Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 14514-14518 [E9-7093]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
14514
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 31, 2009 / Notices
these kinds of data on a continuing basis
since 1983 permitting levels of
economic well-being and changes in
these levels to be measured over time.
The 2008 panel is currently scheduled
for 4 years and will include 13 waves
of interviewing beginning September
2008. Approximately 65,300 households
were selected for the 2008 panel, of
which 45,000 households are expected
to be interviewed. We estimate that each
household contains 2.1 people, yielding
94,500 person-level interviews in Wave
1 and subsequent waves. Interviews take
30 minutes on average. Three waves
will occur in the 2008 SIPP Panel
during FY 2009. The total annual
burden for 2008 Panel SIPP interviews
would be 141,750 hours in FY 2009.
The topical modules for the 2008
Panel Wave 4 collect information about:
• Assets, Liabilities, and Eligibility.
• Child Well-Being.
• Medical Expenses and Utilization of
Health Care (Adults and Children).
• Work Related Expenses and Child
Support Paid.
Wave 4 interviews will be conducted
from September 1, 2009 through
December 31, 2009.
A 10-minute reinterview of 3,100
people is conducted at each wave to
ensure accuracy of responses.
Reinterviews would require an
additional 1,553 burden hours in FY
2009.
tjames on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
II. Method of Collection
The SIPP is designed as a continuing
series of national panels of interviewed
households that are introduced every
few years with each panel having
durations of one to four years. All
household members 15 years old or over
are interviewed using regular proxyrespondent rules. During the 2008
panel, respondents are interviewed a
total of 13 times (13 waves) at 4-month
intervals making the SIPP a longitudinal
survey. Sample people (all household
members present at the time of the first
interview) who move within the country
and reasonably close to a SIPP primary
sampling unit will be followed and
interviewed at their new address.
Individuals 15 years old or over who
enter the household after Wave 1 will be
interviewed; however, if these
individuals move, they are not followed
unless they happen to move along with
a Wave 1 sample individual.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 0607–0944.
Form Number: SIPP/CAPI Automated
Instrument.
Type of Review: Regular submission.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:35 Mar 30, 2009
Jkt 217001
Estimated Number of Respondents:
94,500 people per wave.
Estimated Time per Response: 30
minutes per person.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 143,303.
Estimated Total Annual Cost: $0.
Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary.
Legal Authority: Title 13, United
States Code, Section 182.
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
included in the request for OMB
approval of this information collection;
they also will become a matter of public
record.
Dated: March 26, 2009.
Gwellnar Banks,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. E9–7117 Filed 3–30–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–07–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A–570–935
Certain Circular Welded Carbon
Quality Steel Line Pipe from the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 31, 2009.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Department) has determined that
circular welded carbon quality steel line
pipe (welded line pipe) 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 735 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
The final dumping margins for this
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
investigation are listed in the ‘‘Final
Determination Margins’’ section below.
The period covered by the investigation
is October 1, 2007, through March 31,
2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff
Pedersen or Rebecca Pandolph, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 4, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–2769 and 482–
3627, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published its
preliminary determination of sales at
LTFV on November 6, 2008. See Certain
Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel
Line Pipe from the People’s Republic of
China: Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Postponement of Final Determination,
73 FR 66012 (November 6, 2008)
(Preliminary Determination). On
November 5, 2008, Shanghai Metals &
Minerals Import & Export Corp. d/b/a
Shanghai Minmetals Materials &
Products Corp. (Shanghai Metals)
informed the Department that it would
not participate in the verification of its
information and withdrew from the
investigation. See Letter to Secretary of
Commerce, Shanghai Metals’ Notice of
Withdrawal from Investigation and
Certification of APO Compliance and
Destruction of APO Materials at 1
(November 5, 2008). On November 6,
2008, Benxi Northern Steel Pipes Co.,
Ltd. (Benxi) also informed the
Department that it would not participate
in the verification of its information and
withdrew from the investigation. See
Letter to Secretary of Commerce, Benxi’s
Notice of Withdrawal from Investigation
(November 6, 2008). From November 13,
2008, through November 21, 2008, the
Department conducted a verification of
information submitted by Huludao Steel
Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd. (Huludao Pipe).
See the ‘‘Verification’’ section below for
additional information. On December
16, 2008, Huludao Pipe and United
States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel),
one of the petitioning companies,
submitted comments on, and
calculations of, various surrogate values.
In response to the Department’s
invitation to comment on the
Preliminary Determination, on January
5, 2009, U.S. Steel, Maverick Tube
Corporation (Maverick), a petitioner,
Huludao Pipe, and the Bureau of Fair
Trade, Imports and Exports, Ministry of
Commerce of the PRC filed case briefs.
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
31MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 31, 2009 / Notices
7. We have recalculated
transportation costs for material
inputs based on corrections to the
distance from the supplier to the
factory reported by Huludao Pipe at
verification.
8. We have used new surrogate
financial statements to calculate
financial ratios.
Maverick, U.S. Steel and Huludao Pipe
filed rebuttal briefs on January 12, 2009.
