong
contributes to the application of facts
available applied against the PRC-wide
entity, as described in the Preliminary
Determination.
Section 776(b) of the Act provides
that, in selecting from among the facts
otherwise available, the Department
may employ an adverse inference if an
interested party fails to cooperate by not
acting to the best of its ability to comply
with requests for information. See Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled FlatRolled Carbon Quality Steel Products
from the Russian Federation, 65 FR
5510, 5518 (February 4, 2000); Certain
Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes
From Thailand: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 62 FR 53808, 53819–20
(October 16, 1997); Crawfish Processors
Alliance v. United States, 343 F.
Supp.2d 1242 (CIT 2004) (approving use
of adverse facts available (‘‘AFA’’) when
respondent refused to participate in
verification); see also Statement of
Administrative Action, accompanying
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 80 / Thursday, April 24, 2008 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
the Uruguay Round Agreements Act
(‘‘URAA’’), H.R. Rep. No. 103–316, 870
(1994) (‘‘SAA’’). Yulong’s withdrawal
from participation, its non-cooperation
in submitting requested information,
and its failure to contest the allegations
made by Company X, constitute a
failure to cooperate by not acting to the
best of its ability to comply with
requests for information in accordance
with section 776(b) of the Act.
Section 776(b) of the Act authorizes
the Department to use, as AFA,
information derived from the petition,
the final determination from the LTFV
investigation, a previous administrative
review, or any other information placed
on the record. In selecting a rate for
AFA, the Department selects one that is
sufficiently adverse ‘‘as to effectuate the
purpose of the facts available rule to
induce respondents to provide the
Department with complete and accurate
information in a timely manner.’’ See
Notice of Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Static Random
Access Memory Semiconductors From
Taiwan, 63 FR 8909, 8932 (February 23,
1998). It is the Department’s practice to
select, as AFA, the higher of the (a)
highest margin alleged in the petition,
or (b) the highest calculated rate for any
respondent in the investigation. See
Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled
Flat-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel
Products From the People’s Republic of
China, 65 FR 34660 (May 21, 2000) and
accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum, at ‘‘Facts Available’’. In
this case, as AFA, the Department has
selected the highest margin alleged in
the petition, as revised in the
petitioners’ supplemental responses,
85.55 percent.
Corroboration
Section 776(c) of the Act provides
that, when the Department relies on
secondary information in using the facts
otherwise available, it must, to the
extent practicable, corroborate that
information from independent sources
that are reasonably at its disposal. We
have interpreted ‘‘corroborate’’ to mean
that we will, to the extent practicable,
examine the reliability and relevance of
the information submitted. See Certain
Cold-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon-Quality
Steel Products From Brazil: Notice of
Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value, 65 FR 5554, 5568
(February 4, 2000); see, e.g., Tapered
Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof,
Finished and Unfinished, from Japan,
and Tapered Roller Bearings, Four
Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and
Components Thereof, from Japan;
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:15 Apr 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
Duty Administrative Reviews and
Partial Termination of Administrative
Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392 (November
6, 1996).
Because there are no cooperating
mandatory respondents, to corroborate
the 85.55 percent margin used as
adverse facts available for the PRC-wide
entity, to the extent appropriate
information was available, we revisited
our pre-initiation analysis of the
adequacy and accuracy of the
information in the petition. See
Antidumping Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Circular Welded Carbon
Quality Steel Pipe from the People’s
Republic of China, (Initiation Checklist)
(‘‘Initiation Checklist’’) (July 5, 2007).
We examined evidence supporting the
calculations in the petition and the
supplemental information provided by
the petitioners prior to initiation to
determine the probative value of the
margins alleged in the petition. During
our pre-initiation analysis, we examined
the information used as the basis of
export price and NV in the petition, and
the calculations used to derive the
alleged margins. Also during our preinitiation analysis, we examined
information from various independent
sources provided either in the petition
or, based on our requests, in
supplements to the petition, which
corroborated key elements of the export
price and NV calculations. Id. We
received no comments as to the
relevance or probative value of this
information. Therefore, the Department
finds that the rates derived from the
petition for purposes of initiation have
probative value for the purpose of being
selected as the AFA rate assigned to the
PRC-wide entity (including Yulong).
Critical Circumstances
As noted in the Preliminary
Determination, on December 11, 2007,
the Department preliminarily found that
there is reason to believe or suspect that
critical circumstances exist for imports
of subject merchandise from Yulong, the
separate rate companies, and the PRCwide entity, because (A) in accordance
with section 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the Act,
there is a history of dumped imports of
subject merchandise and of material
injury caused by such dumped imports,
and (B) in accordance with section
733(e)(1)(B) of the Act, Yulong, the
separate-rate companies, and the PRCwide entity had massive imports during
a relatively short period. See
Memorandum from Abdelali Elouaradia,
Director, Office 4, ‘‘Preliminary
Affirmative Determination of Critical
Circumstances,’’ dated December 11,
2007. Yulong, however, was not subject
to suspension of liquidation at the
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22133
Preliminary Determination because it
received a zero percent margin.
Pursuant to this amended preliminary
determination, Yulong no longer has a
separate rate and is part of the PRC-wide
entity. Since the Department has
preliminarily found that critical
circumstances exist with respect to
Yulong, and all other PRC exporters, the
Department will instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to
suspend liquidation of all entries of
CWP from the PRC for consumption
produced and/or exported by Yulong, as
described in the ‘‘Scope of
Investigation’’ section, entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, on or after
90 days prior to the date of publication
in the Federal Register of this amended
preliminary determination. See
‘‘Suspension of Liquidation’’ section
below.
