Certain Large Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe (Over 41/2, 39852-39854 [2011-17065]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 130 (Thursday, July 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39852-39854]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17065]



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



DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE



International Trade Administration



[A-588-850]




Certain Large Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line, 

and Pressure Pipe (Over 4\1/2\ Inches) From Japan: Preliminary Results 

of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review



AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce.



SUMMARY: On July 28, 2010, the U.S. Department of Commerce (``the 

Department'') published a notice of initiation of an administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order on certain large diameter carbon 

and alloy seamless standard, line, and pressure pipe (over 4\1/2\ 

inches) from Japan. The review covers four manufacturers/exporters: JFE 

Steel Corporation (``JFE''); Nippon Steel Corporation (``Nippon''); NKK 

Tubes (``NKK''); and Sumitomo Metal Industries, Ltd. (``SMI''). The 

period of review (``POR'') is June 1, 2009, through May 31, 2010. 

Following the receipt of certifications of no shipments from all four 

of the potential respondents, we sought further clarification of 

specific entries indicated by U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(``CBP'') data. After analyzing parties' explanations of these entries, 

we have reached a preliminary determination of no shipments in this 

administrative review. If the preliminary results are adopted in our 

final results of this administrative review, we will instruct CBP to 

assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Interested 

parties are invited to comment on the preliminary results.



DATES: Effective Date: Insert date of publication in the Federal 

Register.



FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joshua Morris, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1779.



SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:



Background



    On June 1, 2010, the Department published a notice of opportunity 

to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on 

carbon and alloy seamless standard, line, and pressure pipe (over 

4[frac12] inches) from Japan for the period June 1, 2009, through May 

31, 2010. See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding or 

Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 

75 FR 30383 (June 1, 2010). On June 30, 2010, United States Steel 

Corporation (``U.S. Steel''), a domestic producer of the subject 

merchandise, made a timely request that the Department conduct an 

administrative review of JFE, Nippon, NKK, and SMI. On July 28, 2010, 

in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(``the Act''), the Department published in the Federal Register a 

notice of initiation of this antidumping duty administrative review. 

See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Reviews and Requests for Revocations in Part, 75 FR 44224 (July 28, 

2010). On August 18, and 31, 2010, Nippon and SMI, respectively, 

submitted letters to the Department certifying that each company made 

no shipments or entries for consumption in the United States of subject 

merchandise during the POR. On August 31, 2010, the Department issued 

its antidumping duty questionnaire to JFE and NKK. On September 8, and 

21, 2010, JFE and NKK, respectively, submitted letters to the 

Department certifying that each company made no shipments or entries 

for consumption in the United States of subject merchandise during the 

POR.



Scope of the Order



    The products covered by the order are large diameter seamless 

carbon and alloy (other than stainless) steel standard, line, and 

pressure pipes produced, or equivalent, to the American Society for 

Testing and Materials (``ASTM'') A-53, ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-

334, ASTM A-589, ASTM A-795, and the American Petroleum Institute 

(``API'') 5L specifications and meeting the physical parameters 

described below, regardless of application. The scope of the order also 

includes all other products used in standard, line, or pressure pipe 

applications and meeting the physical parameters described below, 

regardless of specification, with the exception of the exclusions 

discussed below. Specifically included within the scope of the order 

are seamless pipes greater than 4.5 inches (114.3 mm) up to and 

including 16 inches (406.4 mm) in outside diameter, regardless of wall-

thickness, manufacturing process (hot finished or cold-drawn), end 

finish (plain end, beveled end, upset end, threaded, or threaded and 

coupled), or surface finish.

    The seamless pipes subject to the order are currently classifiable 

under the subheadings 7304.10.10.30, 7304.10.10.45, 7304.10.10.60, 

7304.10.50.50, 7304.19.10.30, 7304.19.10.45, 7304.19.10.60, 

7304.19.50.50, 7304.31.60.10, 7304.31.60.50, 7304.39.00.04, 

7304.39.00.06, 7304.39.00.08, 7304.39.00.36, 7304.39.00.40, 

7304.39.00.44, 7304.39.00.48, 7304.39.00.52, 7304.39.00.56, 

7304.39.00.62, 7304.39.00.68, 7304.39.00.72, 7304.51.50.15, 

7304.51.50.45, 7304.51.50.60, 7304.59.20.30, 7304.59.20.55, 

7304.59.20.60, 7304.59.20.70, 7304.59.60.00, 7304.59.80.30, 

7304.59.80.35, 7304.59.80.40, 7304.59.80.45, 7304.59.80.50, 

7304.59.80.55, 7304.59.80.60, 7304.59.80.65, and 7304.59.80.70 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'').

