Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from India, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, the Republic of Turkey, Ukraine, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 45505-45512 [2013-18164]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Notices
Preliminary Determinations by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine,
within 45 days after the date on which
the Petitions were filed, whether there
is a reasonable indication that imports
of OCTG from India and Turkey are
materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, a U.S. industry.26 A
negative ITC determination for any
country will result in the investigation
being terminated with respect to that
country; otherwise, these investigations
will proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Submission of Factual Information
On April 10, 2013, the Department
published Definition of Factual
Information and Time Limits for
Submission of Factual Information:
Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10,
2013), which modified two regulations
related to AD and CVD proceedings: the
definition of factual information (19
CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits
for the submission of factual
information (19 CFR 351.301). The final
rule identifies five categories of factual
information in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21),
which are summarized as follows: (i)
evidence submitted in response to
questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted
in support of allegations; (iii) publicly
available information to value factors
under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure
the adequacy of remuneration under 19
CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed
on the record by the Department; and (v)
evidence other than factual information
described in (i)–(iv). The final rule
requires any party, when submitting
factual information, to specify under
which subsection of 19 CFR
351.102(b)(21) the information is being
submitted and, if the information is
submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct
factual information already on the
record, to provide an explanation
identifying the information already on
the record that the factual information
seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. The
final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301
so that, rather than providing general
time limits, there are specific time limits
based on the type of factual information
being submitted. These modifications
are effective for all proceeding segments
initiated on or after May 10, 2013, and
thus are applicable to these
investigations. Please review the final
rule, available at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/
frn/2013/1304frn/2013–08227.txt, prior
to submitting factual information in
these investigations.
26 See
section 703(a) of the Act.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:00 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual
information in an AD or CVD
proceeding must certify to the accuracy
and completeness of that information.27
Parties are hereby reminded that revised
certification requirements are in effect
for company/government officials, as
well as their representatives, in all
segments of any AD or CVD proceedings
initiated on or after March 14, 2011.28
The formats for the revised certifications
are provided at the end of the Interim
Final Rule. Foreign governments and
their officials may continue to submit
certifications in either the format that
was in use prior to the effective date of
the Interim Final Rule, or in the format
provided in the Interim Final Rule.29
The Department intends to reject factual
information submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with
the revised certification requirements.
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit
applications for disclosure under APO
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On
January 22, 2008, the Department
published Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Documents Submission Procedures;
APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January
22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate
in either investigation should ensure
that they meet the requirements of these
procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of
appearance as discussed at 19 CFR
351.103(d)).
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: July 22, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise covered by the
investigations is certain oil country tubular
goods (‘‘OCTG’’), which are hollow steel
products of circular cross-section, including
oil well casing and tubing, of iron (other than
cast iron) or steel (both carbon and alloy),
whether seamless or welded, regardless of
end finish (e.g., whether or not plain end,
threaded, or threaded and coupled) whether
or not conforming to American Petroleum
Institute (‘‘API’’) or non-API specifications,
section 782(b) of the Act.
Certification of Factual Information for
Import Administration during Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Interim Final
Rule, 76 FR 7491 (February 10, 2011) (Interim Final
Rule), amending 19 CFR 351.303(g)(1) and (2).
29 See Certification of Factual Information to
Import Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Supplemental
Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 54697 (September 2,
2011).
PO 00000
27 See
28 See
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45505
whether finished (including limited service
OCTG products) or unfinished (including
green tubes and limited service OCTG
products), whether or not thread protectors
are attached. The scope of the investigations
also covers OCTG coupling stock.
Excluded from the scope of the
investigations are: casing or tubing
containing 10.5 percent or more by weight of
chromium; drill pipe; unattached couplings;
and unattached thread protectors.
The merchandise subject to the
investigations is currently classified in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (‘‘HTSUS’’) under item numbers:
7304.29.10.10, 7304.29.10.20, 7304.29.10.30,
7304.29.10.40, 7304.29.10.50, 7304.29.10.60,
7304.29.10.80, 7304.29.20.10, 7304.29.20.20,
7304.29.20.30, 7304.29.20.40, 7304.29.20.50,
7304.29.20.60, 7304.29.20.80, 7304.29.31.10,
7304.29.31.20, 7304.29.31.30, 7304.29.31.40,
7304.29.31.50, 7304.29.31.60, 7304.29.31.80,
7304.29.41.10, 7304.29.41.20, 7304.29.41.30,
7304.29.41.40, 7304.29.41.50, 7304.29.41.60,
7304.29.41.80, 7304.29.50.15, 7304.29.50.30,
7304.29.50.45, 7304.29.50.60, 7304.29.50.75,
7304.29.61.15, 7304.29.61.30, 7304.29.61.45,
7304.29.61.60, 7304.29.61.75, 7305.20.20.00,
7305.20.40.00, 7305.20.60.00, 7305.20.80.00,
7306.29.10.30, 7306.29.10.90, 7306.29.20.00,
7306.29.31.00, 7306.29.41.00, 7306.29.60.10,
7306.29.60.50, 7306.29.81.10, and
7306.29.81.50.
The merchandise subject to the
investigations may also enter under the
following HTSUS item numbers:
7304.39.00.24, 7304.39.00.28, 7304.39.00.32,
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,
7304.39.00.76, 7304.39.00.80, 7304.59.60.00,
7304.59.80.15, 7304.59.80.20, 7304.59.80.25,
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, 7304.59.80.70,
7304.59.80.80, 7305.31.40.00, 7305.31.60.90,
7306.30.50.55, 7306.30.50.90, 7306.50.50.50,
and 7306.50.50.70.
The HTSUS subheadings above are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes only. The written description of the
scope of the investigations is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2013–18165 Filed 7–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–533–857, A–580–870, A–565–802, A–517–
804, A–583–850, A–549–832, A–489–816, A–
823–815, A–552–817]
Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods
from India, the Republic of Korea, the
Republic of the Philippines, Saudi
Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, the Republic
of Turkey, Ukraine, and the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigations
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
45506
DATES:
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Notices
Effective Date: July 29, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Emily Halle at (202) 482–0176 (India);
Victoria Cho at (202) 482–5075 (Korea);
Dmitry Vladimirov at (202) 482–0665
(the Philippines); Jason Rhoads at (202)
482–0123 (Saudi Arabia); Thomas
Schauer at (202) 482–0410 (Taiwan);
Yasmin Nair at (202) 482–3813
(Thailand); Catherine Cartsos at (202)
482–1757 (Turkey); David Lindgren at
(202) 482–3870 (Ukraine); or Fred Baker
at (202) 482–2924 (Vietnam), AD/CVD
Operations, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
The Petitions
On July 2, 2013, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) received
antidumping duty (AD) petitions
concerning imports of certain oil
country tubular goods (OCTG) from
India, the Republic of Korea (Korea), the
Republic of the Philippines (the
Philippines), Saudi Arabia, Taiwan,
Thailand, the Republic of Turkey
(Turkey), Ukraine, and the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam) filed in
proper form on behalf of United States
Steel Corporation, Vallourec Star L.P.,
TMK IPSCO, Energex (division of JMC
Steel Group), Northwest Pipe Company,
Tejas Tubular Products, Welded Tube
USA Inc., Boomerang Tube LLC, and
Maverick Tube Corporation
(collectively, the petitioners). The AD
petitions were accompanied by two
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions.1
The petitioners are domestic producers
of OCTG. On July 8, 2013, the
Department requested additional
information and clarification of certain
areas of the petitions.2 The petitioners
1 See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping
and Countervailing Duties: Certain Oil Country
Tubular Goods from India, the Republic of Korea,
the Republic of the Philippines, Saudi Arabia,
Taiwan, Thailand, the Republic of Turkey, Ukraine,
and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, dated July
2, 2013 (petitions). Neither Maverick Tube
Corporation nor Vallourec Star L.P. is participating
in the petition against Saudi Arabia.
2 See letter from the Department to the petitioners
entitled ‘‘Re: Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports
of Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from India
and the Republic of Turkey and Antidumping
Duties on Imports of Certain Oil Country Tubular
Goods from the Republic of Korea, the Republic of
the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand,
Ukraine, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:
Supplemental Questions’’ dated July 8, 2013, and
letters from the Department to the petitioners
entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Oil Country
Tubular Goods from {country}: Supplemental
Questions’’ on each of the country-specific records
dated July 8, 2013.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:00 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
filed responses to these requests on July
12, 2013, and a further response with
respect to Korea on July 15, 2013.3
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), the petitioners allege that imports
of OCTG from India, Korea, the
Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan,
Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and Vietnam
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value
within the meaning of section 731 of the
Act and that such imports are materially
injuring, or threatening material injury
to, an industry in the United States.