Separate Rate Companies
In the Preliminary Determination, the
Department assigned a separate rate to
thirty-one exporter/producer
combinations that qualified for a
separate rate using the simple average of
Yulong’s zero percent margin and the
AFA margin assigned to the PRC-wide
entity. See Preliminary Determination,
73 FR at 2451. In light of Yulong’s
withdrawal from the investigation and
the subsequent application of total AFA
for Yulong (as part of the PRC-wide
entity), this methodology is no longer
appropriate. In cases where the
estimated weighted-average margins for
all individually investigated
respondents are zero, de minimis, or
based entirely on AFA, the Department
may use any reasonable method to
assign the separate rate. See section
735(c)(5)(B) of the Act. In this case,
where there are no mandatory
respondents receiving a calculated rate
and the PRC-wide entity’s rate is based
upon total AFA, we find that applying
the simple average of the rates alleged
in the petition, incorporating revisions
made in the petitioners’ supplemental
responses, is both reasonable and
reliable for purposes of establishing a
separate rate. See Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sodium
Hexametaphosphate From the People’s
Republic of China, 73 FR 6479
(February 4, 2008) and the
accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 2. Therefore,
the Department will assign a separate
rate to the thirty-one exporter producer
combinations using the average of the
margins alleged in the petition,
pursuant to its practice. This rate is
corroborated, to the extent practicable,
for the reasons stated above.
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
22134
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 80 / Thursday, April 24, 2008 / Notices
Preliminary Determination Margins
The Department has determined that
the following preliminary dumping
margins exist for the POI:
Weightedaverage
margin
Exporter
Producer
Beijing Sai Lin Ke Hardware Co., Ltd ...........................................
Wuxi Fastube Industry Co., Ltd ....................................................
Jiangsu Guoqiang Zinc-Plating Industrial Co., Ltd.2 .....................
Wuxi Eric Steel Pipe Co., Ltd .......................................................
Qingdao Xiangxing Steel Pipe Co., Ltd ........................................
Wah Cit Enterprises ......................................................................
Guangdong Walsall Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd .......................
Hengshui Jinghua Steel Pipe Co., Ltd ..........................................
Zhangjiagang Zhongyuan Pipe-Making Co., Ltd ..........................
Weifang East Steel Pipe Co., Ltd .................................................
Shijiazhuang Zhongqing Imp & Exp Co., Ltd ...............................
Tianjin Baolai Int’l Trade Co., Ltd .................................................
Wai Ming (Tianjin) Int’l Trading Co., Ltd. ......................................
Xuzhou Guang Huan Steel Tube Products Co., Ltd ...................
Wuxi Fastube Industry Co., Ltd ...................................................
Jiangsu Guoqiang Zinc-Plating Industrial Co., Ltd. .....................
Wuxi Eric Steel Pipe Co., Ltd ......................................................
Qingdao Xiangxing Steel Pipe Co., Ltd .......................................
Guangdong Walsall Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd ......................
Guangdong Walsall Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd ......................
Hengshui Jinghua Steel Pipe Co., Ltd ........................................
Zhangjiagang Zhongyuan Pipe-Making Co., Ltd .........................
Weifang East Steel Pipe Co., Ltd ................................................
Bazhou Zhuofa Steel Pipe Co., Ltd .............................................
Tianjin Jinghai County Baolai Business and Industry Co., Ltd ...
Bazhou Dong Sheng Hot-dipped Galvanized Steel Pipes Co.,
Ltd.
Kunshan Lets Win Steel Machinery Co., Ltd ..............................
Bazhou Dong Sheng Hot-dipped Galvanized Steel Pipes Co.,
Ltd.
Dalian Brollo Steel Tubes Ltd ......................................................
Benxi Northern Pipes Co., Ltd .....................................................
Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co ................................................
Benxi Northern Pipes Co., Ltd .....................................................
Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co ................................................
Tianjin Lifengyuanda Steel Group ...............................................
Tianjin Xingyunda Steel Pipe Co .................................................
Tianjin Lituo Steel Products Co ...................................................
Tangshan Fengnan District Xinlida Steel Pipe Co., Ltd ..............
Jiangyin Jianye Metal Products Co., Ltd .....................................
Shandong Xinyuan Group Co., Ltd .............................................
Tianjin Hexing Steel Co., Ltd .......................................................
Tianjin Ruitong Steel Co., Ltd .....................................................
Tianjin Yayi Industrial Co .............................................................
Kunshan Hongyuan Machinery Manufacture Co., Ltd ................
Shandong Xinyuan Group Co., Ltd .............................................
......................................................................................................
Kunshan Lets Win Steel Machinery Co., Ltd ................................
Shenyang Boyu M/E Co., Ltd .......................................................
Dalian Brollo Steel Tubes Ltd .......................................................
Benxi Northern Pipes Co., Ltd ......................................................
Shanghai Metals & Minerals Import & Export Corp .....................
Shanghai Metals & Minerals Import & Export Corp .....................
Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co ..................................................
Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Co., Ltd ...................................
Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Co., Ltd ...................................
Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Co., Ltd ...................................
Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Co., Ltd ...................................
Jiangyin Jianye Metal Products Co., Ltd ......................................
Rizhao Xingye Import & Export Co., Ltd ......................................
Tianjin No. 1 Steel Rolled Co., Ltd ...............................................
Tianjin No. 1 Steel Rolled Co., Ltd ...............................................
Tianjin No. 1 Steel Rolled Co., Ltd ...............................................
Kunshan Hongyuan Machinery Manufacture Co., Ltd ..................
Qingdao Yongjie Import & Export Co., Ltd ...................................
PRC-Wide Entity (Including Yulong) 3 ...........................................
Disclosure
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.224(b), the Department will disclose
to parties to this proceeding the
calculations performed in reaching the
preliminary determination within five
days after the date of publication of
these preliminary determination.