    Specifications, Characteristics, and Uses: Large diameter seamless 

pipe is used primarily for line applications such as oil, gas, or water 

pipeline, or utility distribution systems. Seamless pressure pipes are 

intended for the conveyance of water, steam, petrochemicals, chemicals, 

oil products, natural gas and other liquids and gasses in industrial 

piping systems. They may carry these substances at elevated pressures 

and temperatures and may be subject to the application of external 

heat. Seamless carbon steel pressure pipe meeting the ASTM A-106 

standard may be used in temperatures of up to 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, 

at various American Society of Mechanical Engineers (``ASME'') code 

stress levels. Alloy pipes made to ASTM A-335 standard must be used if 

temperatures and stress levels exceed those allowed for ASTM A-106. 

Seamless pressure pipes sold in the United States are commonly produced 

to the ASTM A-106 standard.

    Seamless standard pipes are most commonly produced to the ASTM A-53 

specification and generally are not intended for high temperature 

service. They are intended for the low temperature and pressure 

conveyance of water, steam, natural gas, air and other



[[Page 39853]]



liquids and gasses in plumbing and heating systems, air conditioning 

units, automatic sprinkler systems, and other related uses. Standard 

pipes (depending on type and code) may carry liquids at elevated 

temperatures but must not exceed relevant ASME code requirements. If 

exceptionally low temperature uses or conditions are anticipated, 

standard pipe may be manufactured to ASTM A-333 or ASTM A-334 

specifications.

    Seamless line pipes are intended for the conveyance of oil and 

natural gas or other fluids in pipe lines. Seamless line pipes are 

produced to the API 5L specification. Seamless water well pipe (ASTM A-

589) and seamless galvanized pipe for fire protection uses (ASTM A-795) 

are used for the conveyance of water.

    Seamless pipes are commonly produced and certified to meet ASTM A-

106, ASTM A-53, API 5L-B, and API 5L-X42 specifications. To avoid 

maintaining separate production runs and separate inventories, 

manufacturers typically triple or quadruple certify the pipes by 

meeting the metallurgical requirements and performing the required 

tests pursuant to the respective specifications. Since distributors 

sell the vast majority of this product, they can thereby maintain a 

single inventory to service all customers.

    The primary application of ASTM A-106 pressure pipes and triple or 

quadruple certified pipes in large diameters is for use as oil and gas 

distribution lines for commercial applications. A more minor 

application for large diameter seamless pipes is for use in pressure 

piping systems by refineries, petrochemical plants, and chemical 

plants, as well as in power generation plants and in some oil field 

uses (on shore and off shore) such as for separator lines, gathering 

lines and metering runs. These applications constitute the majority of 

the market for the subject seamless pipes. However, ASTM A-106 pipes 

may be used in some boiler applications.

    The scope of the order includes all seamless pipe meeting the 

physical parameters described above and produced to one of the 

specifications listed above, regardless of application, with the 

exception of the exclusions discussed below, whether or not also 

certified to a non-covered specification. Standard, line, and pressure 

applications and the above-listed specifications are defining 

characteristics of the scope of the order. Therefore, seamless pipes 

meeting the physical description above, but not produced to the ASTM A-

53, ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-589, ASTM A-795, and API 

5L specifications shall be covered if used in a standard, line, or 

pressure application, with the exception of the specific exclusions 

discussed below.

    For example, there are certain other ASTM specifications of pipe 

which, because of overlapping characteristics, could potentially be 

used in ASTM A-106 applications. These specifications generally include 

ASTM A-161, ASTM A-192, ASTM A-210, ASTM A-252, ASTM A-501, ASTM A-523, 

ASTM A-524, and ASTM A-618. When such pipes are used in a standard, 

line, or pressure pipe application, such products are covered by the 

scope of the order.