Also, consistent with section 732(b)(1)
of the Act, the petitions are
accompanied by information reasonably
available to the petitioners supporting
their allegations.
The Department finds that the
petitioners filed these petitions on
behalf of the domestic industry because
the petitioners are interested parties as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act.
The Department also finds that the
petitioners have demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the
initiation of the AD investigations that
the petitioners are requesting. See the
‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions’’ section below.
Periods of Investigations
Because the petitions were filed on
July 2, 2013, the period of investigation
(POI) for the Vietnam investigation is
January 1, 2013, through June 30, 2013.
The POI for the India, Korea, the
Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan,
Thailand, Turkey, and Ukraine
investigations is July 1, 2012, through
June 30, 2013.4
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these
investigations is OCTG from India,
Korea, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia,
Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and
Vietnam. For a full description of the
scope of the investigations, see the
‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ in
Appendix I of this notice.
Comments on Scope of Investigations
During our review of the petitions, the
Department issued questions to, and
3 See Supplement to all Petitions dated July 12,
2013 (General Issues Supplement), Supplement to
the India Petition dated July 12, 2013, Supplements
to the Korea Petition dated July 12, 2013, and July
15, 2013, Supplement to the Philippines Petition
dated July 12, 2013, Supplement to the Saudi
Arabia Petition dated July 12, 2013, Supplement to
the Taiwan Petition dated July 12, 2013,
Supplement to the Thailand Petition dated July 12,
2013, Supplement to the Turkey Petition dated July
12, 2013, Supplement to the Ukraine Petition dated
July 12, 2013, and Supplement to the Vietnam
Petition, dated July 12, 2013.
4 See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
received responses from, the petitioners
pertaining to the proposed scope to
ensure that the scope language in the
petitions would be an accurate
reflection of the products for which the
domestic industry is seeking relief. As
discussed in the preamble to the
regulations,5 we are setting aside a
period for interested parties to raise
issues regarding product coverage. The
Department encourages all interested
parties to submit such comments by
August 12, 2013, 5:00 p.m. Eastern
Time.6 All comments must be filed on
the records of the India, Korea, the
Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan,
Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and Vietnam
AD investigations as well as the
concurrent India and Turkey CVD
investigations.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department
must be filed electronically using
Import Administration’s Antidumping
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (IA
ACCESS).7 An electronically filed
document must be received successfully
in its entirety by the time and date
noted above. Documents excepted from
the electronic submission requirements
must be filed manually (i.e., in paper
form) with Import Administration’s
APO/Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street
and Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped
with the date and time of receipt by the
deadline noted above.
Comments on Product Characteristics
for Antidumping Duty Questionnaires
The Department requests comments
from interested parties regarding the
appropriate physical characteristics of
OCTG to be reported in response to the
Department’s antidumping duty
questionnaires. This information will be
used to identify the key physical
characteristics of the subject
merchandise in order to report the
relevant factors and costs of production
accurately as well as to develop
5 Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties;
Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
6 Twenty calendar days from the signature date of
this notice is August 11, 2013, which is a Sunday.
Accordingly, we are setting the deadline on the next
business day.
7 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures;
Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR
39263 (July 6, 2011) for details of the Department’s
electronic filing requirements, which went into
effect on August 5, 2011. Information on help using
IA ACCESS can be found at https://
iaaccess.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can
be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/
Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20
Procedures.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Notices
appropriate product-comparison
criteria.
Interested parties may provide any
information or comments that they feel
are relevant to the development of an
accurate list of physical characteristics.
Specifically, they may provide
comments as to which characteristics
are appropriate to use as: (1) general
product characteristics and (2) productcomparison criteria. We note that it is
not always appropriate to use all
product characteristics as productcomparison criteria. We base productcomparison criteria on meaningful
commercial differences among products.
In other words, while there may be
some physical product characteristics
utilized by manufacturers to describe
OCTG, it may be that only a select few
product characteristics take into account
commercially meaningful physical
characteristics. In addition, interested
parties may comment on the order in
which the physical characteristics
should be used in matching products.
Generally, the Department attempts to
list the most important physical
characteristics first and the least
important characteristics last.
In order to consider the suggestions of
interested parties in developing and
issuing the AD questionnaires, we must
receive comments on product
characteristics by August 5, 2013.
Rebuttal comments must be received by
August 12, 2013. All comments and
submissions to the Department must be
filed electronically using IA ACCESS, as
referenced above.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires
that a petition be filed on behalf of the
domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A)
of the Act provides that a petition meets
this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the
petition account for: (i) at least 25
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product; and (ii) more
than 50 percent of the production of the
domestic like product produced by that
portion of the industry expressing
support for, or opposition to, the
petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D)
of the Act provides that, if the petition
does not establish support of domestic
producers or workers accounting for
more than 50 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product,
the Department shall: (i) poll the
industry or rely on other information in
order to determine if there is support for
the petition, as required by
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine
industry support using a statistically
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:00 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
valid sampling method to poll the
industry.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines
the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a
whole of a domestic like product. Thus,
to determine whether a petition has the
requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to
producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The U.S.
International Trade Commission (ITC),
which is responsible for determining
whether ‘‘the domestic industry’’ has
been injured, must also determine what
constitutes a domestic like product in
order to define the industry. While both
the Department and the ITC must apply
the same statutory definition regarding
the domestic like product,8 they do so
for different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In
addition, the Department’s
determination is subject to limitations of
time and information. Although this
may result in different definitions of the
like product, such differences do not
render the decision of either agency
contrary to law.9
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the
domestic like product as ‘‘a product
which is like, or in the absence of like,
most similar in characteristics and uses
with, the article subject to an
investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the
reference point from which the
domestic like product analysis begins is
‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’
(i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to
be investigated, which normally will be
the scope as defined in the petition).
With regard to the domestic like
product, the petitioners do not offer a
definition of domestic like product
distinct from the scope of the
investigations. Based on our analysis of
the information submitted on the
record, we have determined that OCTG,
as defined in the scope of the
investigations, constitute a single
domestic like product and we have
analyzed industry support in terms of
that domestic like product.10
section 771(10) of the Act
USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp.
2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd.
v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988),
aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
10 See Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods from India
(India AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II;
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods from the
Republic of Korea (Korea AD Initiation Checklist),
at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods
from the Republic of the Philippines (the
Philippines AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment
II; Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods from Saudi
Arabia (Saudi Arabia AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation
PO 00000
8 See
9 See
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45507
In determining whether the
petitioners have standing under section
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered
the industry support data contained in
the petitions with reference to the
domestic like product as defined in the
‘‘Scope of Investigations’’ section above.
To establish industry support, the
petitioners provided their production of
the domestic like product in 2012, and
compared this to the estimated total
production of the domestic like product
for the entire domestic industry.11 The
petitioners estimated total 2012
production of the domestic like product
using domestic shipment data for the
OCTG industry adjusted by the ratio of
the petitioners’ production to domestic
shipments.12 Maverick Tube
Corporation and Vallourec Star L.P. are
not the petitioners with respect to the
petition for the imposition of ADs on
imports of OCTG from Saudi Arabia and
both companies state that they take no
position with regard to the petition on
imports from Saudi Arabia;13 therefore,
the petitioners provided a separate
industry support calculation for the
Saudi Arabia petition.14
On July 10, 2013, we received a
submission from EVRAZ Rocky
Mountain Steel (Evraz), a domestic
producer of OCTG. In the submission,
Evraz states that it supports the AD and
CVD petitions on OCTG from India, the
Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Korea,
Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and
Vietnam. In addition, Evraz provided its
2012 production of the domestic like
product.15
We have relied upon data the
petitioners and Evraz provided for
Initiation Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods
from Taiwan (Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods
from Thailand (Thailand AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods
from the Republic of Turkey (Turkey AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Oil Country
Tubular Goods from Ukraine (Ukraine AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Oil Country
Tubular Goods from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam (Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II. These checklists are dated
concurrently with this notice and on file
electronically via IA ACCESS. Access to documents
filed via IA ACCESS is also available in the Central
Records Unit (CRU), Room 7046 of the main
Department of Commerce building.
11 See Volume I of the petitions, at 3–4 and
Exhibit I–3.
12 Id.
13 Id. at 1.
14 See General Issues Supplement, at 7 and
Exhibit Supp. I–65.
15 See Letter from EVRAZ Rocky Mountain Steel,
dated July 10, 2013, at 1–2.
