Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From Mexico: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77770-77772 [2011-32102]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
77770
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 14, 2011 / Notices
Newark Customs and Border Protection
port of entry. The application was
submitted pursuant to the provisions of
the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as
amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), and the
regulations of the Board (15 CFR part
400). It was formally filed on December
7, 2011.
FTZ 49 was approved by the Board on
April 6, 1979 (Board Order 146, 44 FR
22502, 4/16/79) and expanded on May
26, 1983 (Board Order 211, 48 FR 24958,
6/3/83), on October 23, 1987 (Board
Order 365, 52 FR 41599, 10/29/87), on
April 19, 1990 (Board Order 470, 55 FR
17478, 4/25/90), on December 15, 1999
(Board Order 1067, 64 FR 72462–72643,
12/28/99), on April 14, 2006 (71 FR
23895, 4/25/06), on February 28, 2007
(Board Order 1504, 72 FR 10642–10643,
3/9/07), and on July 16, 2009 (Board
Order 1634, 74 FR 37688–37689, 7/29/
09).
The current zone project includes the
following sites in the Newark/Elizabeth
area: Site 1 (total—2,121 acres)—Port
Newark/Elizabeth Port Authority
Marine Terminal (2,075 acres), a parcel
(23 acres) located at 888 Doremus
Avenue, Newark, a parcel (6 acres)
located at 580 Division Street, Elizabeth,
and a parcel (17 acres) located at 251–
259 Kapowski Road, Elizabeth; Site 2
(64 acres)—Global Terminal and
Container Services facility (41 acres)
and adjacent Jersey Distribution
Services facility (23 acres) Jersey City/
Bayonne; Site 3 (124 acres)—Port
Authority Industrial Park, adjacent to
the Port Newark/Elizabeth Port
Authority Marine Terminal; Site 4 (198
acres)—Port Authority Auto Marine
Terminal (145 acres) and adjacent 53acre Greenville Industrial Park on Upper
New York Bay’s Port Jersey Channel in
Bayonne and Jersey City; Site 5 (40
acres)—Newark International Airport jet
fuel storage and distribution system in
the Cities of Newark and Elizabeth
(Union and Essex Counties); Site 6 (407
acres)—within an industrial park
located at 100 Central Avenue, Kearny;
Site 7 (114 acres, sunset 3/31/14)—
within the I–Port 12 industrial park,
located at exit 12 of the NJ Turnpike,
Carteret; Site 8 (176 acres, sunset 3/31/
14)—within the I–Port 440 industrial
park, located east of State St. and north
of the Outer Bridge Crossing, Perth
Amboy; Site 9 (317 acres, sunset 3/31/
14)—Port Reading Business Park located
on Port Reading Avenue, Woodbridge;
Site 10 (73 acres, sunset 3/31/14)—Port
Elizabeth Business Park located at 10
North Avenue East, Elizabeth; Site 11
(379 acres, sunset 7/31/14)—Heller
Industrial Park located at 205 Mill Road,
Edison; and, Site 12 (23 acres, sunset 7/
31/14)—located at 400, 440, 490 Heller
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:14 Dec 13, 2011
Jkt 226001
Park Court and 1 Industrial Road, South
Brunswick.
The applicant is now requesting
authority to expand the zone to include
the following site: Proposed Site 13 (546
acres)—Raritan Center Business Park,
Woodbridge Avenue & Raritan Center
Parkway, Townships of Edison and
Woodbridge, Middlesex County. No
specific manufacturing authority is
being requested at this time. Such
requests would be made on a case-bycase basis.
In accordance with the Board’s
regulations, Kathleen Boyce of the FTZ
Staff is designated examiner to evaluate
and analyze the facts and information
presented in the application and case
record and to report findings and
recommendations to the Board.
Public comment is invited from
interested parties. Submissions (original
and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the
Board’s Executive Secretary at the
address below. The closing period for
their receipt is February 13, 2012.
Rebuttal comments in response to
material submitted during the foregoing
period may be submitted during the
subsequent 15-day period to February
27, 2012.