Suspension of Liquidation
As noted above, on December 11,
2007, the Department found that critical
circumstances exist with respect to
shipments of CWP from all PRC
exporters. Yulong, however, was not
subject to suspension of liquidation at
the Preliminary Determination because
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
2 In
the Preliminary Determination, the
Department incorrectly identified Jiangsu Guoqiang
Zinc-Plating Industrial Company, Ltd., as Jiangsu
Guoqiang Zinc-Plating Co., Ltd. We note, however,
that in the Department’s subsequent instructions to
CBP to suspend liquidation and require cash
deposits for CWP from PRC, the Department
correctly identified Jiangsu Guoqiang Zinc-Plating
Industrial Company, Ltd.
3 In the Preliminary Determination, the
Department also found that the Tianjin Shuangjie
Group is part of the PRC-wide entity.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:54 Apr 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
it received a zero percent margin.
Pursuant to this amended preliminary
determination, Yulong no longer has a
separate rate and is part of the PRC-wide
entity. Therefore, to apply the
Department’s affirmative finding of
critical circumstances for the PRC-wide
entity to Yulong, in accordance with
section 733(d) of the Act, we will
instruct CBP to suspend liquidation of
all entries of CWP from the PRC as
described in the ‘‘Scope of
Investigation’’ section, entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption from Yulong on or after 90
days prior to the date of publication in
the Federal Register of this amended
preliminary determination. We will
instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or
the posting of a bond equal to the
weighted-average dumping margin
amount by which the NV exceeds U.S.
price, as follows: (1) The rate for the
exporter/producer combinations listed
in the chart above will be the rate we
have determined in this amended
preliminary determination; (2) for all
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
69.20
85.55
PRC exporters of subject merchandise
which have not received their own
separate rate, including Yulong, the
cash-deposit rate will be the PRC-wide
rate; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters
of subject merchandise which have not
received their own rate, the cash-deposit
rate will be the rate applicable to the
PRC exporter/producer combination
that supplied that non-PRC exporter.
These suspension-of-liquidation
instructions will remain in effect until
further notice.
International Trade Commission
Notification
In accordance with section 733(f) of
the Act, we have notified the
International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’)
of our amended preliminary
determination. If our final
determination is affirmative, the ITC
will make its final determination as to
whether the domestic industry in the
United States is materially injured, or
threatened with material injury, by
reason of imports of certain lined paper
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 80 / Thursday, April 24, 2008 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Public Comment
RIN: 0648–XH40
Interested parties may submit written
comments (case briefs) by the close of
business on the third business day after
the date of signature (rather than
publication) of this amended
preliminary determination and rebuttal
comments (rebuttal briefs), which must
be limited to issues raised in the case
briefs, within three business days after
the deadline for filing case briefs. See 19
CFR 351.309(c)(1)(i) and 19 CFR
351.309(d). Parties are requested to limit
the issues raised in their case briefs to
only those issues relevant to this
amended preliminary determination
and not already briefed. Specifically, the
Department requests that parties limit
their case briefs to the following issues:
(1) Whether the Department should use
the facts available in reaching its
determination with respect to Yulong,
pursuant to Section 776(a) of the Act; (2)
whether Yulong has failed to cooperate
to the best of its ability, warranting the
application of an adverse inference,
pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act; (3)
how the Department should determine
any AFA rate for Yulong, what the rate
should be, and corroboration of the rate,
to the extent practicable, if the rate is
based upon secondary information,
pursuant to section 776(c) of the Act; (4)
whether Yulong qualifies for a separate
rate; and (5) what rate to apply to the
separate rate companies and
corroboration of the rate, to the extent
practicable, if the rate is based upon
secondary information.
Parties who submit arguments are
requested to submit with the argument:
(1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief
summary of the argument; and (3) a
table of authorities. Further, the
Department requests that parties
submitting written comments provide
the Department with a disk containing
the public version of those comments.
This determination is issued and
published in accordance with sections
733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
products, or sales (or the likelihood of
sales) for importation, of the subject
merchandise within 45 days of our final
determination.
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management
Council; Public Meetings
Dated: April 18, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–8953 Filed 4–23–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:15 Apr 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of a public meeting.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council (Council) will
convene a workgroup of its
Socioeconomic Panel (SEP).
DATES: The meeting will be convened at
9 a.m. on Wednesday, May 14, 2008 and
conclude no later than 5 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Inter-Continental Hotel, 4860 W.
Kennedy Blvd., Tampa, FL 33609;
telephone: (813) 286–4400.
Council address: Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council, 2203
North Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa,
FL 33607.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Assane Diagne, Economist, Gulf of
Mexico Fishery Management Council;
telephone: (813) 348–1630.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Gulf
of Mexico Fishery Management Council
(Council) will convene a workgroup of
its Socioeconomic Panel (SEP) to
discuss social and economic aspects of
total allowable catch (TAC) allocations
between the recreational and
commercial sectors.
A copy of the agenda and related
materials can be obtained by calling the
Council office at (813) 348–1630.
Although other non-emergency issues
not on the agendas may come before the
SEP workgroup for discussion, in
accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), those
issues may not be the subject of formal
action during this meeting. Actions of
the SEP workgroup will be restricted to
those issues specifically identified in
the agendas and any issues arising after
publication of this notice that require
emergency action under Section 305(c)
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided
the public has been notified of the
Council’s intent to take action to
address the emergency.
Special Accommodations
This meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to Tina
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22135
Trezza at the Council (see ADDRESSES) at
least 5 working days prior to the
meeting.
Dated: April 21, 2008.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E8–8937 Filed 4–23–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN: 0648–XH42
Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management
Council (MAFMC); Public Meetings
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of public meetings.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council’s (MAFMC) Ad
Hoc Excessive Shares Committee will
hold a public meeting.