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
45508
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Notices
purposes of measuring industry
support.16
Based on information provided in the
petitions, supplemental submissions,
and other information readily available
to the Department, we determine that
the petitioners have met the statutory
criteria for industry support under
section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act for all
of the petitions because the domestic
producers (or workers) who support
each of the petitions account for at least
25 percent of the total production of the
domestic like product.17 Based on
information provided in the petitions
and other submissions, the domestic
producers (or workers) have met the
statutory criteria for industry support
under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act
for all of the petitions because the
domestic producers (or workers) who
support each of the petitions account for
more than 50 percent of the production
of the domestic like product produced
by that portion of the industry
expressing support for, or opposition to,
the petitions. Accordingly, the
Department determines that the
petitions were filed on behalf of the
domestic industry within the meaning
of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.18
The Department finds that the
petitioners filed the petitions on behalf
of the domestic industry because they
are interested parties as defined in
section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they
have demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the antidumping
duty investigations that they are
requesting the Department initiate.19
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
The petitioners allege that the U.S.
industry producing the domestic like
product is being materially injured, or is
threatened with material injury, by
reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at less than normal
value (NV). In addition, the petitioners
allege that subject imports exceed the
negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.20
The petitioners contend that the
industry’s injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share;
underselling and price depression or
suppression; lost sales and revenues;
16 See India AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, the Philippines AD Initiation
Checklist, Saudi Arabia AD Initiation Checklist,
Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, Thailand AD
Initiation Checklist, Turkey AD Initiation Checklist,
Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist, and Vietnam AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
17 Id.
18 Id.
19 Id.
20 See General Issues Supplement, at 7–8 and
Exhibit Supp. I–66.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:00 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
stunted production, shipments, and
capacity utilization; hindered growth in
employment-related variables; and
decline in financial performance.21 We
have assessed the allegations and
supporting evidence regarding material
injury, threat of material injury, and
causation, and we have determined that
these allegations are properly supported
by adequate evidence and meet the
statutory requirements for initiation.22
Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value
The following is a description of the
allegations of sales at less than fair value
upon which the Department based its
decision to initiate AD investigations of
imports of OCTG from India, Korea, the
Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan,
Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and
Vietnam. The sources of data for the
deductions and adjustments relating to
U.S. price and NV are discussed in
greater detail in the country-specific
initiation checklists.
Export Price
For India, the petitioners based U.S.
price on price quotes and information
provided by U.S. trading companies,
customers, and foreign entities for
subject merchandise sold by trading
companies to the United States
produced in India by three Indian
producers of OCTG.23
For Korea, the Philippines, Taiwan,
Turkey, and Vietnam, the petitioners
based U.S. prices on price quotes from
sales offers of U.S. distributors/trading
companies for subject merchandise in
the United States produced in and
exported from the subject country by a
producer of OCTG in that country.24
For Saudi Arabia, the petitioners
based U.S. price on price information
provided by U.S. sales representatives
for subject merchandise sold to the
United States produced in and exported
from Saudi Arabia by a Saudi Arabian
producer of OCTG.25
For Thailand and Ukraine, because
they were unable to obtain price quotes
for subject merchandise sold to the
United States produced in and exported
21 See Volume I of the petitions, at 17–64 and
Exhibits I–6 and I–8 through I–54; see also General
Issues Supplement, at 8–9.
22 See India AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, the Philippines AD Initiation
Checklist, Saudi Arabia AD Initiation Checklist,
Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, Thailand AD
Initiation Checklist, Turkey AD Initiation Checklist,
Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist, and Vietnam AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III.
23 See India AD Initiation Checklist.
24 See Korea AD Initiation Checklist, the
Philippines AD Initiation Checklist, Taiwan AD
Initiation Checklist, Turkey AD Initiation Checklist,
and Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
25 See Saudi Arabia AD Initiation Checklist.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
from these countries, the petitioners
based U.S. price on average unit value
data for products classified under the
appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule
of the United States (HTSUS) numbers
for subject merchandise obtained from
the U.S. Census Bureau for subject
merchandise imported from these
countries into the United States during
the POI.26
For India, Korea, the Philippines,
Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Turkey, Ukraine,
and Vietnam, the petitioners made
deductions for movement and other
expenses consistent with the sales and
delivery terms.27 For Korea, the
petitioners additionally adjusted the
quoted U.S. prices as necessary to
account for further manufacturing of the
OCTG in the United States.28 The
petitioners made no other adjustments
to U.S. price.
Normal Value
For the Philippines and Taiwan, since
home market prices were not reasonably
available, the petitioners based NV on
reasonably available third-country
prices of the foreign like product
produced and offered for sale in Canada
by a producer of OCTG in the subject
country.29
For India, the petitioners based NV on
price information obtained through
market research for the foreign like
product produced and sold in India by
three Indian producers of OCTG.30
For Saudi Arabia, the petitioners
based NV on home market price quotes
for the foreign like product produced
and sold in Saudi Arabia by a Saudi
Arabian producer of OCTG.31
For Thailand, since home market
prices were not reasonably available, the
petitioners based NV on export statistics
from Thailand to Myanmar, the largest
export market for foreign like product
from Thailand after the United States,
from the Global Trade Atlas. 32
For Ukraine, the petitioners based NV
on price information provided by
26 See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist and
Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist.
27 See India AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, the Philippines AD Initiation
Checklist, Saudi Arabia AD Initiation Checklist,
Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, Turkey AD
Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD Initiation
Checklist, and Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
28 See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
29 Because the petitioners alleged sales below cost
(see ‘‘Sales Below Cost Allegations’’ section below),
the petitioners calculated margins for these
countries using constructed value (CV) (see
‘‘Normal Value Based on Constructed Value’’
section, below). See also the Philippines AD
Initiation Checklist and Taiwan AD Initiation
Checklist.
30 See India AD Initiation Checklist.
31 See Saudi Arabia AD Initiation Checklist.
32 See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
market research for the foreign like
product produced and sold in Ukraine
by a Ukrainian producer of OCTG.33
For Korea and Turkey, the petitioners
were unable to obtain home-market or
third-country prices; accordingly, the
petitioners based NV on CV.34
For India, the Philippines, and
Taiwan, the petitioners made
deductions for movement expenses
consistent with the terms of delivery.35
For India, the petitioners made a
deduction for other expenses as well.36
The petitioners made no adjustments to
NV for Korea, Saudi Arabia, Thailand,
Turkey, and Ukraine.
With respect to Vietnam, the
petitioners state that the Department has
long treated Vietnam as a non-market
economy (NME) country.37 In
accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of
the Act, the presumption of NME status
remains in effect until revoked by the
Department. The presumption of NME
status for Vietnam has not been revoked
by the Department and, therefore,
remains in effect for purposes of the
initiation of this investigation.
Accordingly, the NV of the product is
appropriately based on factors of
production (FOPs) valued in a surrogate
market economy country in accordance
with section 773(c) of the Act. In the
course of this investigation, all parties,
including the public, will have the
opportunity to provide relevant
information related to the issues of
Vietnam’s NME status and the granting
of separate rates to individual exporters.
The petitioners claim that India is an
appropriate surrogate country because it
is a market economy that is at a level of
economic development comparable to
that of Vietnam, it is a significant
producer of the merchandise under
consideration, and the data for valuing
FOPs are both available and reliable.38
Based on the information provided by
the petitioners, we believe it is
appropriate to use India as a surrogate
country for initiation purposes.
Interested parties will have the
opportunity to submit comments
regarding surrogate country selection
and will be provided an opportunity to
submit publicly available information to
value FOPs within 40 days before the
33 See
Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist.
Korea AD Initiation Checklist and Turkey
AD Initiation Checklist.
35 See India AD Initiation Checklist, the
Philippines AD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan AD
Initiation Checklist.
36 See India AD Initiation Checklist.
37 See Volume VIII of the petition, at 2.
38 Id. at 3–5.
34 See
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:00 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
scheduled date of the preliminary
determination.39
Factors of Production
The petitioners based the FOPs usage
for materials, labor and energy on the
consumption rates of a U.S. producer of
tubular products. The petitioners assert
that the experience of the U.S. producer
is appropriate for comparison to
producers in Vietnam because it is a
comparable producer of welded
OCTG.40
Valuation of Raw Materials
The petitioners valued the FOPs for
hot-rolled coil (i.e., the primary raw
material used to produce subject
merchandise) using publicly available
Indian domestic price data published by
Steelworld in Indian rupees for the
period from October 2012 through
March 2013, the most recent six-month
period for which data were available.41
The petitioners made a deduction for
the value of scrap recovered during the
production process based on the average
import value of other ferrous waste and
scrap using HTSUS subheadings
7204.41 and 7204.49 as published by
Global Trade Atlas for the period from
October 2012 through March 2013.42
The petitioners excluded all import
values from countries previously
determined by the Department to
maintain broadly available, nonindustry-specific export subsidies and
from countries previously determined
by the Department to be NME countries.