Analysis of Comments Received
All of the issues that were raised in
the case and rebuttal briefs that were
submitted in this investigation, and to
which we have responded, are
addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final
Determination in the Antidumping Duty
Investigation of Certain Circular Welded
Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the
People’s Republic of China,’’ dated
March 23, 2009, which is hereby
adopted by this notice (Issues and
Decision Memorandum). Appendix I to
this notice contains a list of the issues
that are addressed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum. The Issues and
Decision Memorandum, which is a
public document, is on file in the
Central Records Unit, at the main
Commerce Building, Room 1117, and is
accessible on the Web at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and
electronic version of the memorandum
are identical in content.
tjames on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
Changes Since the Preliminary
Determination
We have made the following changes
to our calculations in the Preliminary
Determination:
1. We based our determination with
respect to Shanghai Metals and
Benxi on total adverse facts
available (AFA) because these
companies refused to allow the
Department to verify the
information submitted in the
investigation and failed to
cooperate to the best of their
abilities. As total AFA, we found
Shanghai Metals and Benxi to be
part of the PRC–wide entity.
2. We have reduced the grace
period used in calculating
warehouse expenses to seven days.
3. We have applied new surrogate
values for ocean freight based on
corrections to the departure and
destination ports made at
verification.
4. We have recalculated the
reported per–unit volume of subject
merchandise warehoused based on
verification findings.
5. We have recalculated the cost of
paint and thinner based on
corrections to consumption
reported by Huludao Pipe at
verification.
6. We have recalculated labor costs
based on corrections to
consumption reported by Huludao
Pipe at verification.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:35 Mar 30, 2009
Jkt 217001
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by this
investigation is circular welded carbon
quality steel pipe of a kind used for oil
and gas pipelines (welded line pipe),
not more than 406.4 mm (16 inches) in
outside diameter, regardless of wall
thickness, length, surface finish, end
finish or stenciling.
The term ‘‘carbon quality steel’’
includes both carbon steel and carbon
steel mixed with small amounts of
alloying elements that may exceed the
individual weight limits for nonalloy
steels imposed in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).
Specifically, the term ‘‘carbon quality’’
includes products in which (1) iron
predominates by weight over each of the
other contained elements, (2) the carbon
content is 2 percent or less by weight
and (3) none of the elements listed
below exceeds the quantity by weight
respectively indicated:
(i) 2.00 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) 0.012 percent of boron,
(xi) 0.50 percent of molybdenum,
(xii) 0.15 percent of niobium,
(xiii) 0.41 percent of titanium,
(xiv) 0.15 percent of vanadium, or
(xv) 0.15 percent of zirconium.
Welded line pipe is normally
produced to specifications published by
the American Petroleum Institute (API)
(or comparable foreign specifications)
including API A–25, 5LA, 5LB, and X
grades from 42 and above, and/or any
other proprietary grades or non–graded
material. Nevertheless, all pipe meeting
the physical description set forth above
that is of a kind used in oil and gas
pipelines, including all multiple–
stenciled pipe with an API welded line
pipe stencil is covered by the scope of
this investigation.
Excluded from this scope are pipes of
a kind used for oil and gas pipelines
that are multiple–stenciled to a standard
and/or structural specification and have
one or more of the following
characteristics: is 32 feet in length or
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14515
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 term ‘‘painted’’ does not include
coatings to inhibit rust in transit, such
as varnish, but includes coatings such as
polyester.)
The welded line pipe products that
are the subject of this investigation are
currently classifiable in the HTSUS
under subheadings 7306.19.10.10,
7306.19.10.50, 7306.19.51.10, and
7306.19.51.50. While HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the scope of this
investigation is dispositive.
Scope Comments
Since the Preliminary Determination
no one has submitted comments on the
scope of this investigation.
Adverse Facts Available
As noted in the ‘‘Background’’ section
above, Shanghai Metals and Benxi
withdrew from the investigation and
refused to allow the Department to
verify the information they had
submitted in this proceeding.
Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides
that, if an interested party (C)
significantly impedes a proceeding, or
(D) provides information that cannot be
verified, the Department shall use facts
otherwise available in reaching the
applicable determination.
Section 776(b) of the Act authorizes
the Department to use an adverse
inference with respect to an interested
party if the Department finds that the
party failed to cooperate by not acting
to the best of its ability to comply with
a request for information.
Therefore, pursuant to sections
776(a)(2)(C) and (D) and 776(b) of the
Act, we have, decided to base Shanghai
Metals and Benxi’s dumping margins on
AFA. As AFA, we have treated
Shanghai Metals and Benxi as part of
the PRC–wide entity and assigned
Shanghai Metals and Benxi the PRC–
wide rate of 101.10 percent. See Issues
and Decision Memorandum at Comment
12.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the
Act, we conducted verification in the
PRC of the information submitted by
Huludao Pipe for use in our final
determination. See the Memorandum
from Jeff Pedersen and Rebecca
Pandolph, through Howard Smith, to
the file regarding Verification of the
Questionnaire Responses of Huludao
Pipe Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd.
(December 11, 2008). In conducting the
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
31MRN1
14516
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 31, 2009 / Notices
verification, we used standard
verification procedures, including
examination of relevant accounting,
sales, and production records, as well as
original source documents provided by
Huludao Pipe.