DATES: The meeting will be held on
Thursday, May 15, 2008, from noon
until 4 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Sheraton Suites Wilmington, 422
Delaware Ave., Wilmington, DE 19801,
telephone: (302) 654–8300.
Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council, Room 2115, 300
S. New Street, Dover, DE 19904,
telephone: (302) 674–2331.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel T. Furlong, Executive Director,
Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management
Council; telephone: (302) 674–2331,
extension 19.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
purpose of this meeting will be to
review and discuss the application of:
Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) National
Standard 4 [Section 301(a)(4) of MSA];
allocation of limited access privilege
program shares so that no shareholder
acquires an excessive share [Section
303A(c)(5)(D) of MSA]; and, the
antitrust savings clause [Section
303A(c)(9) of MSA]. The Committee will
also address the concept of one-size-fitsall and the use of cases-by-case
approaches regarding determining
excessive share thresholds and/or
ceilings.
Although non-emergency issues not
contained in this agenda may come
before this group for discussion, those
issues may not be the subject of formal
action during this meeting. Action will
be restricted to those issues specifically
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 80 (Thursday, April 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22130-22135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-8953]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-910]
Amended Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe From the People's
Republic of China
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 24, 2008.
SUMMARY: On January 15, 2008, the Department published in the Federal
Register its preliminary determination that circular welded carbon
quality steel pipe (``CWP'') from the People's Republic of China
(``PRC'') is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at
less than fair value (``LTFV''), as provided in section 733 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). See Circular Welded
Carbon Quality Steel Pipe From the People's Republic of China: Notice
of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Postponement of Final Determination, 73 FR 2445, 2451 (January 15,
2008) (``Preliminary Determination''). On April 7, 2008, Jiangsu Yulong
Steel Pipe Co., Ltd, (``Yulong''), the only participating mandatory
respondent remaining in this investigation, notified the Department
that it was withdrawing from the proceeding. Based on the circumstances
described below, the Department of Commerce (the ``Department'') is
amending the preliminary determination in the antidumping duty
investigation of CWP from the PRC. This amended preliminary
determination results in revised antidumping rates.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Martin, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-3936.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Case History
On January 15, 2008, the Department published in the Federal
Register the Preliminary Determination that CWP from the PRC is being,
or is likely to be, sold in the United States at LTFV, as provided in
section 733 of the Act. In the Preliminary Determination, the
Department calculated a zero percent margin for Yulong, and included
Yulong's zero percent preliminary margin in calculating the rate
applied to the separate rate companies, and relied upon Yulong's
individual sales margins in corroborating the rate assigned to the PRC-
wide entity. See Preliminary Determination.
From January 28, 2008, through February 1, 2008, the Department
conducted a verification of the U.S. sales and factors of production
reported by Yulong. On February 27, 2008, the Department issued its
verification report. See Memorandum from Thomas Martin and Maisha
Cryor, International Trade Compliance Analysts, to the File,
``Verification of the Sales and Factors Response of Jiangsu Yulong
Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. (``Yulong''),'' dated February 27, 2008.
[[Page 22131]]
We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Determination. On
March 12, 2008, the Petitioners,\1\ Yulong, one separate rate
applicant, and two U.S. importers of subject merchandise filed case
briefs. On March 19, 2008, the Petitioners, Yulong, and one U.S.
importer filed rebuttal briefs. On March 24, 2008, the Department held
a public hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Petitioners in this investigation are Allied Tube &
Conduit, Sharon Tube Company, IPSCO Tubulars, Inc., Western Tube &
Conduit Corporation, Northwest Pipe Company, Wheatland Tube Co.,
i.e., the Ad Hoc Coalition For Fair Pipe Imports From China, and the
United Steelworkers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 17, 2008, the Department received an unsolicited letter
from the Director of a trading company registered in Hong Kong,
referred to hereafter as Company X, in which it notified the Department
that it had learned from industry sources that a PRC pipe producer
involved in this investigation had claimed that it purchased hot-rolled
steel coil for the production of merchandise subject to this
investigation from Company X. See Memorandum from Abdelali Elouaradia,
Office Director, to the File, ``Phone Conversation With Trading
Company,'' dated March 27, 2008 (``Trading Company Memorandum''), at
Attachment 1, which contains Company X's complaint letter. Company X
claims it had learned that a PRC pipe producer submitted to the
Department ``fake'' documents, including sales contracts, commercial
invoices, packing lists, and mill test reports, under Company X's
letterhead. Id. Company X clarified during a subsequent phone
conversation with the Department that it had learned that a PRC pipe
producer told the Department that the hot-rolled steel coils allegedly
purchased from Company X were produced by non-Chinese steel mills. Id.
at 1. During the telephone conversation, Company X further clarified
that it had not purchased any hot-rolled steel in coils directly from
foreign steel producers, nor purchased foreign-origin hot-rolled steel
coils indirectly through other Chinese companies, and had not sold any
hot-rolled steel coils to any PRC pipe producers involved in this
investigation. Id.
After reviewing the administrative record of the proceeding, the
Department concluded that Yulong was the only PRC pipe producer for
which Company X's allegations could possibly be applicable. See
Memorandum from Thomas Martin, International Trade Compliance Analyst,
to the File, ``Supporting Documentation for Market Economy Inputs
Submitted to the Administrative Record,'' dated concurrently with this
notice.