In addition, in accordance with the
Department’s practice, the average
import value excludes imports that were
labeled as originating from an
unidentified country.
Valuation of Labor
The petitioners calculated labor using
a 2005 industry-specific wage rate for
India from the Yearbook of Labor
Statistics, a labor database compiled by
the International Labor Organization.
The petitioners adjusted this wage rate
for inflation using the Indian Consumer
Price Index as published by the
International Monetary Fund.43
Valuation of Energy
The petitioners valued electricity
using the same rate used by the
Department in Circular Welded Pipe
39 See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i). Note that this is
the revised regulation published on April 1, 2013.
See https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR–2013title19-vol3/html/CFR–2013-title19-vol3.htm.
40 See Volume VIII of the petition at exhibit VIII–
14, at 1.
41 Id. at 4.
42 Id. at exhibit VIII–14, at 5.
43 Id. at exhibit VIII–14, at 6.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45509
from Vietnam, i.e., a 2008 unit cost for
electricity in India based on data from
the Central Electricity Authority of
India.44 Similar to Circular Welded Pipe
from Vietnam, the petitioners did not
adjust these data for inflation as they
became effective on a variety of different
dates.45
Valuation of Factory Overhead, Selling,
General and Administrative Expenses,
and Profit
The petitioners calculated surrogate
financial ratios (i.e., manufacturing
overhead, selling, general and
administrative (SG&A) expenses, and
profit) using the audited financial
statements of Maharastra Seamless
Limited and Ratnamani Metals & Tubes
Ltd., two Indian producers of
comparable merchandise (i.e., welded
OCTG and other tubular products), for
the fiscal year ending March 31, 2012.46
Sales Below Cost Allegations
For India, the Philippines, and
Taiwan, the petitioners provided
information demonstrating reasonable
grounds to believe or suspect that sales
of OCTG in the Indian market and, for
the Philippines and Taiwan, sales of
OCTG in the Canadian market, were
made at prices below the fully-absorbed
cost of production (COP), within the
meaning of section 773(b) of the Act,
and requested that the Department
conduct a country-wide sales-belowcost investigation. The Statement of
Administrative Action (SAA), submitted
to the Congress in connection with the
interpretation and application of the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act, states
that an allegation of sales below COP
need not be specific to individual
exporters or producers.47 The SAA
states that ‘‘Commerce will consider
allegations of below-cost sales in the
aggregate for a foreign country, just as
Commerce currently considers
allegations of sales at less than fair value
on a country-wide basis for purposes of
initiating an antidumping
investigation.’’48
Further, the SAA provides that
section 773(b)(2)(A) of the Act retains
the requirement that the Department
have ‘‘reasonable grounds to believe or
suspect’’ that below-cost sales have
occurred before initiating such an
investigation. Reasonable grounds exist
when an interested party provides
specific factual information on costs and
44 Id. at exhibit VIII–14, at 7, and Circular Welded
Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe from Vietnam, 77 FR
64483 (October 22, 2012).
45 Id.
46 Id. at exhibit VIII–14, at 8
47 See SAA, H.R. Doc. No. 103–316 at 833 (1994).
48 Id.
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
45510
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Notices
prices, observed or constructed,
indicating that sales in the foreign
market in question are at below-cost
prices.49
Cost of Production
Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the
Act, COP consists of the cost of
manufacturing (COM); SG&A expenses;
financial expenses; and packing
expenses. The petitioners calculated
COM based on the petitioners’
experience adjusted for known
differences between the U.S. and the
industries of the respective country (i.e.,
India, the Philippines, and Taiwan),
during the proposed POI.50 Using
publicly-available data to account for
price differences, the petitioners
multiplied the surrogate usage
quantities by the surrogate value of the
inputs used to manufacture OCTG.
To determine factory overhead,
SG&A, and financial expense rates, the
petitioners relied on financial
statements of producers of comparable
merchandise operating in the respective
foreign country.51
Based upon a comparison of the
prices of the foreign like product in the
home market or third-country to the
calculated COP of the most comparable
product, we find reasonable grounds to
believe or suspect that sales of the
foreign like products were made below
the COP, within the meaning of section
773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly,
the Department is initiating countrywide cost investigations on sales of
OCTG from India in India and on sales
of OCTG from the Philippines and
Taiwan to Canada.
Normal Value Based on Constructed
Value
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
For India, the Philippines and
Taiwan, because they alleged sales
below cost, pursuant to sections
773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the Act,
the petitioners calculated NV based on
CV. The petitioners calculated CV using
the same average COM, SG&A, financial
expense, and packing figures used to
compute the COPs. The petitioners
relied on the same financial statements
used as the basis for the factory
overhead, SG&A, and financial expense
rates to calculate the profit rates.52
49 Id.
50 See India AD Initiation Checklist, the
Philippines AD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan AD
Initiation Checklist.
51 Id.
52 See India AD Initiation Checklist, the
Philippines AD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan AD
Initiation Checklist.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:00 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
Korea
The petitioners based NV on CV, as
neither a home market nor a third
country price was reasonably available.
Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV
consists of the COM; SG&A expenses;
financial expenses; packing expenses;
and profit. The petitioners calculated
COM (except depreciation) based on the
petitioners’ experience adjusted for
known differences between the U.S. and
Korean industries, during the proposed
POI, multiplied by the value of the
inputs used to manufacture OCTG in
Korea using publicly-available data. 53
To determine depreciation, SG&A,
and financial expense rates, the
petitioners relied on the financial
statements of a Korean producer of
comparable merchandise. The
petitioners relied on the same financial
statements used as the basis for the
factory overhead, SG&A, and financial
expense rates to calculate the profit
rate.54
Turkey
The petitioners based NV on CV, as
neither a home market nor a third
country price was reasonably available.
Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV
consists of the COM; SG&A expenses;
financial expenses; packing expenses;
and profit. The petitioners calculated
COM (except factory overhead) and
packing expenses based on the
petitioners’ experience adjusted for
known differences between the U.S. and
Turkish industries, during the proposed
POI, multiplied by the value of the
inputs used to manufacture OCTG in
Turkey using publicly-available data. 55
To determine factory overhead,
SG&A, and financial expense rates, the
petitioners relied on the fiscal year
ending 2012 financial statements of a
Turkish producer of comparable
merchandise. The petitioners relied on
the same fiscal year ending 2012
financial statements used as the basis
for the factory overhead, SG&A, and
financial expense rates to calculate the
profit rate.56
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the
petitioners, there is reason to believe
that imports of OCTG from India, Korea,
the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan,
Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and Vietnam
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value.
Based on comparisons of export price
(EP) to NV in accordance with section
PO 00000
53 See
Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
54 Id.
55 See
Turkey AD Initiation Checklist.
56 Id.
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
773(a)(1) of the Act, the estimated
dumping margins for OCTG from: (1)
India range from 12.67 percent to 239.64
percent;57 (2) Korea range from 66.19
percent to 158.53 percent;58 (3) the
Philippines range from 46.04 percent to
56.38 percent;59 (4) Saudi Arabia is
53.34 percent;60 (5) Taiwan range from
68.44 percent to 70.98 percent;61 (6)
Thailand is 118.32 percent;62 (7) Turkey
range from 44.52 percent to 47.20
percent;63 and (8) Ukraine range from
25.75 percent to 30.76 percent.64 Based
on comparisons of EP to NV in
accordance with section 773(c) of the
Act, the estimated dumping margins for
OCTG from Vietnam range from 103.43
percent to 111.47 percent.65
Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Investigations
Based upon the examination of the
AD petitions on OCTG from India,
Korea, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia,
Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and
Vietnam, we find that the petitions meet
the requirements of section 732 of the
Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD
investigations to determine whether
imports of OCTG from India, Korea, the
Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan,
Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and Vietnam
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value. In
accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1),
unless postponed, we will make our
preliminary determinations no later
than 140 days after the date of this
initiation.