A copy of the application will be
available for public inspection at the
Office of the Executive Secretary,
Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 2111,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230–0002, and in the ‘‘Reading
Room’’ section of the Board’s Web site,
which is accessible via https://www.
trade.gov/ftz. For further information,
contact Kathleen Boyce at Kathleen.
Boyce@trade.gov or (202) 482–1346.
Dated: December 7, 2011.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–32090 Filed 12–13–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–201–805]
Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy
Steel Pipe From Mexico: Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 10, 2011, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on certain
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
circular welded non-alloy steel pipe
from Mexico.1 This administrative
review covers mandatory respondents
Mueller Comercial de Mexico, S. de R.L.
de C.V. (Mueller), Southland Pipe
Nipples Company, Inc. (Southland),
Lamina y Placa Comercial, S.A. de C.V.
(Lamina), and Tuberia Nacional, S.A. de
C.V. (TUNA).2
We determine that the respondents
did not have reviewable sales,
shipments, or entries during the POR.
DATES: Effective Date: December 14,
2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Flessner or Robert James, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 7, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–6312 and (202)
482–0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 10, 2011, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
preliminary results of the administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on certain circular welded non-alloy
steel pipe from Mexico for the period
November 1, 2009, to October 31, 2010.
See Preliminary Results.
In response to the Department’s
invitation to comment on the
preliminary results of this review,
Petitioner Wheatland Tube Company
filed a case brief on September 9, 2011.
Respondents Lamina and TUNA jointly
filed a rebuttal brief on September 13,
2011.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this order
are circular welded non-alloy steel
pipes and tubes, of circular crosssection, not more than 406.4 millimeters
(16 inches) in outside diameter,
regardless of wall thickness, surface
finish (black, galvanized, or painted), or
end finish (plain end, beveled end,
threaded, or threaded and coupled).
These pipes and tubes are generally
known as standard pipes and tubes and
are intended for the low pressure
conveyance of water, steam, natural gas,
and other liquids and gases in plumbing
and heating systems, air conditioning
1 See Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel
Pipe From Mexico: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR
49437 (August 10, 2011) (Preliminary Results).
2 The Department determined that Lamina is the
successor-in-interest to TUNA. See Notice of Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review: Certain Circular Welded
Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From Mexico, 75 FR 82374
(December 30, 2010).
E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM
14DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 14, 2011 / Notices
units, automatic sprinkler systems, and
other related uses, and generally meet
ASTM A–53 specifications. Standard
pipe may also be used for light loadbearing applications, such as for fence
tubing, and as structural pipe tubing
used for framing and support members
for reconstruction or load-bearing
purposes in the construction,
shipbuilding, trucking, farm equipment,
and related industries. Unfinished
conduit pipe is also included in these
orders. All carbon steel pipes and tubes
within the physical description outlined
above are included within the scope of
this order, except line pipe, oil country
tubular goods, boiler tubing, mechanical
tubing, pipe and tube hollows for
redraws, finished scaffolding, and
finished conduit. Standard pipe that is
dual or triple certified/stenciled that
enters the U.S. as line pipe of a kind
used for oil or gas pipelines is also not
included in this order.
The merchandise covered by the order
and subject to this review are currently
classified in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)
at subheadings: 7306.30.10.00,
7306.30.50.25, 7306.30.50.32,
7306.30.50.40, 7306.30.50.55,
7306.30.50.85, and 7306.30.50.90.
Although the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, our written description of the
scope of these proceedings is
dispositive.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case brief and
rebuttal brief are addressed in the Issues
and Decision Memorandum (Decision
Memorandum) from Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration,
dated December 2, 2011, which is
hereby adopted by this notice. A list of
the issues raised is attached to this
notice as Appendix I. The Decision
Memorandum is a public document and
is on file electronically via Import
Administration’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS).