On March 27, 2007, the Department issued a memorandum in which it
provided all interested parties an opportunity to place on the record
of this investigation any new factual information that is relevant to
the issues raised in Company X's complaint letter or the Department's
phone conversation memorandum. See Memorandum from Mark Manning,
Program Manager, to the File, ``Schedule of Submissions,'' dated March
27, 2008. On March 28, 2008, the Department issued to Yulong a letter
in which it noted that Yulong reported to the Department certain
commercial invoices and other documentation pertaining to one of its
suppliers of hot-rolled steel in coils. See letter from Abdelali
Elouaradia, Office Director, to Yulong dated March 28, 2008. In this
letter, the Department asked Yulong to comment on certain actions the
Department is considering taking with respect to the documents Yulong
submitted to the Department that involve this supplier.
On April 7, 2008, Yulong notified the Department that: (1) It
``refuses to continue to contest the information contained in the
Department's March 27, 2008, memorandum to the file;'' (2) ``Yulong
will not participate any further in these proceedings;'' and (3)
``Yulong withdraws from the proceedings.'' See Letter to the Hon.
Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary of Commerce, from Jiangsu Yulong Steel
Pipe Co., Ltd., dated April 7, 2008 (``Yulong Withdrawal Letter'').
Yulong also stated that it has ``full understanding that because of
{Yulong's{time} lack of continued participation in these proceedings,
the Department may find that Yulong has failed to cooperate to the best
of its ability pursuant to section 776(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930.''
Id.
In sum, the Department notes the following facts in this case: (1)
Yulong received a zero margin in the Preliminary Determination; (2)
Company X has alleged that a PRC pipe company involved in this
investigation submitted ``fake'' documents to the Department; (3)
Yulong has withdrawn from this investigation and stated that it does
not contest the allegations made by Company X and identified in the
Trading Company Memorandum; (4) in the Preliminary Determination, the
Department included Yulong's zero percent preliminary margin in
calculating the rate applied to the separate rate companies, and relied
upon Yulong's individual sales margins in corroborating the rate
assigned to the PRC-wide entity; and (5) any change to Yulong's
preliminary margin will have a significant impact on all margins
included in the Preliminary Determination. In light of these facts, the
Department finds it necessary to issue an amended preliminary
determination.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (``POI'') is October 1, 2006, through
March 31, 2007. This period corresponds to the two most recent fiscal
quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition, i.e., June
2007. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
Scope of the Investigation
The scope of this investigation covers certain welded carbon
quality steel pipes and tubes, of circular cross-section, and with an
outside diameter of 0.372 inches (9.45 mm) or more, but not more than
16 inches (406.4 mm), whether or not stenciled, regardless of wall
thickness, surface finish (e.g., black, galvanized, or painted), end
finish (e.g., plain end, beveled end, grooved, threaded, or threaded
and coupled), or industry specification (e.g., ASTM, proprietary, or
other), generally known as standard pipe and structural pipe (they may
also be referred to as circular, structural, or mechanical tubing).
Specifically, the term ``carbon quality'' includes products in
which (a) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other
contained elements; (b) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by
weight; and (c) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity,
by weight, as indicated:
(i) 1.80 percent of manganese;
(ii) 2.25 percent of silicon;
(iii) 1.00 percent of copper;
(iv) 0.50 percent of aluminum;
(v) 1.25 percent of chromium;
(vi) 0.30 percent of cobalt;
(vii) 0.40 percent of lead;
(viii) 1.25 percent of nickel;
(ix) 0.30 percent of tungsten;
(x) 0.15 percent of molybdenum;
(xi) 0.10 percent of niobium;
(xii) 0.41 percent of titanium;
(xiii) 0.15 percent of vanadium; or
(xiv) 0.15 percent of zirconium.
Standard pipe is made primarily to American Society for Testing and
Materials (``ASTM'') specifications, but can be made to other
specifications. Standard pipe is made primarily to ASTM specifications
A-53, A-135, and A-795. Structural pipe is made primarily to ASTM
specifications A-252 and A-500. Standard and structural pipe may also
be produced to proprietary specifications rather than to industry
specifications. This is often the case, for example, with fence tubing.
[[Page 22132]]
Pipe multiple-stenciled to a standard and/or structural specification
and to any other specification, such as the American Petroleum
Institute (``API'') API-5L specification, is also covered by the scope
of this investigation when it meets the physical description set forth
above and also has one or more of the following characteristics: Is 32
feet in length or less; is less than 2.0 inches (50 mm) in outside
diameter; has a galvanized and/or painted surface finish; or has a
threaded and/or coupled end finish.
The scope of this investigation does not include: (a) Pipe suitable
for use in boilers, superheaters, heat exchangers, condensers, refining
furnaces and feedwater heaters, whether or not cold drawn; (b)
mechanical tubing, whether or not cold-drawn; (c) finished electrical
conduit; (d) finished scaffolding; (e) tube and pipe hollows for
redrawing; (f) oil country tubular goods produced to API
specifications; and (g) line pipe produced to only API specifications.
The pipe products that are the subject of this investigation are
currently classifiable in HTSUS statistical reporting numbers
7306.30.10.00, 7306.30.50.25, 7306.30.50.32, 7306.30.50.40,
7306.30.50.55, 7306.30.50.85, 7306.30.50.90, 7306.50.10.00,
7306.50.50.50, 7306.50.50.70, 7306.19.10.10, 7306.19.10.50,
7306.19.51.10, and 7306.19.51.50. However, the product description, and
not the harmonized tariff schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'')
classification, is dispositive of whether merchandise imported into the
United States falls within the scope of the investigation.
Non-Market Economy Treatment
The Department considers the PRC to be a non-market economy
(``NME'') country. In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act,
any determination that a country is an NME country shall remain in
effect until revoked by the administering authority. See Tapered Roller
Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From the People's
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of 2001-2002 Administrative
Review and Partial Rescission of Review, 68 FR 7500 (February 14,
2003), unchanged in Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished
and Unfinished, from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
2001-2002 Administrative Review and Partial Rescission of Review, 68 FR
70488 (December 18, 2003). Therefore, in this preliminary
determination, we have treated the PRC as an NME country and applied
our current NME methodology.