    Specifically excluded from the scope of the order are: A. Boiler 

tubing and mechanical tubing, if such products are not produced to ASTM 

A-53, ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-589, ASTM A-795, and 

API 5L specifications and are not used in standard, line, or pressure 

pipe applications. B. Finished and unfinished oil country tubular goods 

(``OCTG''), if covered by the scope of another antidumping duty order 

from the same country. If not covered by such an OCTG order, finished 

and unfinished OCTG are included in the scope when used in standard, 

line or pressure applications. C. Products produced to the A-335 

specification unless they are used in an application that would 

normally utilize ASTM A-53, ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-

589, ASTM A-795, and API 5L specifications. D. Line and riser pipe for 

deepwater application, i.e., line and riser pipe that is: (1) Used in a 

deepwater application, which means for use in water depths of 1,500 

feet or more; (2) intended for use in and is actually used for a 

specific deepwater project; (3) rated for a specified minimum yield 

strength of not less than 60,000 psi; and (4) not identified or 

certified through the use of a monogram, stencil, or otherwise marked 

with an API specification (e.g., ``API 5L'').

    With regard to the excluded products listed above, the Department 

will not instruct CBP to require end-use certification until such time 

as petitioner or other interested parties provide to the Department a 

reasonable basis to believe or suspect that the products are being 

utilized in a covered application. If such information is provided, we 

will require end-use certification only for the product(s) (or 

specification(s)) for which evidence is provided that such products are 

being used in a covered application as described above. For example, 

if, based on evidence provided by petitioner, the Department finds a 

reasonable basis to believe or suspect that seamless pipe produced to 

the A-335 specification is being used in an A-106 application, we will 

require end-use certifications for imports of that specification. 

Normally we will require only the importer of record to certify to the 

end use of the imported merchandise. If it later proves necessary for 

adequate implementation, we may also require producers who export such 

products to the United States to provide such certification on invoices 

accompanying shipments to the United States.

    Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and 

customs purposes, our written description of the merchandise subject to 

this scope is dispositive.



Preliminary Determination of No Shipments



    As noted above, all four of the potential respondents submitted 

letters to the Department indicating that they did not make any 

shipments or entries of subject merchandise to the United States during 

the POR. In response to the Department's query to CBP, CBP data showed 

subject merchandise manufactured by three of the respondent companies, 

JFE, NKK, and SMI, may have entered for consumption into the United 

States during the POR. On December 27, 2010, and January 7, 2011, the 

Department placed on the record of this review, copies of the entry 

documents in question.

    The Department subsequently confirmed with CBP the no shipment 

claim made by Nippon. Because the evidence on the record indicates that 

Nippon did not export subject merchandise to the United States during 

the POR, we preliminarily determine that Nippon had no reviewable 

transactions during the POR.

    On January 3, 2011, the Department sent letters to JFE, NKK, and 

SMI, requesting that they further substantiate their claims of no 

shipments. On February 1, 2011, JFE submitted that it did not make any 

U.S. sales of subject merchandise during the POR, nor did it sell any 

subject merchandise to any trading company with the knowledge that the 

trading company would export the subject merchandise to the United 

States during the POR, nor did it initiate, and was not aware of, any 

exports from Japan to the United States of subject merchandise produced 

by JFE during the POR. In its response, JFE explained in detail how its 

claim of no knowledge is supported by the record evidence, and that 

some of the entries which entered the United States under its 

antidumping case number were non-



[[Page 39854]]



subject merchandise. See Memorandum to the File, from Joshua Morris, 

International Trade Analyst, ``Preliminary Determination of No 

Shipments in the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review on Certain 

Large Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line, and Pressure 

Pipe (Over 4\1/2\ Inches) from Japan,'' June 29, 2011 (``No Shipments 

Memo'').

    On February 8, 2011, NKK responded that its statement to the 

Department on September 21, 2010, remains accurate, and reiterated that 

NKK did not have shipments of subject merchandise to the United States 

during the POR. NKK explained in detail how its claim of no knowledge 

is supported by the record evidence, and that entries which entered 

into the United States during the POR under its antidumping case number 

were non-subject merchandise. See No Shipments Memo.

    On February 15, 2011, SMI submitted that SMI did not export subject 

merchandise to the United States during the POR. SMI explained that it 

did sell, through trading companies, subject merchandise to 

distributors and end-users in Japan and third countries. SMI emphasized 

that as stated in its August 31, 2010, submission, it did not make any 

U.S. sales of subject merchandise during the POR, nor did it sell any 

subject merchandise to any end-users or distributors with the knowledge 

that such end-users or distributors would export the subject 

merchandise to the United States during the POR. Furthermore, SMI 

stated that it did not initiate, and was not aware of, any exports from 

Japan or any third countries to the United States of subject 

merchandise produced by SMI during the POR. In its response, SMI 

explained in detail how its claim of no knowledge is supported by the 

record evidence. See No Shipments Memo.