Surrogate Country
In the Preliminary Determination, we
selected India as the appropriate
surrogate country noting that India was
on the Department’s list of countries
that are at a level of economic
development comparable to the PRC
and that: (1) India is a significant
producer of merchandise comparable to
the subject merchandise; and, (2)
reliable Indian data for valuing factors
of production are readily available. See
Preliminary Determination, 73 FR at
66014. No party has commented on our
selection of India as the appropriate
surrogate country. For the final
determination, we continue to find
India to be the appropriate surrogate
country in this investigation.
tjames on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving non–marketeconomy (NME) countries, the
Department begins with a rebuttable
presumption that all companies within
the country are subject to government
control and, thus, should be assigned a
single antidumping duty deposit rate. It
is the Department’s policy to assign all
exporters of merchandise subject to an
investigation in an NME country this
single rate unless an exporter can
demonstrate that it is sufficiently
independent so as to be entitled to a
separate rate. See Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers
From the People’s Republic of China, 56
FR 20588 (May 6, 1991), as amplified by
Notice of Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide
From the People’s Republic of China, 59
FR 22585 (May 2, 1994); see also 19 CFR
351.107(d).
In the Preliminary Determination, the
Department granted separate–rate status
to Benxi; Huludao Pipe; Pangang Group
Beihai Pipe Corporation (Pangang
Beihai); Shanghai Metals; Tianjin
Xingyuda Import and Export Company
(Tianjin); and Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe
Co., Ltd. (Jiangsu Yulong). As discussed
above, the Department has decided, as
AFA, to treat Shanghai Metals and
Benxi as part of the PRC–wide entity.
Moreover, we note that the information
that Shanghai Metals and Benxi
provided to the Department to
demonstrate the absence of de facto and
de jure control could not be verified due
to their failure to cooperate.
Consequently we have not granted
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:35 Mar 30, 2009
Jkt 217001
Shanghai Metals and Benxi separate
rates.
While U.S. Steel argued in its case
brief that Pangang Beihai should not be
granted a separate rate, we continue to
find that Pangang Beihai qualifies for a
separate rate. See Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 11. No other
parties commented on the separate–rate
status granted to companies in the
Preliminary Determination. For this
final determination we have continued
to grant the following companies
separate–rate status: Huludao Pipe,
Pangang Beihai, Tianjin, and Jiangsu
Yulong. We have assigned the separate–
rate companies the dumping margin that
we calculated for Huludao Pipe.
The PRC–Wide Rate
In the Preliminary Determination, the
Department found that certain
companies did not respond to our
requests for information. See
Preliminary Determination, 73 FR at
66016. We treated these PRC producers/
exporters as part of the PRC–wide entity
because they did not demonstrate that
they operate free of government control
over their export activities. Id. No
additional information was placed on
the record with respect to any of these
companies after the Preliminary
Determination. Moreover, for the
reasons noted above, we also consider
Shanghai Metals and Benxi to be part of
the PRC–wide entity.
As noted above, section 776(a)(2) of
the Act provides that, if an interested
party or any other person withholds
information that has been requested by
the administering authority,
significantly impedes a proceeding
under this title, or provides such
information but the information cannot
be verified as provided in section 782(i)
of the Act, the administering authority
shall, subject to section 782(d) of the
Act, use facts otherwise available in
reaching the applicable determination.
Because the PRC–wide entity did not
respond to our requests for information
and because companies within the PRC–
wide entity withheld information
requested by the Department, and
Shanghai Metals and Benxi, which are
part of the PRC–wide entity, did not
allow their information to be verified,
pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A), (C),
and (D) of the Act, we determine, as in
the Preliminary Determination, that the
use of facts otherwise available is
appropriate to determine the PRC–wide
rate.
As stated above, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
cooperate by not acting to the best of its
ability to comply with requests for
information. See Notice of 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). See also
Statement of Administrative Action
accompanying the Uruguay Round
Agreements Act, H.R. Doc. No. 103–316,
Vol. 1 (1994), at 870. We determine that,
because the PRC–wide entity did not
respond to our requests for information,
and Shanghai Metals and Benxi
prevented the Department from
verifying its information, the PRC–wide
entity has failed to cooperate to the best
of its ability. Therefore, the Department
finds that, in selecting a dumping
margin from among the facts otherwise
available, an adverse inference is
appropriate for the PRC–wide entity.
In this final determination, we have
assigned the PRC–wide entity the
highest CONNUM–specific dumping
margin, i.e., 101.10 percent, calculated
for Shanghai Metals. See Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 10.
No corroboration of this rate is
necessary because we are relying on
information obtained in the course of
this investigation, rather than secondary
information.
Since we begin with the presumption
that all companies within an NME
country are subject to government
control, and only the exporters listed
under the ‘‘Final Determination
Margins’’ section below have overcome
that presumption, we are applying a
single antidumping rate (i.e., the PRC–
wide rate) to all exporters of subject
merchandise from the PRC, other than
the exporters listed in the ‘‘Final
Determination Margins’’ sections. See,
e.g., Synthetic Indigo From the People’s
Republic of China; Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value, 65 FR 25706 (May 3, 2000).
Combination Rates
In the Initiation Notice, the
Department stated that it would
calculate combination rates for certain
respondents that are eligible for a
separate rate in this investigation. See
Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality
Steel Line Pipe From the Republic of
Korea and the People’s Republic of
China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Investigations, 73 FR 23188 (April 29,
2008) (Initiation Notice). This change in
practice is described in Policy Bulletin
05.1:
§w§hile continuing the practice of
assigning separate rates only to
exporters, all separate rates that the
Department will now assign in its
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
31MRN1
14517
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 31, 2009 / Notices
weighted–average of the
individually calculated rates. This
practice is referred to as the
application of ‘‘combination rates’’
because such rates apply to specific
combinations of exporters and one
or more producers. The cash–
deposit rate assigned to an exporter
will apply only to merchandise
both exported by the firm in
question and produced by a firm
that supplied the exporter during
the period of investigation.’’