Adverse Facts Available
Sections 776(a)(1) and (2) of the Act provide that the Department
shall apply ``facts otherwise available'' if, inter alia, necessary
information is not on the record or an interested party: (A) Withholds
information requested by the Department, (B) fails to provide such
information by the deadline, or in the form or manner requested, (C)
significantly impedes a proceeding, or (D) provides information that
cannot be verified, as provided by section 782(i) of the Act.
Where the Department determines that a response to a request for
information does not comply with the request, section 782(d) of the Act
provides that the Department will so inform the party submitting the
response and will, to the extent practicable, provide that party the
opportunity to remedy or explain the deficiency. If the party fails to
remedy the deficiency within the applicable time limits, the Department
may disregard all or part of the original and subsequent responses,
subject to section 782(e) of the Act, as appropriate. Pursuant to
section 782(e) of the Act, the Department shall not decline to consider
submitted information if all of the following requirements are met: (1)
The information is submitted by the established deadline; (2) the
information can be verified; (3) the information is not so incomplete
that it cannot serve as a reliable basis for reaching the applicable
determination; (4) the interested party has demonstrated that it acted
to the best of its ability; and (5) the information can be used without
undue difficulties.
On April 7, 2008, Yulong informed the Department that it would not
continue participation in the instant investigation and does not
contest the allegations made by Company X and identified in the Trading
Company Memorandum. See Yulong Withdrawal Letter. In addition, because
Yulong ceased participation in the instant investigation prior to
submitting a response to the Department's March 28, 2008, request for
comment concerning certain actions under consideration by the
Department regarding documents Yulong submitted during this
investigation, Yulong withheld information requested by the Department.
Further, by not contesting the allegations made by Company X concerning
a PRC pipe producer's purchases of the major input used to produce
subject merchandise, as described in the Trading Company Memorandum,
Yulong has significantly impeded the proceeding. In addition, by
withdrawing from the investigation and no longer responding to the
Department's requests for information, Yulong has prevented the
Department from obtaining new information that could be used to conduct
additional analyses to assess the validity of the documents Yulong
submitted during the course of the investigation and during
verification. For these reasons, we find that the use of facts
available, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A), (C), and (D) of the Act
is appropriate in determining the applicable dumping margin for Yulong.
Yulong's failure to contest the information contained in the
Trading Company Memorandum, where Company X alleged that a PRC pipe
company submitted false documents to the Department concerning
purchases of hot-rolled steel coils, calls into question the veracity
of all information Yulong submitted to the record. For this reason, the
Department cannot rely upon the information Yulong submitted in its
factors of production database, U.S. sales database, or separate rate
application, and has disregarded all such information in making this
amended preliminary determination. Since the Department cannot rely
upon information contained in Yulong's separate rate application, we
can no longer find that Yulong operates free of government control and
that it is entitled to a separate rate. For this reason, we have denied
Yulong a separate rate, and find that Yulong is part of the PRC-wide
entity. As part of the PRC-wide entity, the Department's application of
facts available to Yulong contributes to the application of facts
available applied against the PRC-wide entity, as described in the
Preliminary Determination.
Section 776(b) of the Act provides that, in selecting from among
the facts otherwise available, the Department may employ an adverse
inference if an interested party fails to cooperate by not acting to
the best of its ability to comply with requests for information. See
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-
Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel Products from the Russian
Federation, 65 FR 5510, 5518 (February 4, 2000); Certain Welded Carbon
Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 62 FR 53808, 53819-20 (October 16, 1997);
Crawfish Processors Alliance v. United States, 343 F. Supp.2d 1242 (CIT
2004) (approving use of adverse facts available (``AFA'') when
respondent refused to participate in verification); see also Statement
of Administrative Action, accompanying
[[Page 22133]]
the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''), H.R. Rep. No. 103-316, 870
(1994) (``SAA''). Yulong's withdrawal from participation, its non-
cooperation in submitting requested information, and its failure to
contest the allegations made by Company X, constitute a failure to
cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with
requests for information in accordance with section 776(b) of the Act.
Section 776(b) of the Act authorizes the Department to use, as AFA,
information derived from the petition, the final determination from the
LTFV investigation, a previous administrative review, or any other
information placed on the record. In selecting a rate for AFA, the
Department selects one that is sufficiently adverse ``as to effectuate
the purpose of the facts available rule to induce respondents to
provide the Department with complete and accurate information in a
timely manner.'' See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Static Random Access Memory Semiconductors From
Taiwan, 63 FR 8909, 8932 (February 23, 1998). It is the Department's
practice to select, as AFA, the higher of the (a) highest margin
alleged in the petition, or (b) the highest calculated rate for any
respondent in the investigation. See Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon Quality
Steel Products From the People's Republic of China, 65 FR 34660 (May
21, 2000) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, at ``Facts
Available''. In this case, as AFA, the Department has selected the
highest margin alleged in the petition, as revised in the petitioners'
supplemental responses, 85.55 percent.
Corroboration
Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies
on secondary information in using the facts otherwise available, it
must, to the extent practicable, corroborate that information from
independent sources that are reasonably at its disposal. We have
interpreted ``corroborate'' to mean that we will, to the extent
practicable, examine the reliability and relevance of the information
submitted. See Certain Cold-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon-Quality Steel
Products From Brazil: Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value, 65 FR 5554, 5568 (February 4, 2000); see, e.g.,
Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished,
from Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside
Diameter, and Components Thereof, from Japan; Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Partial Termination of
Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392 (November 6, 1996).