Access to IA ACCESS is available in the
Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046
of the main Department of Commerce
building. In addition, a complete
version of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum can be accessed directly
on the Internet at https://www.trade.gov/
ia/. The signed Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the electronic
versions of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:14 Dec 13, 2011
Jkt 226001
Final Results of Review
Because we have found that the
respondents did not have reviewable
sales, shipments, or entries during the
POR, there is no change in the
antidumping duties for any of the
respondents.
Assessment
The Department will determine, and
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties
on all appropriate entries, pursuant to
section 751(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.212(b). We will issue appraisement
instructions directly to CBP to assess
antidumping duties on appropriate
entries by applying the assessment rate
to the entered value of the merchandise.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 356.8(a), the
Department intends to issue assessment
instructions to CBP 41 days after the
date of publication of these final results
of review.
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, as
well as a no-shipment query to the
ports, 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, 2005), 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,
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77771
we find it appropriate in this case to
instruct CBP to liquidate any existing
entries of merchandise produced by the
respondents, and exported by other
parties at the all-others rate. 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
its entirety but, rather, to complete the
review with respect to the respondents,
issuing appropriate instructions to CBP
based on the final results of the review.
See the ‘‘Assessment Rates’’ section of
this notice below.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of these final results for all
shipments of the subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication date of these final results of
administrative review, consistent with
section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash
deposit rate for the reviewed companies
will be the rates in effect from the most
recently-completed POR; (2) if the
exporter is not a firm covered in this
review, but was covered in a previous
review or the original less-than-fairvalue (LTFV) investigation, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the
company-specific rate published for the
most recent period; (3) if the exporter is
not a firm covered in this review, a prior
review, or the original LTFV
investigation, but the manufacturer is,
the cash deposit rate will be the rate
established for the most recent period
for the manufacturer of the
merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit
rate for all other manufacturers or
exporters will continue to be 32.62
percent, the all-others rate established
in the LTFV investigation. See Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Circular Welded Non-Alloy
Steel Pipe From Mexico, 57 FR 42953
(September 17, 1992). These deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping duties prior to liquidation
E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM
14DEN1
77772
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 14, 2011 / Notices
of the relevant entries during this
review period. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
Department’s presumption that
reimbursement of the antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping
duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective orders (APOs) of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues
to govern business proprietary
information in this segment of the
proceeding. Timely written notification
of the 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 notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i)(1) of the Act.
Appendix—List of Issues in Decision
Memorandum
Comment 1: Allegedly Incorrect
Classification of Entry Documents
Comment 2: Verification
[FR Doc. 2011–32102 Filed 12–13–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–937]
Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts
from the People’s Republic of China:
Final Results of the First
Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On June 10, 2011, the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) published the
preliminary results of the first
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on citric acid
and certain citrate salts (‘‘citric acid’’)
from the People’s Republic of China
(‘‘PRC’’), covering the period November
20, 2008, through April 30, 2010. See
Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts
from the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Results of the First
Administrative Review of the
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:14 Dec 13, 2011
Jkt 226001
DATES:
Effective Date: December 14,
2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Krisha Hill or Maisha Cryor, 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) 482–4037 or (202) 482–
5831, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Dated: December 2, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
AGENCY:
Antidumping Duty Order; and Partial
Rescission of Administrative Review, 76
FR 34048 (June 10, 2011) (‘‘Preliminary
Results’’). We invited interested parties
to comment on our Preliminary Results.
Based on our findings from on-site
verifications and analysis of the
comments received, we made certain
changes to our margin calculations for
the respondents. The final dumping
margins for this review are listed in the
‘‘Final Results of the Review’’ section
below.
On June 10, 2011, the Department
published the Preliminary Results of the
first administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on citric acid
from the PRC. On June 30, 2011, both
respondents, RZBC Co., Ltd., RZCB Imp.