NME investigations will be specific
to those producers that supplied the
exporter during the period of
investigation. Note, however, that
one rate is calculated for the
exporter and all of the producers
which supplied subject
merchandise to it during the period
of investigation. This practice
applies both to mandatory
respondents receiving an
individually calculated separate
rate as well as the pool of non–
investigated firms receiving the
See Policy Bulletin 05.1, ‘‘Separate
Rates Practice and Application of
Combination Rates in Antidumping
Investigations Involving Non–Market
Economy Countries’’ available on the
Import Administration’s website at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/.
Final Determination Margins
We determine that the following
weighted–average dumping margins
exist for the period October 1, 2007,
through March 31, 2008:
Exporter & Producer
Weighted–Average Margin
tjames on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd..
Huludao City Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd. ..............................................................................................................
Produced by: Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd..
Huludao City Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd..
Pangang Group Beihai Steel Pipe Corporation ........................................................................................................
Produced by: Pangang Group Beihai Steel Pipe Corporation.
Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. .........................................................................................................................
Produced by: Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe Co., Ltd..
Tianjin Xingyuda Import and Export Co., Ltd. ...........................................................................................................
Produced by: Tianjin Lifengyuanda Steel Pipe Group Co., Ltd..
PRC–Wide Rate ........................................................................................................................................................
Disclosure
We will disclose to parties the
calculations performed within five days
of the date of public announcement of
this determination in accordance with
19 CFR 351.224(b). The Department has
determined in Circular Welded Carbon
Quality Steel Line Pipe from the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Amended Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination and
Notice of Countervailing Duty Order, 74
FR 4136 (January 23, 2009) (Line Pipe
CVD Final) that the product under
investigation, exported and produced by
Huludao Pipe, benefitted from export
subsidies. Normally, where the product
under investigation is also subject to a
concurrent countervailing duty
investigation, we instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) to require
an antidumping cash deposit or posting
of a bond equal to the weighted–average
amount by which the normal value (NV)
exceeds the export price, as indicated
above, minus the amount determined to
constitute an export subsidy. See, e.g.,
Notice of Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Carbazole
Violet Pigment 23 From India, 69 FR
67306, 67307 (November 17, 2004).
Therefore, for merchandise under
consideration, exported and produced
by Huludao Pipe, and entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date of this final determination, we will
instruct CBP to require an antidumping
cash deposit or the posting of a bond for
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:35 Mar 30, 2009
Jkt 217001
each entry equal to the weighted–
average margin indicated above,
reduced by the export subsidy rate
determined in the Line Pipe CVD Final
for Huludao Pipe. For merchandise
under consideration from the other
exporter producer combinations, listed
in the table above, that have been
granted separate rates, we have assigned
the rate calculated for Huludao Pipe in
this antidumping investigation.
Additionally, this merchandise is
subject to countervailing duties to offset
export subsidies equal to or greater than
the export subsidy rate determined for
Huludao Pipe. Therefore, for
merchandise under consideration from
these exporter producer combinations,
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication date of this final
determination, we will instruct CBP to
require an antidumping cash deposit or
the posting of a bond for each entry
equal to the weighted–average margin
indicated above, reduced by the export
subsidy rate determined for Huludao
Pipe in the Line Pipe CVD Final. The
adjusted cash deposit rate for Huludao
Pipe and the other exporter–producer
combinations listed above is 73.44
percent.
Continuation of Suspension of
Liquidation
In accordance with section
735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we are directing
CBP to continue to suspend liquidation
of all imports of subject merchandise as
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
73.87%
73.87%
73.87%
73.87%
101.10%
described in the ‘‘Scope of the
Investigation’’ section, that are entered
or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after November 6,
2008, which is the date of publication
of the Preliminary Determination in the
Federal Register. 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
combination listed in the chart above
will be the rate we have determined in
this final determination; (2) for all PRC
exporters of subject merchandise which
have not received their own rate, the
cash–deposit rate will be the PRC–wide
entity 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–ofliquidation instructions will remain in
effect until further notice.
International Trade Commission
Notification
In accordance with section 735(d) of
the Act, we have notified the
International Trade Commission (ITC) of
our final determination of sales at LTFV.
As our final determination is
affirmative, in accordance with section
735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will
determine whether the domestic
industry in the United States is
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
31MRN1
14518
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 31, 2009 / Notices
materially injured, or threatened with
material injury, by reason of imports or
sales (or the likelihood of sales) for
importation of the subject merchandise
within 45 days of this final
determination. If the ITC determines
that material injury or threat of material
injury does not exist, the proceeding
will be terminated and all securities
posted will be refunded or canceled. If
the ITC determines that such injury
does exist, the Department will issue an
antidumping duty order directing CBP
to assess upon further instruction by the
Department antidumping duties on all
imports of the subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the effective
date of the suspension of liquidation.