Because there are no cooperating mandatory respondents, to
corroborate the 85.55 percent margin used as adverse facts available
for the PRC-wide entity, to the extent appropriate information was
available, we revisited our pre-initiation analysis of the adequacy and
accuracy of the information in the petition. See Antidumping
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Circular Welded Carbon Quality
Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China, (Initiation Checklist)
(``Initiation Checklist'') (July 5, 2007). We examined evidence
supporting the calculations in the petition and the supplemental
information provided by the petitioners prior to initiation to
determine the probative value of the margins alleged in the petition.
During our pre-initiation analysis, we examined the information used as
the basis of export price and NV in the petition, and the calculations
used to derive the alleged margins. Also during our pre-initiation
analysis, we examined information from various independent sources
provided either in the petition or, based on our requests, in
supplements to the petition, which corroborated key elements of the
export price and NV calculations. Id. We received no comments as to the
relevance or probative value of this information. Therefore, the
Department finds that the rates derived from the petition for purposes
of initiation have probative value for the purpose of being selected as
the AFA rate assigned to the PRC-wide entity (including Yulong).
Critical Circumstances
As noted in the Preliminary Determination, on December 11, 2007,
the Department preliminarily found that there is reason to believe or
suspect that critical circumstances exist for imports of subject
merchandise from Yulong, the separate rate companies, and the PRC-wide
entity, because (A) in accordance with section 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the
Act, there is a history of dumped imports of subject merchandise and of
material injury caused by such dumped imports, and (B) in accordance
with section 733(e)(1)(B) of the Act, Yulong, the separate-rate
companies, and the PRC-wide entity had massive imports during a
relatively short period. See Memorandum from Abdelali Elouaradia,
Director, Office 4, ``Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Critical
Circumstances,'' dated December 11, 2007. Yulong, however, was not
subject to suspension of liquidation at the Preliminary Determination
because it received a zero percent margin. Pursuant to this amended
preliminary determination, Yulong no longer has a separate rate and is
part of the PRC-wide entity. Since the Department has preliminarily
found that critical circumstances exist with respect to Yulong, and all
other PRC exporters, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (``CBP'') to suspend liquidation of all entries of
CWP from the PRC for consumption produced and/or exported by Yulong, as
described in the ``Scope of Investigation'' section, entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, on or after 90 days prior to the date of
publication in the Federal Register of this amended preliminary
determination. See ``Suspension of Liquidation'' section below.
Separate Rate Companies
In the Preliminary Determination, the Department assigned a
separate rate to thirty-one exporter/producer combinations that
qualified for a separate rate using the simple average of Yulong's zero
percent margin and the AFA margin assigned to the PRC-wide entity. See
Preliminary Determination, 73 FR at 2451. In light of Yulong's
withdrawal from the investigation and the subsequent application of
total AFA for Yulong (as part of the PRC-wide entity), this methodology
is no longer appropriate. In cases where the estimated weighted-average
margins for all individually investigated respondents are zero, de
minimis, or based entirely on AFA, the Department may use any
reasonable method to assign the separate rate. See section 735(c)(5)(B)
of the Act. In this case, where there are no mandatory respondents
receiving a calculated rate and the PRC-wide entity's rate is based
upon total AFA, we find that applying the simple average of the rates
alleged in the petition, incorporating revisions made in the
petitioners' supplemental responses, is both reasonable and reliable
for purposes of establishing a separate rate. See Final Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sodium Hexametaphosphate From the
People's Republic of China, 73 FR 6479 (February 4, 2008) and the
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2. Therefore,
the Department will assign a separate rate to the thirty-one exporter
producer combinations using the average of the margins alleged in the
petition, pursuant to its practice. This rate is corroborated, to the
extent practicable, for the reasons stated above.
[[Page 22134]]
Preliminary Determination Margins
The Department has determined that the following preliminary
dumping margins exist for the POI:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
Exporter Producer average
margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beijing Sai Lin Ke Hardware Co., Xuzhou Guang Huan Steel 69.20
Ltd. Tube Products Co., Ltd.
Wuxi Fastube Industry Co., Ltd... Wuxi Fastube Industry 69.20
Co., Ltd.
Jiangsu Guoqiang Zinc-Plating Jiangsu Guoqiang Zinc- 69.20
Industrial Co., Ltd.\2\. Plating Industrial Co.,
Ltd..
Wuxi Eric Steel Pipe Co., Ltd.... Wuxi Eric Steel Pipe 69.20
Co., Ltd.
Qingdao Xiangxing Steel Pipe Co., Qingdao Xiangxing Steel 69.20
Ltd. Pipe Co., Ltd.
Wah Cit Enterprises.............. Guangdong Walsall Steel 69.20
Pipe Industrial Co.,
Ltd.
Guangdong Walsall Steel Pipe Guangdong Walsall Steel 69.20
Industrial Co., Ltd. Pipe Industrial Co.,
Ltd.
Hengshui Jinghua Steel Pipe Co., Hengshui Jinghua Steel 69.20
Ltd. Pipe Co., Ltd.
Zhangjiagang Zhongyuan Pipe- Zhangjiagang Zhongyuan 69.20
Making Co., Ltd. Pipe-Making Co., Ltd.
Weifang East Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Weifang East Steel Pipe 69.20
Co., Ltd.
Shijiazhuang Zhongqing Imp & Exp Bazhou Zhuofa Steel Pipe 69.20
Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd.
Tianjin Baolai Int'l Trade Co., Tianjin Jinghai County 69.20
Ltd. Baolai Business and
Industry Co., Ltd.
Wai Ming (Tianjin) Int'l Trading Bazhou Dong Sheng Hot- 69.20
Co., Ltd.. dipped Galvanized Steel
Pipes Co., Ltd.
Kunshan Lets Win Steel Machinery Kunshan Lets Win Steel 69.20
Co., Ltd. Machinery Co., Ltd.