    Based on JFE's and SMI's submissions and our review of CBP 

documentation, the Department finds that the record evidence supports 

JFE's and SMI's claims that, at the time of the sale, JFE or SMI had no 

knowledge that any of these entries of subject merchandise entered the 

United States during the POR. On this basis, we find that subject 

merchandise produced by JFE and SMI entered the United States during 

the POR under their antidumping case number, but did so by way of 

intermediaries without the knowledge of either company.\1\

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



    \1\ As our decision is based largely on proprietary information, 

a full analysis and explanation is contained in our No Shipments 

Memo.

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



    Based on NKK's and JFE's submissions and our review of CBP 

documentation, the Department finds that the merchandise produced by 

NKK and certain of the merchandise produced by JFE which entered the 

United States during the POR under their respective antidumping case 

numbers appears to be non-subject merchandise. See No Shipments Memo 

for full analysis.

    Thus, the Department finds that the respondents' claims of no 

shipments or entries for consumption to be substantiated. Based upon 

the certifications and the evidence on the record, we are satisfied 

that no respondent had shipments of subject merchandise to the United 

States during the POR and, as such, we preliminarily determine that 

JFE, SMI, and NKK had no reviewable transactions during the POR.

    Since the implementation of the 1997 regulations, our practice 

concerning no-shipment respondents had been to rescind the 

administrative review if the respondent certifies that it had no 

shipments and we have confirmed through our examination of CBP data 

that there were no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. See 

Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27393 (May 19, 

1997); see also Oil Country Tubular Goods from Japan: Preliminary 

Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Partial 

Rescission of Review, 70 FR 53161, 53162 (September 5, 2007), unchanged 

in Oil Country Tubular Goods from Japan: Final Results and Partial 

Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 95 (January 

3, 2006). In such circumstances, we normally instructed CBP to 

liquidate any entries from the no-shipment company at the deposit rate 

in effect on the date of entry.

    In our May 6, 2003, ``automatic assessment'' clarification, we 

explained that, where respondents in an administrative review 

demonstrate that they had no knowledge of sales through resellers to 

the United States, we would instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at 

the all-others rate applicable to the proceeding. See Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (``Assessment Policy Notice'').

    Because ``as entered'' liquidation instructions do not alleviate 

the concerns which the May 2003 clarification was intended to address, 

we find it appropriate in this case to instruct CBP to liquidate any 

existing entries of merchandise produced by Nippon, JFE, SMI, and NKK, 

and exported by other parties at the all-others rate, should we 

continue to find that Nippon, JFE, SMI, and NKK had no shipments of 

subject merchandise in the POR in our final results. See, e.g., 

Magnesium Metal From the Russian Federation: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 26922, 26923 (May 13, 

2010), unchanged in Magnesium Metal From the Russian Federation: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 56989, 56990 

(September 17, 2010). In addition, the Department finds that it is more 

consistent with the May 2003 clarification not to rescind the review in 

part in these circumstances but, rather, to complete the review with 

respect to Nippon, JFE, SMI, and NKK, and issue appropriate 

instructions to CBP based on the final results of the review. See the 

``Assessment Rates'' section of this notice below.



Assessment Rates



    Upon completion of the administrative review, the Department shall 

determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 

entries, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212. The Department intends to 

issue appraisement instructions directly to CBP 15 days after the date 

of publication of the final results of this review.

    As noted above, the Department clarified its ``automatic 

assessment'' regulation on May 6, 2003. See Assessment Policy Notice. 

This clarification will apply to POR entries by all respondent 

companies if we continue to make a final determination of no shipments 

because they certified that they made no POR shipments of subject 

merchandise for which they had knowledge of U.S. destination. We will 

instruct CBP to liquidate these entries at the all-others rate 

established in the less-than-fair-value investigation (68.88 percent) 

if there is no rate for the intermediary involved in the transaction. 

See Assessment Policy Notice for a full discussion of this 

clarification.

    These preliminary results of administrative review and notice are 

issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 

777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221.



    Dated: June 29, 2011.

Paul Piquado,

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 2011-17065 Filed 7-6-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P