Respondent Selection
The petitioners name 48 companies as
producers/exporters of OCTG from
India, ten companies as producers/
exporters of OCTG from Korea, one
company as a producer/exporter of
OCTG from the Philippines, 13
companies as producers/exporters of
OCTG from Saudi Arabia, five
companies as producers/exporters of
OCTG from Taiwan, three companies as
producers/exporters of OCTG from
Thailand, five companies as producers/
exporters of OCTG from Turkey, three
companies as producers/exporters of
OCTG from Ukraine, and eight
companies as producers/exporters of
OCTG from Vietnam.66
57 See
India AD Initiation Checklist.
Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
59 See the Philippines AD Initiation Checklist.
60 See Saudi Arabia AD Initiation Checklist.
61 See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
62 See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
63 See Turkey AD Initiation Checklist.
64 See Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist.
65 See Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
66 See the petitions at Volume I, Exhibit I–5.
58 See
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Notices
Following standard practice in AD
investigations involving market
economy countries, in the event the
Department determines that the number
of known exporters or producers for any
of these investigations is large, the
Department may select respondents
based on U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of
OCTG from the relevant countries. We
intend to release the CBP data under
Administrative Protective Order (APO)
to all parties with access to information
protected by APO within five days of
publication of this Federal Register
notice.
We intend to make our decision
regarding respondent selection within
20 days of publication of this notice.
The Department invites comments
regarding the CBP data and respondent
selection within seven days of
publication of this Federal Register
notice for India, Korea, the Philippines,
Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand,
Turkey, and Ukraine.67
With respect to Vietnam, the
petitioners have identified eight
potential respondents. In accordance
with our standard practice for
respondent selection for NME countries,
we intend to issue quantity and value
questionnaires to each potential
respondent and base respondent
selection on the responses received. In
addition, the Department will post the
quantity and value questionnaire along
with the filing instructions on the
Import Administration Web site (https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-andnews.html). Exporters and producers of
OCTG from Vietnam that do not receive
quantity and value questionnaires via
mail may still submit a quantity and
value response and can obtain a copy
from the Import Administration Web
site. The quantity and value
questionnaire must be submitted by all
Vietnamese exporters/producers no later
than August 12, 2013.68 All quantity
and value questionnaires must be filed
electronically using IA ACCESS.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate rate status
in an NME investigation, exporters and
producers must submit a separate rate
status application.69 The specific
67 See Bottom Mount Combination RefrigeratorFreezers From the Republic of Korea and Mexico:
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 76
FR 23281, 23285 (April 26, 2011).
68 As noted above, twenty calendar days from the
signature date of this notice is August 11, 2013,
which is a Sunday. Accordingly, we are setting the
deadline on the next business day.
69 See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates
Practice and Application of Combination Rates in
Antidumping Investigation involving Non-Market
Economy Countries (April 5, 2005) (‘‘Separate Rates
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:00 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
requirements for submitting the separate
rate application in the Vietnam
investigation are outlined in detail in
the application itself, which will be
available on the Department’s Web site
at https://trade.gov/ia/ia-highlights-andnews.html on the date of publication of
this initiation notice in the Federal
Register. The separate rate application
will be due 60 days after publication of
this initiation notice. For exporters and
producers who submit a separate rate
status application and have been
selected as mandatory respondents,
these exporters and producers will no
longer be eligible for consideration for
separate rate status unless they respond
to all parts of the questionnaire as
mandatory respondents. The
Department requires that Vietnam
respondents submit a response to both
the quantity and value questionnaire
and the separate rate application by
their respective deadlines in order to
receive consideration for separate rate
status.
Use of Combination Rates
The Department will calculate
combination rates for certain
respondents that are eligible for a
separate rate in an NME investigation.
The Separate Rates and Combination
Rates Bulletin states:
{w}hile continuing the practice of assigning
separate rates only to exporters, all separate
rates that the Department will now assign in
its NME Investigation 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.70
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section
732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version
of the petitions have been provided to
the Governments of India, Korea, the
Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan,
and Combination Rates Bulletin’’), available on the
Department’s Web site at https://trade.gov/ia/policy/
bull05–1.pdf.
70 See Separate Rates and Combination Rates
Bulletin at 6 (emphasis added).
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45511
Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and Vietnam
via IA ACCESS. To the extent
practicable, we will attempt to provide
a copy of the public version of the
petitions to each exporter named in the
petitions, as provided under 19 CFR
351.203(c)(2).
Meeting With the Government of Korea
Pursuant to a request by the
Government of Korea, on July 17, 2013,
Department officials met with Korean
Government officials to discuss that
government’s inquiry regarding the
status of the Department’s consideration
of the petition and industry support, as
provided under section 732(b)(3)(B) of
the Act.
ITC Notification
We have notified the ITC of our
initiation, as required by section 732(d)
of the Act.
Preliminary Determinations by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine
no later than August 16, 2013, whether
there is a reasonable indication that
imports of OCTG from India, Korea, the
Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan,
Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and Vietnam
are materially injuring or threatening
material injury to a U.S. industry. A
negative ITC determination for any
country will result in the investigation
being terminated with respect to that
country; otherwise, these investigations
will proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
Submission of Factual Information
On April 10, 2013, the Department
published Definition of Factual
Information and Time Limits for
Submission of Factual Information:
Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10,
2013), which modified two regulations
related to AD and CVD proceedings: the
definition of factual information (19
CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits
for the submission of factual
information (19 CFR 351.301). The final
rule identifies five categories of factual
information in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21),
which are summarized as follows: (i)
Evidence submitted in response to
questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted
in support of allegations; (iii) publicly
available information to value factors
under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure
the adequacy of remuneration under 19
CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed
on the record by the Department; and (v)
evidence other than factual information
described in (i)–(iv). The final rule
requires any party, when submitting
factual information, to specify under
which subsection of 19 CFR
351.102(b)(21) the information is being
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
45512
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Notices
submitted and, if the information is
submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct
factual information already on the
record, to provide an explanation
identifying the information already on
the record that the factual information
seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. The
final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301
so that, rather than providing general
time limits, there are specific time limits
based on the type of factual information
being submitted. These modifications
are effective for all proceeding segments
initiated on or after May 10, 2013, and
thus are applicable to these
investigations. Please review the final
rule, available at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/
frn/2013/1304frn/2013–08227.txt, prior
to submitting factual information in
these investigations.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual
information in an AD or CVD
proceeding must certify to the accuracy
and completeness of that information.71
Parties are hereby reminded that revised
certification requirements are in effect
for company/government officials, as
well as their representatives, in all
segments of any AD or CVD proceedings
initiated on or after March 14, 2011.72
The formats for the revised certifications
are provided at the end of the Interim
Final Rule. Foreign governments and
their officials may continue to submit
certifications in either the format that
was in use prior to the effective date of
the Interim Final Rule, or in the format
provided in the Interim Final Rule.73
The Department intends to reject factual
information submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with
the revised certification requirements.
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit
applications for disclosure under APO
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On
January 22, 2008, the Department
published Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Documents Submission Procedures;
APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January
22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate
in these investigations should ensure
that they meet the requirements of these
procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
71 See
section 782(b) of the Act.
Certification of Factual Information for
Import Administration during Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Interim Final
Rule, 76 FR 7491 (February 10, 2011) (Interim Final
Rule), amending 19 CFR 351.303(g)(1) and (2).
73 See Certification of Factual Information to
Import Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Supplemental
Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 54697 (September 2,
2011).
72 See
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:00 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
appearance as discussed at 19 CFR
351.103(d)).
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act.
purposes only. The written description of the
scope of the investigations is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2013–18164 Filed 7–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Dated: July 22, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Appendix I
[A–533–824, A–583–837]
Scope of the Investigations
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film from
India and Taiwan: Extension of Time
Limits for Preliminary and Final
Results of the Second Antidumping
Duty Sunset Reviews
International Trade Administration
The merchandise covered by the
investigations is certain oil country tubular
goods (‘‘OCTG’’), which are hollow steel
products of circular cross-section, including
oil well casing and tubing, of iron (other than
cast iron) or steel (both carbon and alloy),
whether seamless or welded, regardless of
end finish (e.g., whether or not plain end,
threaded, or threaded and coupled) whether
or not conforming to American Petroleum
Institute (‘‘API’’) or non-API specifications,
whether finished (including limited service
OCTG products) or unfinished (including
green tubes and limited service OCTG
products), whether or not thread protectors
are attached. The scope of the investigations
also covers OCTG coupling stock.
Excluded from the scope of the
investigations are: casing or tubing
containing 10.5 percent or more by weight of
chromium; drill pipe; unattached couplings;
and unattached thread protectors.