Notification Regarding APO
This notice also serves as a reminder
to the parties subject to administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely
notification of return or destruction of
APO materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the regulations
and the terms of an APO is a
sanctionable violation. This
determination and notice are issued and
published in accordance with sections
735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: March 23, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
tjames on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
Appendix I
Parties’ Comments
Comment 1: Whether Huludao Pipe
Could Have Reported Steel
Consumption on a More Product–
Specific Basis
Comment 2: Whether Huludao Pipe
Could Have Reported the Consumption
of Paint, Thinner, and Packing Labor on
a More Product–Specific Basis
Comment 3: The Department’s
Valuation of Huludao Pipe’s Water
Consumption
Comment 4: Huludao Pipe’s Reported
Steel By–Product Quantity
Comment 5: Whether Huludao Pipe’s
Reported Scrap Steel Offset Should be
Reduced by Transportation Costs
Comment 6: Application of
Warehousing Grace Period
Comment 7: Reported Days in
Warehouse
Comment 8: Calculation of Warehousing
Volume
Comment 9: Whether the Date of the
Commercial Invoice Is the Proper Date
of Sale
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:35 Mar 30, 2009
Jkt 217001
Comment 10: Scrap Surrogate Value
Comment 11: Eligibility of Pangang
Group Beihai Steel Pipe Corporation for
a Separate Rate
Comment 12: Applying Adverse Facts
Available to Non–Responsive
Companies
Comment 13: Selection of Surrogate
Financial Statements
Comment 14: Whether the Imposition of
Both Countervailing and Antidumping
Duties Constitutes the Double Counting
of Duties
microscope. We know of no electron
microscope, or any other instrument
suited to these purposes, which was
being manufactured in the United States
at the time of order of each instrument.
[FR Doc. E9–7093 Filed 3–30–09; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Dated: March 23, 2009.
Christopher Cassel,
Acting Director, Subsidies Enforcement
Office, Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–7222 Filed 3–30–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
International Trade Administration
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Childrens Hospital, et al.; Notice of
Consolidated Decision on Applications
for Duty-Free Entry of Electron
Microscopes
This is a decision consolidated
pursuant to Section 6(c) of the
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub.
L. 89–651, as amended by Pub. L. 106–
36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301).
Related records can be viewed between
8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. in Room 3705, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th and
Constitution Avenue., NW.,
Washington, DC.
Docket Number: 09–001. Applicant:
Childrens Hospital, Los Angeles, CA
90027. Instrument: Transmission
Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI
Company, Czech Republic. Intended
Use: See notice at 74 FR 8503, February
25, 2009.
Docket Number: 09–002. Applicant:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Denver, CO 80202. Instrument:
Transmission Electron Microscope.
Manufacturer: JEOL, Ltd., Japan.
Intended Use: See notice at 74 FR 8503,
February 25, 2009.
Docket Number: 09–003. Applicant:
U.S. Food and Drug Administration,
Laurel, MD 20708. Instrument:
Transmission Electron Microscope.
Manufacturer: JEOL Ltd., Japan.
Intended Use: See notice at 74 FR 8503,
February 25, 2009.
Comments: None received. Decision:
Approved. No instrument of equivalent
scientific value to the foreign
instrument, for such purposes as these
instruments are intended to be used,
was being manufactured in the United
States at the time the instruments were
ordered. Reasons: Each foreign
instrument is an electron microscope
and is intended for research or scientific
educational uses requiring an electron
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
[C–570–931]
Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless
Pressure Pipe from the People’s
Republic of China: Correction to
Countervailing Duty Order
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES:
Effective Date: March 31, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Copyak, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 3, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Room 4014, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–2209.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Correction
On March 19, 2009, the Department of
Commerce (‘‘the Department’’)
published a notice of countervailing
duty order on circular welded austenitic
stainless pressure pipe from the
People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). See
Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless
Pressure Pipe from the People’s
Republic of China: Countervailing Duty
Order, 74 FR 11712 (March 19, 2009)
(‘‘CVD Order’’). Subsequent to the
publication of the CVD Order in the
Federal Register, we identified an
inadvertent error.
The notice states that on March 11,
2009, the United States International
Trade Commission (ITC) notified the
Department of its final affirmative
determination of material injury. This is
a typographical error. The Department
received the ITC’s notification of its
final affirmative determination of
material injury on March 12, 2009.
This notice is published in
accordance with sections 777(i) and
706(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended.
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
31MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 60 (Tuesday, March 31, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14514-14518]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-7093]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A-570-935
Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the
People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 31, 2009.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Department) has determined that
circular welded carbon quality steel line pipe (welded line pipe) 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 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The final
dumping margins for this investigation are listed in the ``Final
Determination Margins'' section below. The period covered by the
investigation is October 1, 2007, through March 31, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Pedersen or Rebecca Pandolph, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
2769 and 482-3627, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published its preliminary determination of sales at
LTFV on November 6, 2008. See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality
Steel Line Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of
Final Determination, 73 FR 66012 (November 6, 2008) (Preliminary
Determination). On November 5, 2008, Shanghai Metals & Minerals Import
& Export Corp. d/b/a Shanghai Minmetals Materials & Products Corp.
(Shanghai Metals) informed the Department that it would not participate
in the verification of its information and withdrew from the
investigation. See Letter to Secretary of Commerce, Shanghai Metals'
Notice of Withdrawal from Investigation and Certification of APO
Compliance and Destruction of APO Materials at 1 (November 5, 2008). On
November 6, 2008, Benxi Northern Steel Pipes Co., Ltd. (Benxi) also
informed the Department that it would not participate in the
verification of its information and withdrew from the investigation.