& Exp. Co., Ltd., and RZBC (Juxian) Co.,
Ltd. (collectively ‘‘RZBC’’) and Yixing
Union Biochemical Co., Ltd. (‘‘Yixing
Union’’), submitted surrogate value
comments. On July 20, 2011, the
Department released a Memorandum to
the File, titled ‘‘First Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order
on Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts
from the People’s Republic of China:
Industry-Specific Surrogate Wage Rate
and Surrogate Financial Ratio
Adjustments,’’ dated July 20, 2011
(‘‘Wage Rate Memorandum’’), for use in
these final results. On June 30, 2010,
both RZBC and Yixing Union submitted
surrogate value comments. On August 3,
2011, Petitioners submitted comments
on the industry-specific surrogate wage
rate methodology and offered an
alternative source to value the wage
rate.1 On August 4, 2011, the
Department published a notice in the
Federal Register fully extending the
time limit for the final results of review
by the full 60 days allowed under
section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), to
December 7, 2011.2
1 Petitioners are Archer Daniels Midland
Company, Cargill, Incorporated, and Tate & Lyle
Americas LLC.
2 See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from
the People’s Republic of China: Extension of Time
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
In preparation for verification, the
Department issued supplemental
questionnaires to RZBC and Yixing
Union on August 8, 2011. Yixing Union
submitted its supplemental
questionnaire response, with an
updated factor of production (‘‘FOP’’)
database, on August 23, 2011. RZBC
submitted its supplemental
questionnaire response, with updated
U.S. sales and FOP databases, on August
24, 2011. From August 29, 2011, to
September 2, 2011, and from September
5, 2011, to September 9, 2011, the
Department conducted on-site
verifications of RZBC and Yixing Union,
respectively. On October 12, 2011,
RZBC, Yixing Union, Petitioners, and
the Government of the People’s
Republic of China, Ministry of
Commerce, Bureau of Fair Trade for
Imports and Exports, submitted case
briefs. RZBC, Yixing Union, and
Petitioners submitted rebuttal briefs on
October 18, 2011.
Period of Review
The period of review (‘‘POR’’) is
November 20, 2008, through April 30,
2010.
Scope of the Order
The scope of the order includes all
grades and granulation sizes of citric
acid, sodium citrate, and potassium
citrate in their unblended forms,
whether dry or in solution, and
regardless of packaging type. The scope
also includes blends of citric acid,
sodium citrate, and potassium citrate; as
well as blends with other ingredients,
such as sugar, where the unblended
form(s) of citric acid, sodium citrate,
and potassium citrate constitute 40
percent or more, by weight, of the blend.
The scope of the order also includes all
forms of crude calcium citrate,
including dicalcium citrate
monohydrate, and tricalcium citrate
tetrahydrate, which are intermediate
products in the production of citric
acid, sodium citrate, and potassium
citrate. The scope of the order does not
include calcium citrate that satisfies the
standards set forth in the United States
Pharmacopeia and has been mixed with
a functional excipient, such as dextrose
or starch, where the excipient
constitutes at least 2 percent, by weight,
of the product. The scope of the order
includes the hydrous and anhydrous
forms of citric acid, the dihydrate and
anhydrous forms of sodium citrate,
otherwise known as citric acid sodium
salt, and the monohydrate and
Limit for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 76 FR 47146 (August 4,
2011).
E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM
14DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 240 (Wednesday, December 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77770-77772]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32102]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-201-805]
Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From Mexico: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 10, 2011, the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative
review of the antidumping duty order on certain circular welded non-
alloy steel pipe from Mexico.\1\ This administrative review covers
mandatory respondents Mueller Comercial de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V.
(Mueller), Southland Pipe Nipples Company, Inc. (Southland), Lamina y
Placa Comercial, S.A. de C.V. (Lamina), and Tuberia Nacional, S.A. de
C.V. (TUNA).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From
Mexico: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 76 FR 49437 (August 10, 2011) (Preliminary Results).
\2\ The Department determined that Lamina is the successor-in-
interest to TUNA. See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Changed Circumstances Review: Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy
Steel Pipe From Mexico, 75 FR 82374 (December 30, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We determine that the respondents did not have reviewable sales,
shipments, or entries during the POR.
DATES: Effective Date: December 14, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Flessner or Robert James, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
6312 and (202) 482-0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 10, 2011, the Department published in the Federal
Register the preliminary results of the administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain circular welded non-alloy steel pipe
from Mexico for the period November 1, 2009, to October 31, 2010. See
Preliminary Results.