The merchandise subject to the
investigations is currently classified in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (‘‘HTSUS’’) under item numbers:
7304.29.10.10, 7304.29.10.20, 7304.29.10.30,
7304.29.10.40, 7304.29.10.50, 7304.29.10.60,
7304.29.10.80, 7304.29.20.10, 7304.29.20.20,
7304.29.20.30, 7304.29.20.40, 7304.29.20.50,
7304.29.20.60, 7304.29.20.80, 7304.29.31.10,
7304.29.31.20, 7304.29.31.30, 7304.29.31.40,
7304.29.31.50, 7304.29.31.60, 7304.29.31.80,
7304.29.41.10, 7304.29.41.20, 7304.29.41.30,
7304.29.41.40, 7304.29.41.50, 7304.29.41.60,
7304.29.41.80, 7304.29.50.15, 7304.29.50.30,
7304.29.50.45, 7304.29.50.60, 7304.29.50.75,
7304.29.61.15, 7304.29.61.30, 7304.29.61.45,
7304.29.61.60, 7304.29.61.75, 7305.20.20.00,
7305.20.40.00, 7305.20.60.00, 7305.20.80.00,
7306.29.10.30, 7306.29.10.90, 7306.29.20.00,
7306.29.31.00, 7306.29.41.00, 7306.29.60.10,
7306.29.60.50, 7306.29.81.10, and
7306.29.81.50.
The merchandise subject to the
investigations may also enter under the
following HTSUS item numbers:
7304.39.00.24, 7304.39.00.28, 7304.39.00.32,
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,
7304.39.00.76, 7304.39.00.80, 7304.59.60.00,
7304.59.80.15, 7304.59.80.20, 7304.59.80.25,
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, 7304.59.80.70,
7304.59.80.80, 7305.31.40.00, 7305.31.60.90,
7306.30.50.55, 7306.30.50.90, 7306.50.50.50,
and 7306.50.50.70.
The HTSUS subheadings above are
provided for convenience and customs
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: July 29, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jun
Jack Zhao or Jacky Arrowsmith at 202–
482–1396 or 202–482–5255,
respectively, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 6, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
AGENCY:
Background
On April 2, 2013, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) initiated
the second sunset reviews of the
antidumping duty (AD) orders on
polyethylene terephthalate film (PET
Film) from India and Taiwan, pursuant
to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act). See
Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’)
Review, 78 FR 19647 (April 2, 2013).
Within the deadline specified in 19 CFR
351.218(d)(1)(i), the Department
received notices of intent to participate,
in both sunset reviews, on behalf of
DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi
Polyester Film, Inc., and SKC, Inc.
(collectively, domestic interested
parties). Each claimed interested party
status under section 771(9)(C) of the
Act, as a producer of domestic like
product. The Department received
timely substantive responses from these
domestic interested parties. On April
22, 2013, after analyzing the substantive
responses of interested parties,
consistent with 19 CFR
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(A), the Department
determined to conduct expedited sunset
reviews of these AD orders on the basis
that no respondent interested party
submitted a substantive response in
either review. See Letter to Catherine
DeFilippo, Director, Office of
Investigations, International Trade
Commission, regarding ‘‘Sunset Reviews
Initiated on April 2, 2013,’’ (April 22,
2013).
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 145 (Monday, July 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45505-45512]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18164]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-533-857, A-580-870, A-565-802, A-517-804, A-583-850, A-549-832, A-
489-816, A-823-815, A-552-817]
Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from India, the Republic of
Korea, the Republic of the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand,
the Republic of Turkey, Ukraine, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
[[Page 45506]]
DATES: Effective Date: July 29, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Halle at (202) 482-0176 (India);
Victoria Cho at (202) 482-5075 (Korea); Dmitry Vladimirov at (202) 482-
0665 (the Philippines); Jason Rhoads at (202) 482-0123 (Saudi Arabia);
Thomas Schauer at (202) 482-0410 (Taiwan); Yasmin Nair at (202) 482-
3813 (Thailand); Catherine Cartsos at (202) 482-1757 (Turkey); David
Lindgren at (202) 482-3870 (Ukraine); or Fred Baker at (202) 482-2924
(Vietnam), AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On July 2, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of certain
oil country tubular goods (OCTG) from India, the Republic of Korea
(Korea), the Republic of the Philippines (the Philippines), Saudi
Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, the Republic of Turkey (Turkey), Ukraine, and
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam) filed in proper form on
behalf of United States Steel Corporation, Vallourec Star L.P., TMK
IPSCO, Energex (division of JMC Steel Group), Northwest Pipe Company,
Tejas Tubular Products, Welded Tube USA Inc., Boomerang Tube LLC, and
Maverick Tube Corporation (collectively, the petitioners). The AD
petitions were accompanied by two countervailing duty (CVD)
petitions.\1\ The petitioners are domestic producers of OCTG. On July
8, 2013, the Department requested additional information and
clarification of certain areas of the petitions.\2\ The petitioners
filed responses to these requests on July 12, 2013, and a further
response with respect to Korea on July 15, 2013.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties: Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from India,
the Republic of Korea, the Republic of the Philippines, Saudi
Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, the Republic of Turkey, Ukraine, and the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam, dated July 2, 2013 (petitions).
Neither Maverick Tube Corporation nor Vallourec Star L.P. is
participating in the petition against Saudi Arabia.
\2\ See letter from the Department to the petitioners entitled
``Re: Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duties on Imports of Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from India
and the Republic of Turkey and Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea, the
Republic of the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand,
Ukraine, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Supplemental
Questions'' dated July 8, 2013, and letters from the Department to
the petitioners entitled ``Petition for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Oil Country Tubular Goods from
{country{time} : Supplemental Questions'' on each of the country-
specific records dated July 8, 2013.
\3\ See Supplement to all Petitions dated July 12, 2013 (General
Issues Supplement), Supplement to the India Petition dated July 12,
2013, Supplements to the Korea Petition dated July 12, 2013, and
July 15, 2013, Supplement to the Philippines Petition dated July 12,
2013, Supplement to the Saudi Arabia Petition dated July 12, 2013,
Supplement to the Taiwan Petition dated July 12, 2013, Supplement to
the Thailand Petition dated July 12, 2013, Supplement to the Turkey
Petition dated July 12, 2013, Supplement to the Ukraine Petition
dated July 12, 2013, and Supplement to the Vietnam Petition, dated
July 12, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of OCTG from
India, Korea, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey,
Ukraine, and Vietnam are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United
States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the
Act and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, consistent
with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the petitions are accompanied by
information reasonably available to the petitioners supporting their
allegations.
The Department finds that the petitioners filed these petitions on
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested
parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also
finds that the petitioners have demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the initiation of the AD investigations that
the petitioners are requesting. See the ``Determination of Industry
Support for the Petitions'' section below.
Periods of Investigations
Because the petitions were filed on July 2, 2013, the period of
investigation (POI) for the Vietnam investigation is January 1, 2013,
through June 30, 2013. The POI for the India, Korea, the Philippines,
Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, and Ukraine investigations is
July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2013.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these investigations is OCTG from India,
Korea, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey,
Ukraine, and Vietnam. For a full description of the scope of the
investigations, see the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in Appendix I
of this notice.
Comments on Scope of Investigations
During our review of the petitions, the Department issued questions
to, and received responses from, the petitioners pertaining to the
proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the petitions would
be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic
industry is seeking relief. As discussed in the preamble to the
regulations,\5\ we are setting aside a period for interested parties to
raise issues regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all
interested parties to submit such comments by August 12, 2013, 5:00
p.m. Eastern Time.\6\ All comments must be filed on the records of the
India, Korea, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey,
Ukraine, and Vietnam AD investigations as well as the concurrent India
and Turkey CVD investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR
27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
\6\ Twenty calendar days from the signature date of this notice
is August 11, 2013, which is a Sunday. Accordingly, we are setting
the deadline on the next business day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically
using Import Administration's Antidumping Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS).\7\ An electronically
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the
time and date noted above. Documents excepted from the electronic
submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form)
with Import Administration's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by
the deadline noted above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011) for details of the
Department's electronic filing requirements, which went into effect
on August 5, 2011. Information on help using IA ACCESS can be found
at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can be found
at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on Product Characteristics for Antidumping Duty Questionnaires
The Department requests comments from interested parties regarding
the appropriate physical characteristics of OCTG to be reported in
response to the Department's antidumping duty questionnaires. This
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics
of the subject merchandise in order to report the relevant factors and
costs of production accurately as well as to develop
[[Page 45507]]
appropriate product-comparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide any information or comments that
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) general product
characteristics and (2) product-comparison criteria. We note that it is
not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-
comparison criteria. We base product-comparison criteria on meaningful
commercial differences among products. In other words, while there may
be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers to
describe OCTG, it may be that only a select few product characteristics
take into account commercially meaningful physical characteristics. In
addition, interested parties may comment on the order in which the
physical characteristics should be used in matching products.
Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important physical
characteristics first and the least important characteristics last.
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, we must receive comments
on product characteristics by August 5, 2013. Rebuttal comments must be
received by August 12, 2013. All comments and submissions to the
Department must be filed electronically using IA ACCESS, as referenced
above.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department
shall: (i) poll the industry or rely on other information in order to
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a
statistically valid sampling method to poll the industry.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC),
which is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry''
has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like
product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic
like product,\8\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department's
determination is subject to limitations of time and information.
Although this may result in different definitions of the like product,
such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary
to law.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See section 771(10) of the Act
\9\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F.
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not
offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of
the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted
on the record, we have determined that OCTG, as defined in the scope of
the investigations, constitute a single domestic like product and we
have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like
product.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist:
Oil Country Tubular Goods from India (India AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of
Korea (Korea AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping
Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods
from the Republic of the Philippines (the Philippines AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods from Saudi Arabia
(Saudi Arabia AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II;
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Oil Country
Tubular Goods from Taiwan (Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist:
Oil Country Tubular Goods from Thailand (Thailand AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of
Turkey (Turkey AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II;
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Oil Country
Tubular Goods from Ukraine (Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam (Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These
checklists are dated concurrently with this notice and on file
electronically via IA ACCESS. Access to documents filed via IA
ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room
7046 of the main Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data
contained in the petitions with reference to the domestic like product
as defined in the ``Scope of Investigations'' section above. To
establish industry support, the petitioners provided their production
of the domestic like product in 2012, and compared this to the
estimated total production of the domestic like product for the entire
domestic industry.\11\ The petitioners estimated total 2012 production
of the domestic like product using domestic shipment data for the OCTG
industry adjusted by the ratio of the petitioners' production to
domestic shipments.\12\ Maverick Tube Corporation and Vallourec Star
L.P. are not the petitioners with respect to the petition for the
imposition of ADs on imports of OCTG from Saudi Arabia and both
companies state that they take no position with regard to the petition
on imports from Saudi Arabia;\13\ therefore, the petitioners provided a
separate industry support calculation for the Saudi Arabia
petition.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Volume I of the petitions, at 3-4 and Exhibit I-3.
\12\ Id.
\13\ Id. at 1.
\14\ See General Issues Supplement, at 7 and Exhibit Supp. I-65.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 10, 2013, we received a submission from EVRAZ Rocky
Mountain Steel (Evraz), a domestic producer of OCTG. In the submission,
Evraz states that it supports the AD and CVD petitions on OCTG from
India, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey,
Ukraine, and Vietnam. In addition, Evraz provided its 2012 production
of the domestic like product.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Letter from EVRAZ Rocky Mountain Steel, dated July 10,
2013, at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have relied upon data the petitioners and Evraz provided for
[[Page 45508]]
purposes of measuring industry support.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation
Checklist, the Philippines AD Initiation Checklist, Saudi Arabia AD
Initiation Checklist, Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, Thailand AD
Initiation Checklist, Turkey AD Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD
Initiation Checklist, and Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on information provided in the petitions, supplemental
submissions, and other information readily available to the Department,
we determine that the petitioners have met the statutory criteria for
industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act for all of
the petitions because the domestic producers (or workers) who support
each of the petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product.\17\ Based on information
provided in the petitions and other submissions, the domestic producers
(or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under
section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act for all of the petitions because
the domestic producers (or workers) who support each of the petitions
account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petitions. Accordingly, the Department
determines that the petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic
industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Id.
\18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department finds that the petitioners filed the petitions on
behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated
sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping duty
investigations that they are requesting the Department initiate.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the
petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See General Issues Supplement, at 7-8 and Exhibit Supp. I-
66.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price depression
or suppression; lost sales and revenues; stunted production, shipments,
and capacity utilization; hindered growth in employment-related
variables; and decline in financial performance.\21\ We have assessed
the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury,
threat of material injury, and causation, and we have determined that
these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet
the statutory requirements for initiation.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See Volume I of the petitions, at 17-64 and Exhibits I-6
and I-8 through I-54; see also General Issues Supplement, at 8-9.
\22\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation
Checklist, the Philippines AD Initiation Checklist, Saudi Arabia AD
Initiation Checklist, Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, Thailand AD
Initiation Checklist, Turkey AD Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD
Initiation Checklist, and Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less
than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to
initiate AD investigations of imports of OCTG from India, Korea, the
Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and
Vietnam. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments
relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the
country-specific initiation checklists.
Export Price
For India, the petitioners based U.S. price on price quotes and
information provided by U.S. trading companies, customers, and foreign
entities for subject merchandise sold by trading companies to the
United States produced in India by three Indian producers of OCTG.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Korea, the Philippines, Taiwan, Turkey, and Vietnam, the
petitioners based U.S. prices on price quotes from sales offers of U.S.
distributors/trading companies for subject merchandise in the United
States produced in and exported from the subject country by a producer
of OCTG in that country.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist, the Philippines AD
Initiation Checklist, Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, Turkey AD
Initiation Checklist, and Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Saudi Arabia, the petitioners based U.S. price on price
information provided by U.S. sales representatives for subject
merchandise sold to the United States produced in and exported from
Saudi Arabia by a Saudi Arabian producer of OCTG.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Saudi Arabia AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Thailand and Ukraine, because they were unable to obtain price
quotes for subject merchandise sold to the United States produced in
and exported from these countries, the petitioners based U.S. price on
average unit value data for products classified under the appropriate
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) numbers for
subject merchandise obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau for subject
merchandise imported from these countries into the United States during
the POI.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist and Ukraine AD
Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For India, Korea, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Turkey,
Ukraine, and Vietnam, the petitioners made deductions for movement and
other expenses consistent with the sales and delivery terms.\27\ For
Korea, the petitioners additionally adjusted the quoted U.S. prices as
necessary to account for further manufacturing of the OCTG in the
United States.\28\ The petitioners made no other adjustments to U.S.
price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation
Checklist, the Philippines AD Initiation Checklist, Saudi Arabia AD
Initiation Checklist, Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, Turkey AD
Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist, and Vietnam
AD Initiation Checklist.
\28\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value
For the Philippines and Taiwan, since home market prices were not
reasonably available, the petitioners based NV on reasonably available
third-country prices of the foreign like product produced and offered
for sale in Canada by a producer of OCTG in the subject country.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Because the petitioners alleged sales below cost (see
``Sales Below Cost Allegations'' section below), the petitioners
calculated margins for these countries using constructed value (CV)
(see ``Normal Value Based on Constructed Value'' section, below).
See also the Philippines AD Initiation Checklist and Taiwan AD
Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For India, the petitioners based NV on price information obtained
through market research for the foreign like product produced and sold
in India by three Indian producers of OCTG.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Saudi Arabia, the petitioners based NV on home market price
quotes for the foreign like product produced and sold in Saudi Arabia
by a Saudi Arabian producer of OCTG.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See Saudi Arabia AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Thailand, since home market prices were not reasonably
available, the petitioners based NV on export statistics from Thailand
to Myanmar, the largest export market for foreign like product from
Thailand after the United States, from the Global Trade Atlas. \32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Ukraine, the petitioners based NV on price information provided
by
[[Page 45509]]
market research for the foreign like product produced and sold in
Ukraine by a Ukrainian producer of OCTG.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Korea and Turkey, the petitioners were unable to obtain home-
market or third-country prices; accordingly, the petitioners based NV
on CV.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist and Turkey AD Initiation
Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For India, the Philippines, and Taiwan, the petitioners made
deductions for movement expenses consistent with the terms of
delivery.\35\ For India, the petitioners made a deduction for other
expenses as well.\36\ The petitioners made no adjustments to NV for
Korea, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Turkey, and Ukraine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, the Philippines AD
Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
\36\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to Vietnam, the petitioners state that the Department
has long treated Vietnam as a non-market economy (NME) country.\37\ In
accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the presumption of
NME status remains in effect until revoked by the Department. The
presumption of NME status for Vietnam has not been revoked by the
Department and, therefore, remains in effect for purposes of the
initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, the NV of the product is
appropriately based on factors of production (FOPs) valued in a
surrogate market economy country in accordance with section 773(c) of
the Act. In the course of this investigation, all parties, including
the public, will have the opportunity to provide relevant information
related to the issues of Vietnam's NME status and the granting of
separate rates to individual exporters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See Volume VIII of the petition, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioners claim that India is an appropriate surrogate
country because it is a market economy that is at a level of economic
development comparable to that of Vietnam, it is a significant producer
of the merchandise under consideration, and the data for valuing FOPs
are both available and reliable.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Id. at 3-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the information provided by the petitioners, we believe it
is appropriate to use India as a surrogate country for initiation
purposes. Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit
comments regarding surrogate country selection and will be provided an
opportunity to submit publicly available information to value FOPs
within 40 days before the scheduled date of the preliminary
determination.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i). Note that this is the revised
regulation published on April 1, 2013. See https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2013-title19-vol3/html/CFR-2013-title19-vol3.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Factors of Production
The petitioners based the FOPs usage for materials, labor and
energy on the consumption rates of a U.S. producer of tubular products.