See Letter to Secretary of Commerce, Benxi's Notice of Withdrawal from
Investigation (November 6, 2008). From November 13, 2008, through
November 21, 2008, the Department conducted a verification of
information submitted by Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd.
(Huludao Pipe). See the ``Verification'' section below for additional
information. On December 16, 2008, Huludao Pipe and United States Steel
Corporation (U.S. Steel), one of the petitioning companies, submitted
comments on, and calculations of, various surrogate values. In response
to the Department's invitation to comment on the Preliminary
Determination, on January 5, 2009, U.S. Steel, Maverick Tube
Corporation (Maverick), a petitioner, Huludao Pipe, and the Bureau of
Fair Trade, Imports and Exports, Ministry of Commerce of the PRC filed
case briefs.
[[Page 14515]]
Maverick, U.S. Steel and Huludao Pipe filed rebuttal briefs on January
12, 2009.
Analysis of Comments Received
All of the issues that were raised in the case and rebuttal briefs
that were submitted in this investigation, and to which we have
responded, are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for
the Final Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of
Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the
People's Republic of China,'' dated March 23, 2009, which is hereby
adopted by this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). Appendix I to
this notice contains a list of the issues that are addressed in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum. The Issues and Decision Memorandum,
which is a public document, is on file in the Central Records Unit, at
the main Commerce Building, Room 1117, and is accessible on the Web at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the
memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Determination
We have made the following changes to our calculations in the
Preliminary Determination:
1. We based our determination with respect to Shanghai Metals and
Benxi on total adverse facts available (AFA) because these companies
refused to allow the Department to verify the information submitted in
the investigation and failed to cooperate to the best of their
abilities. As total AFA, we found Shanghai Metals and Benxi to be part
of the PRC-wide entity.
2. We have reduced the grace period used in calculating warehouse
expenses to seven days.
3. We have applied new surrogate values for ocean freight based on
corrections to the departure and destination ports made at
verification.
4. We have recalculated the reported per-unit volume of subject
merchandise warehoused based on verification findings.
5. We have recalculated the cost of paint and thinner based on
corrections to consumption reported by Huludao Pipe at verification.
6. We have recalculated labor costs based on corrections to
consumption reported by Huludao Pipe at verification.
7. We have recalculated transportation costs for material inputs
based on corrections to the distance from the supplier to the factory
reported by Huludao Pipe at verification.
8. We have used new surrogate financial statements to calculate
financial ratios.
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by this investigation is circular welded
carbon quality steel pipe of a kind used for oil and gas pipelines
(welded line pipe), not more than 406.4 mm (16 inches) in outside
diameter, regardless of wall thickness, length, surface finish, end
finish or stenciling.
The term ``carbon quality steel'' includes both carbon steel and
carbon steel mixed with small amounts of alloying elements that may
exceed the individual weight limits for nonalloy steels imposed in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Specifically,
the term ``carbon quality'' includes products in which (1) iron
predominates by weight over each of the other contained elements, (2)
the carbon content is 2 percent or less by weight and (3) none of the
elements listed below exceeds the quantity by weight respectively
indicated:
(i) 2.00 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) 0.012 percent of boron,
(xi) 0.50 percent of molybdenum,
(xii) 0.15 percent of niobium,
(xiii) 0.41 percent of titanium,
(xiv) 0.15 percent of vanadium, or
(xv) 0.15 percent of zirconium.
Welded line pipe is normally produced to specifications published
by the American Petroleum Institute (API) (or comparable foreign
specifications) including API A-25, 5LA, 5LB, and X grades from 42 and
above, and/or any other proprietary grades or non-graded material.
Nevertheless, all pipe meeting the physical description set forth above
that is of a kind used in oil and gas pipelines, including all
multiple-stenciled pipe with an API welded line pipe stencil is covered
by the scope of this investigation.
Excluded from this scope are pipes of a kind used for oil and gas
pipelines that are multiple-stenciled to a standard and/or structural
specification and have 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 term ``painted'' does not
include coatings to inhibit rust in transit, such as varnish, but
includes coatings such as polyester.)
The welded line pipe products that are the subject of this
investigation are currently classifiable in the HTSUS under subheadings
7306.19.10.10, 7306.19.10.50, 7306.19.51.10, and 7306.19.51.50. While
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes,
the written description of the scope of this investigation is
dispositive.
Scope Comments
Since the Preliminary Determination no one has submitted comments
on the scope of this investigation.
Adverse Facts Available
As noted in the ``Background'' section above, Shanghai Metals and
Benxi withdrew from the investigation and refused to allow the
Department to verify the information they had submitted in this
proceeding.
Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that, if an interested party
(C) significantly impedes a proceeding, or (D) provides information
that cannot be verified, the Department shall use facts otherwise
available in reaching the applicable determination.
Section 776(b) of the Act authorizes the Department to use an
adverse inference with respect to an interested party if the Department
finds that the party failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of
its ability to comply with a request for information.
Therefore, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(C) and (D) and 776(b) of
the Act, we have, decided to base Shanghai Metals and Benxi's dumping
margins on AFA. As AFA, we have treated Shanghai Metals and Benxi as
part of the PRC-wide entity and assigned Shanghai Metals and Benxi the
PRC-wide rate of 101.10 percent. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 12.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we conducted verification
in the PRC of the information submitted by Huludao Pipe for use in our
final determination. See the Memorandum from Jeff Pedersen and Rebecca
Pandolph, through Howard Smith, to the file regarding Verification of
the Questionnaire Responses of Huludao Pipe Steel Pipe Industrial Co.,
Ltd. (December 11, 2008). In conducting the
[[Page 14516]]
verification, we used standard verification procedures, including
examination of relevant accounting, sales, and production records, as
well as original source documents provided by Huludao Pipe.