Shenyang Boyu M/E Co., Ltd....... Bazhou Dong Sheng Hot- 69.20
dipped Galvanized Steel
Pipes Co., Ltd.
Dalian Brollo Steel Tubes Ltd.... Dalian Brollo Steel 69.20
Tubes Ltd.
Benxi Northern Pipes Co., Ltd.... Benxi Northern Pipes 69.20
Co., Ltd.
Shanghai Metals & Minerals Import Huludao Steel Pipe 69.20
& Export Corp. Industrial Co.
Shanghai Metals & Minerals Import Benxi Northern Pipes 69.20
& Export Corp. Co., Ltd.
Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co. Huludao Steel Pipe 69.20
Industrial Co.
Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Tianjin Lifengyuanda 69.20
Co., Ltd. Steel Group.
Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Tianjin Xingyunda Steel 69.20
Co., Ltd. Pipe Co.
Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Tianjin Lituo Steel 69.20
Co., Ltd. Products Co.
Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Tangshan Fengnan 69.20
Co., Ltd. District Xinlida Steel
Pipe Co., Ltd.
Jiangyin Jianye Metal Products Jiangyin Jianye Metal 69.20
Co., Ltd. Products Co., Ltd.
Rizhao Xingye Import & Export Shandong Xinyuan Group 69.20
Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd.
Tianjin No. 1 Steel Rolled Co., Tianjin Hexing Steel 69.20
Ltd. Co., Ltd.
Tianjin No. 1 Steel Rolled Co., Tianjin Ruitong Steel 69.20
Ltd. Co., Ltd.
Tianjin No. 1 Steel Rolled Co., Tianjin Yayi Industrial 69.20
Ltd. Co.
Kunshan Hongyuan Machinery Kunshan Hongyuan 69.20
Manufacture Co., Ltd. Machinery Manufacture
Co., Ltd.
Qingdao Yongjie Import & Export Shandong Xinyuan Group 69.20
Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd.
PRC-Wide Entity (Including ........................ 85.55
Yulong) \3\.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b), the Department will disclose
to parties to this proceeding the calculations performed in reaching
the preliminary determination within five days after the date of
publication of these preliminary determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In the Preliminary Determination, the Department incorrectly
identified Jiangsu Guoqiang Zinc-Plating Industrial Company, Ltd.,
as Jiangsu Guoqiang Zinc-Plating Co., Ltd. We note, however, that in
the Department's subsequent instructions to CBP to suspend
liquidation and require cash deposits for CWP from PRC, the
Department correctly identified Jiangsu Guoqiang Zinc-Plating
Industrial Company, Ltd.
\3\ In the Preliminary Determination, the Department also found
that the Tianjin Shuangjie Group is part of the PRC-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suspension of Liquidation
As noted above, on December 11, 2007, the Department found that
critical circumstances exist with respect to shipments of CWP from all
PRC exporters. Yulong, however, was not subject to suspension of
liquidation at the Preliminary Determination because it received a zero
percent margin. Pursuant to this amended preliminary determination,
Yulong no longer has a separate rate and is part of the PRC-wide
entity. Therefore, to apply the Department's affirmative finding of
critical circumstances for the PRC-wide entity to Yulong, in accordance
with section 733(d) of the Act, we will instruct CBP to suspend
liquidation of all entries of CWP from the PRC as described in the
``Scope of Investigation'' section, entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption from Yulong on or after 90 days prior to the
date of publication in the Federal Register of this amended preliminary
determination. We will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or the
posting of a bond equal to the weighted-average dumping margin amount
by which the NV exceeds U.S. price, as follows: (1) The rate for the
exporter/producer combinations listed in the chart above will be the
rate we have determined in this amended preliminary determination; (2)
for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received
their own separate rate, including Yulong, the cash-deposit rate will
be the PRC-wide rate; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of subject
merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash-deposit
rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter/producer
combination that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These suspension-of-
liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.
International Trade Commission Notification
In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we have notified the
International Trade Commission (``ITC'') of our amended preliminary
determination. If our final determination is affirmative, the ITC will
make its final determination as to whether the domestic industry in the
United States is materially injured, or threatened with material
injury, by reason of imports of certain lined paper
[[Page 22135]]
products, or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation, of the
subject merchandise within 45 days of our final determination.
Public Comment
Interested parties may submit written comments (case briefs) by the
close of business on the third business day after the date of signature
(rather than publication) of this amended preliminary determination and
rebuttal comments (rebuttal briefs), which must be limited to issues
raised in the case briefs, within three business days after the
deadline for filing case briefs. See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(i) and 19 CFR
351.309(d). Parties are requested to limit the issues raised in their
case briefs to only those issues relevant to this amended preliminary
determination and not already briefed. Specifically, the Department
requests that parties limit their case briefs to the following issues:
(1) Whether the Department should use the facts available in reaching
its determination with respect to Yulong, pursuant to Section 776(a) of
the Act; (2) whether Yulong has failed to cooperate to the best of its
ability, warranting the application of an adverse inference, pursuant
to section 776(b) of the Act; (3) how the Department should determine
any AFA rate for Yulong, what the rate should be, and corroboration of
the rate, to the extent practicable, if the rate is based upon
secondary information, pursuant to section 776(c) of the Act; (4)
whether Yulong qualifies for a separate rate; and (5) what rate to
apply to the separate rate companies and corroboration of the rate, to
the extent practicable, if the rate is based upon secondary
information.
Parties who submit arguments are requested to submit with the
argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the
argument; and (3) a table of authorities. Further, the Department
requests that parties submitting written comments provide the
Department with a disk containing the public version of those comments.
This determination is issued and published in accordance with
sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: April 18, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-8953 Filed 4-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
