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 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