Surrogate Country
In the Preliminary Determination, we selected India as the
appropriate surrogate country noting that India was on the Department's
list of countries that are at a level of economic development
comparable to the PRC and that: (1) India is a significant producer of
merchandise comparable to the subject merchandise; and, (2) reliable
Indian data for valuing factors of production are readily available.
See Preliminary Determination, 73 FR at 66014. No party has commented
on our selection of India as the appropriate surrogate country. For the
final determination, we continue to find India to be the appropriate
surrogate country in this investigation.
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving non-market-economy (NME) countries, the
Department begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies
within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should
be assigned a single antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the
Department's policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject to
an investigation in an NME country this single rate unless an exporter
can demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be
entitled to a separate rate. See Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Sparklers From the People's Republic of China, 56 FR
20588 (May 6, 1991), as amplified by Notice of Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide From the People's
Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994); see also 19 CFR
351.107(d).
In the Preliminary Determination, the Department granted separate-
rate status to Benxi; Huludao Pipe; Pangang Group Beihai Pipe
Corporation (Pangang Beihai); Shanghai Metals; Tianjin Xingyuda Import
and Export Company (Tianjin); and Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe Co., Ltd.
(Jiangsu Yulong). As discussed above, the Department has decided, as
AFA, to treat Shanghai Metals and Benxi as part of the PRC-wide entity.
Moreover, we note that the information that Shanghai Metals and Benxi
provided to the Department to demonstrate the absence of de facto and
de jure control could not be verified due to their failure to
cooperate. Consequently we have not granted Shanghai Metals and Benxi
separate rates.
While U.S. Steel argued in its case brief that Pangang Beihai
should not be granted a separate rate, we continue to find that Pangang
Beihai qualifies for a separate rate. See Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 11. No other parties commented on the separate-
rate status granted to companies in the Preliminary Determination. For
this final determination we have continued to grant the following
companies separate-rate status: Huludao Pipe, Pangang Beihai, Tianjin,
and Jiangsu Yulong. We have assigned the separate-rate companies the
dumping margin that we calculated for Huludao Pipe.
The PRC-Wide Rate
In the Preliminary Determination, the Department found that certain
companies did not respond to our requests for information. See
Preliminary Determination, 73 FR at 66016. We treated these PRC
producers/exporters as part of the PRC-wide entity because they did not
demonstrate that they operate free of government control over their
export activities. Id. No additional information was placed on the
record with respect to any of these companies after the Preliminary
Determination. Moreover, for the reasons noted above, we also consider
Shanghai Metals and Benxi to be part of the PRC-wide entity.
As noted above, section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that, if an
interested party or any other person withholds information that has
been requested by the administering authority, significantly impedes a
proceeding under this title, or provides such information but the
information cannot be verified as provided in section 782(i) of the
Act, the administering authority shall, subject to section 782(d) of
the Act, use facts otherwise available in reaching the applicable
determination. Because the PRC-wide entity did not respond to our
requests for information and because companies within the PRC-wide
entity withheld information requested by the Department, and Shanghai
Metals and Benxi, which are part of the PRC-wide entity, did not allow
their information to be verified, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A),
(C), and (D) of the Act, we determine, as in the Preliminary
Determination, that the use of facts otherwise available is appropriate
to determine the PRC-wide rate.
As stated above, 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 Notice of 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). See also Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H.R. Doc. No. 103-316, Vol. 1 (1994), at
870. We determine that, because the PRC-wide entity did not respond to
our requests for information, and Shanghai Metals and Benxi prevented
the Department from verifying its information, the PRC-wide entity has
failed to cooperate to the best of its ability. Therefore, the
Department finds that, in selecting a dumping margin from among the
facts otherwise available, an adverse inference is appropriate for the
PRC-wide entity.
In this final determination, we have assigned the PRC-wide entity
the highest CONNUM-specific dumping margin, i.e., 101.10 percent,
calculated for Shanghai Metals. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 10. No corroboration of this rate is necessary because we are
relying on information obtained in the course of this investigation,
rather than secondary information.
Since we begin with the presumption that all companies within an
NME country are subject to government control, and only the exporters
listed under the ``Final Determination Margins'' section below have
overcome that presumption, we are applying a single antidumping rate
(i.e., the PRC-wide rate) to all exporters of subject merchandise from
the PRC, other than the exporters listed in the ``Final Determination
Margins'' sections. See, e.g., Synthetic Indigo From the People's
Republic of China; Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value, 65 FR 25706 (May 3, 2000).
Combination Rates
In the Initiation Notice, the Department stated that it would
calculate combination rates for certain respondents that are eligible
for a separate rate in this investigation. See Certain Circular Welded
Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe From the Republic of Korea and the
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Investigations, 73 FR 23188 (April 29, 2008) (Initiation Notice). This
change in practice is described in Policy Bulletin 05.1:
Sec. wSec. hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates
only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now
assign in its
[[Page 14517]]
NME investigations will be specific to those producers that supplied
the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, however, that
one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the producers which
supplied subject merchandise to it during the period of investigation.