In response to the Department's invitation to comment on the
preliminary results of this review, Petitioner Wheatland Tube Company
filed a case brief on September 9, 2011. Respondents Lamina and TUNA
jointly filed a rebuttal brief on September 13, 2011.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this order are circular welded non-alloy
steel pipes and tubes, of circular cross-section, not more than 406.4
millimeters (16 inches) in outside diameter, regardless of wall
thickness, surface finish (black, galvanized, or painted), or end
finish (plain end, beveled end, threaded, or threaded and coupled).
These pipes and tubes are generally known as standard pipes and tubes
and are intended for the low pressure conveyance of water, steam,
natural gas, and other liquids and gases in plumbing and heating
systems, air conditioning
[[Page 77771]]
units, automatic sprinkler systems, and other related uses, and
generally meet ASTM A-53 specifications. Standard pipe may also be used
for light load-bearing applications, such as for fence tubing, and as
structural pipe tubing used for framing and support members for
reconstruction or load-bearing purposes in the construction,
shipbuilding, trucking, farm equipment, and related industries.
Unfinished conduit pipe is also included in these orders. All carbon
steel pipes and tubes within the physical description outlined above
are included within the scope of this order, except line pipe, oil
country tubular goods, boiler tubing, mechanical tubing, pipe and tube
hollows for redraws, finished scaffolding, and finished conduit.
Standard pipe that is dual or triple certified/stenciled that enters
the U.S. as line pipe of a kind used for oil or gas pipelines is also
not included in this order.
The merchandise covered by the order and subject to this review are
currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS) at subheadings: 7306.30.10.00, 7306.30.50.25,
7306.30.50.32, 7306.30.50.40, 7306.30.50.55, 7306.30.50.85, and
7306.30.50.90. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope
of these proceedings is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case brief and rebuttal brief are
addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum (Decision Memorandum)
from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary
for Import Administration, dated December 2, 2011, which is hereby
adopted by this notice. A list of the issues raised is attached to this
notice as Appendix I. The Decision Memorandum is a public document and
is on file electronically via Import Administration's Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS).
Access to IA ACCESS is available in the Central Records Unit (CRU),
room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a
complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the Internet at https://www.trade.gov/ia/. The signed Issues
and Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Final Results of Review
Because we have found that the respondents did not have reviewable
sales, shipments, or entries during the POR, there is no change in the
antidumping duties for any of the respondents.
Assessment
The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries, pursuant to section 751(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.212(b). We will issue appraisement instructions directly to CBP to
assess antidumping duties on appropriate entries by applying the
assessment rate to the entered value of the merchandise. Pursuant to 19
CFR 356.8(a), the Department intends to issue assessment instructions
to CBP 41 days after the date of publication of these final results of
review.
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, as
well as a no-shipment query to the ports, 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, 2005), 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 the respondents, and
exported by other parties at the all-others rate. 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
its entirety but, rather, to complete the review with respect to the
respondents, issuing appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final
results of the review. See the ``Assessment Rates'' section of this
notice below.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of these final results for all shipments of the subject
merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or
after the publication date of these final results of administrative
review, consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash
deposit rate for the reviewed companies will be the rates in effect
from the most recently-completed POR; (2) if the exporter is not a firm
covered in this review, but was covered in a previous review or the
original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, the cash deposit
rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the
most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this
review, a prior review, or the original LTFV investigation, but the
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for
the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4)
the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will
continue to be 32.62 percent, the all-others rate established in the
LTFV investigation. See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value: Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From Mexico, 57 FR 42953
(September 17, 1992). These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
[[Page 77772]]
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that
reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern
business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding.
Timely written notification of the 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 notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 2, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix--List of Issues in Decision Memorandum
Comment 1: Allegedly Incorrect Classification of Entry Documents
Comment 2: Verification
[FR Doc. 2011-32102 Filed 12-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