This practice applies both to mandatory respondents receiving an
individually calculated separate rate as well as the pool of non-
investigated firms receiving the weighted-average of the individually
calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the application of
``combination rates'' because such rates apply to specific combinations
of exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned
to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the firm
in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during
the period of investigation.''
See Policy Bulletin 05.1, ``Separate Rates Practice and Application
of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations Involving Non-Market
Economy Countries'' available on the Import Administration's website at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/.
Final Determination Margins
We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins
exist for the period October 1, 2007, through March 31, 2008:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exporter & Producer Weighted-Average Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd....
Huludao City Steel Pipe Industrial Co., 73.87%
Ltd......................................
Produced by: Huludao Steel Pipe
Industrial Co., Ltd..............
Huludao City Steel Pipe Industrial
Co., Ltd.........................
Pangang Group Beihai Steel Pipe 73.87%
Corporation..............................
Produced by: Pangang Group Beihai
Steel Pipe Corporation...........
Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe Co., Ltd........ 73.87%
Produced by: Jiangsu Yulong Steel
Pipe Co., Ltd....................
Tianjin Xingyuda Import and Export Co., 73.87%
Ltd......................................
Produced by: Tianjin Lifengyuanda
Steel Pipe Group Co., Ltd........
PRC-Wide Rate............................. 101.10%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure
We will disclose to parties the calculations performed within five
days of the date of public announcement of this determination in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). The Department has determined in
Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the People's
Republic of China: Notice of Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing
Duty Determination and Notice of Countervailing Duty Order, 74 FR 4136
(January 23, 2009) (Line Pipe CVD Final) that the product under
investigation, exported and produced by Huludao Pipe, benefitted from
export subsidies. Normally, where the product under investigation is
also subject to a concurrent countervailing duty investigation, we
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to require an
antidumping cash deposit or posting of a bond equal to the weighted-
average amount by which the normal value (NV) exceeds the export price,
as indicated above, minus the amount determined to constitute an export
subsidy. See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 From India, 69 FR 67306, 67307
(November 17, 2004). Therefore, for merchandise under consideration,
exported and produced by Huludao Pipe, and entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of this
final determination, we will instruct CBP to require an antidumping
cash deposit or the posting of a bond for each entry equal to the
weighted-average margin indicated above, reduced by the export subsidy
rate determined in the Line Pipe CVD Final for Huludao Pipe. For
merchandise under consideration from the other exporter producer
combinations, listed in the table above, that have been granted
separate rates, we have assigned the rate calculated for Huludao Pipe
in this antidumping investigation. Additionally, this merchandise is
subject to countervailing duties to offset export subsidies equal to or
greater than the export subsidy rate determined for Huludao Pipe.
Therefore, for merchandise under consideration from these exporter
producer combinations, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication date of this final
determination, we will instruct CBP to require an antidumping cash
deposit or the posting of a bond for each entry equal to the weighted-
average margin indicated above, reduced by the export subsidy rate
determined for Huludao Pipe in the Line Pipe CVD Final. The adjusted
cash deposit rate for Huludao Pipe and the other exporter-producer
combinations listed above is 73.44 percent.
Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we are
directing CBP to continue to suspend liquidation of all imports of
subject merchandise as described in the ``Scope of the Investigation''
section, that are entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption
on or after November 6, 2008, which is the date of publication of the
Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register. 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 combination
listed in the chart above will be the rate we have determined in this
final determination; (2) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise
which have not received their own rate, the cash-deposit rate will be
the PRC-wide entity 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 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the
International Trade Commission (ITC) of our final determination of
sales at LTFV. As our final determination is affirmative, in accordance
with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine whether the
domestic industry in the United States is
[[Page 14518]]
materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of
imports or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation of the
subject merchandise within 45 days of this final determination. If the
ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does
not exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted
will be refunded or canceled. If the ITC determines that such injury
does exist, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order
directing CBP to assess upon further instruction by the Department
antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered,
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective
date of the suspension of liquidation.
Notification Regarding APO
This notice also serves as a reminder to the parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of return or
destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the
terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. This determination and
notice are issued and published in accordance with sections 735(d) and
777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: March 23, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I
Parties' Comments
Comment 1: Whether Huludao Pipe Could Have Reported Steel Consumption
on a More Product-Specific Basis
Comment 2: Whether Huludao Pipe Could Have Reported the Consumption of
Paint, Thinner, and Packing Labor on a More Product-Specific Basis
Comment 3: The Department's Valuation of Huludao Pipe's Water
Consumption
Comment 4: Huludao Pipe's Reported Steel By-Product Quantity
Comment 5: Whether Huludao Pipe's Reported Scrap Steel Offset Should be
Reduced by Transportation Costs
Comment 6: Application of Warehousing Grace Period
Comment 7: Reported Days in Warehouse
Comment 8: Calculation of Warehousing Volume
Comment 9: Whether the Date of the Commercial Invoice Is the Proper
Date of Sale
Comment 10: Scrap Surrogate Value
Comment 11: Eligibility of Pangang Group Beihai Steel Pipe Corporation
for a Separate Rate
Comment 12: Applying Adverse Facts Available to Non-Responsive
Companies
Comment 13: Selection of Surrogate Financial Statements
Comment 14: Whether the Imposition of Both Countervailing and
Antidumping Duties Constitutes the Double Counting of Duties
[FR Doc. E9-7093 Filed 3-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