The petitioners assert that the experience of the U.S. producer is
appropriate for comparison to producers in Vietnam because it is a
comparable producer of welded OCTG.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See Volume VIII of the petition at exhibit VIII-14, at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Raw Materials
The petitioners valued the FOPs for hot-rolled coil (i.e., the
primary raw material used to produce subject merchandise) using
publicly available Indian domestic price data published by Steelworld
in Indian rupees for the period from October 2012 through March 2013,
the most recent six-month period for which data were available.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Id. at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioners made a deduction for the value of scrap recovered
during the production process based on the average import value of
other ferrous waste and scrap using HTSUS subheadings 7204.41 and
7204.49 as published by Global Trade Atlas for the period from October
2012 through March 2013.\42\ The petitioners excluded all import values
from countries previously determined by the Department to maintain
broadly available, non-industry-specific export subsidies and from
countries previously determined by the Department to be NME countries.
In addition, in accordance with the Department's practice, the average
import value excludes imports that were labeled as originating from an
unidentified country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ Id. at exhibit VIII-14, at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Labor
The petitioners calculated labor using a 2005 industry-specific
wage rate for India from the Yearbook of Labor Statistics, a labor
database compiled by the International Labor Organization. The
petitioners adjusted this wage rate for inflation using the Indian
Consumer Price Index as published by the International Monetary
Fund.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ Id. at exhibit VIII-14, at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Energy
The petitioners valued electricity using the same rate used by the
Department in Circular Welded Pipe from Vietnam, i.e., a 2008 unit cost
for electricity in India based on data from the Central Electricity
Authority of India.\44\ Similar to Circular Welded Pipe from Vietnam,
the petitioners did not adjust these data for inflation as they became
effective on a variety of different dates.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ Id. at exhibit VIII-14, at 7, and Circular Welded Carbon-
Quality Steel Pipe from Vietnam, 77 FR 64483 (October 22, 2012).
\45\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Factory Overhead, Selling, General and Administrative
Expenses, and Profit
The petitioners calculated surrogate financial ratios (i.e.,
manufacturing overhead, selling, general and administrative (SG&A)
expenses, and profit) using the audited financial statements of
Maharastra Seamless Limited and Ratnamani Metals & Tubes Ltd., two
Indian producers of comparable merchandise (i.e., welded OCTG and other
tubular products), for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2012.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ Id. at exhibit VIII-14, at 8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sales Below Cost Allegations
For India, the Philippines, and Taiwan, the petitioners provided
information demonstrating reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that
sales of OCTG in the Indian market and, for the Philippines and Taiwan,
sales of OCTG in the Canadian market, were made at prices below the
fully-absorbed cost of production (COP), within the meaning of section
773(b) of the Act, and requested that the Department conduct a country-
wide sales-below-cost investigation. The Statement of Administrative
Action (SAA), submitted to the Congress in connection with the
interpretation and application of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act,
states that an allegation of sales below COP need not be specific to
individual exporters or producers.\47\ The SAA states that ``Commerce
will consider allegations of below-cost sales in the aggregate for a
foreign country, just as Commerce currently considers allegations of
sales at less than fair value on a country-wide basis for purposes of
initiating an antidumping investigation.''\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See SAA, H.R. Doc. No. 103-316 at 833 (1994).
\48\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, the SAA provides that section 773(b)(2)(A) of the Act
retains the requirement that the Department have ``reasonable grounds
to believe or suspect'' that below-cost sales have occurred before
initiating such an investigation. Reasonable grounds exist when an
interested party provides specific factual information on costs and
[[Page 45510]]
prices, observed or constructed, indicating that sales in the foreign
market in question are at below-cost prices.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost of Production
Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost
of manufacturing (COM); SG&A expenses; financial expenses; and packing
expenses. The petitioners calculated COM based on the petitioners'
experience adjusted for known differences between the U.S. and the
industries of the respective country (i.e., India, the Philippines, and
Taiwan), during the proposed POI.\50\ Using publicly-available data to
account for price differences, the petitioners multiplied the surrogate
usage quantities by the surrogate value of the inputs used to
manufacture OCTG.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, the Philippines AD
Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine factory overhead, SG&A, and financial expense rates,
the petitioners relied on financial statements of producers of
comparable merchandise operating in the respective foreign country.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon a comparison of the prices of the foreign like product
in the home market or third-country to the calculated COP of the most
comparable product, we find reasonable grounds to believe or suspect
that sales of the foreign like products were made below the COP, within
the meaning of section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, the
Department is initiating country-wide cost investigations on sales of
OCTG from India in India and on sales of OCTG from the Philippines and
Taiwan to Canada.
Normal Value Based on Constructed Value
For India, the Philippines and Taiwan, because they alleged sales
below cost, pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the
Act, the petitioners calculated NV based on CV. The petitioners
calculated CV using the same average COM, SG&A, financial expense, and
packing figures used to compute the COPs. The petitioners relied on the
same financial statements used as the basis for the factory overhead,
SG&A, and financial expense rates to calculate the profit rates.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, the Philippines AD
Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Korea
The petitioners based NV on CV, as neither a home market nor a
third country price was reasonably available. Pursuant to section
773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the COM; SG&A expenses; financial
expenses; packing expenses; and profit. The petitioners calculated COM
(except depreciation) based on the petitioners' experience adjusted for
known differences between the U.S. and Korean industries, during the
proposed POI, multiplied by the value of the inputs used to manufacture
OCTG in Korea using publicly-available data. \53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine depreciation, SG&A, and financial expense rates, the
petitioners relied on the financial statements of a Korean producer of
comparable merchandise. The petitioners relied on the same financial
statements used as the basis for the factory overhead, SG&A, and
financial expense rates to calculate the profit rate.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Turkey
The petitioners based NV on CV, as neither a home market nor a
third country price was reasonably available. Pursuant to section
773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the COM; SG&A expenses; financial
expenses; packing expenses; and profit. The petitioners calculated COM
(except factory overhead) and packing expenses based on the
petitioners' experience adjusted for known differences between the U.S.
and Turkish industries, during the proposed POI, multiplied by the
value of the inputs used to manufacture OCTG in Turkey using publicly-
available data. \55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ See Turkey AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine factory overhead, SG&A, and financial expense rates,
the petitioners relied on the fiscal year ending 2012 financial
statements of a Turkish producer of comparable merchandise. The
petitioners relied on the same fiscal year ending 2012 financial
statements used as the basis for the factory overhead, SG&A, and
financial expense rates to calculate the profit rate.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to
believe that imports of OCTG from India, Korea, the Philippines, Saudi
Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and Vietnam are being, or
are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value.
Based on comparisons of export price (EP) to NV in accordance with
section 773(a)(1) of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for OCTG
from: (1) India range from 12.67 percent to 239.64 percent;\57\ (2)
Korea range from 66.19 percent to 158.53 percent;\58\ (3) the
Philippines range from 46.04 percent to 56.38 percent;\59\ (4) Saudi
Arabia is 53.34 percent;\60\ (5) Taiwan range from 68.44 percent to
70.98 percent;\61\ (6) Thailand is 118.32 percent;\62\ (7) Turkey range
from 44.52 percent to 47.20 percent;\63\ and (8) Ukraine range from
25.75 percent to 30.76 percent.\64\ Based on comparisons of EP to NV in
accordance with section 773(c) of the Act, the estimated dumping
margins for OCTG from Vietnam range from 103.43 percent to 111.47
percent.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
\58\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\59\ See the Philippines AD Initiation Checklist.
\60\ See Saudi Arabia AD Initiation Checklist.
\61\ See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
\62\ See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
\63\ See Turkey AD Initiation Checklist.
\64\ See Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist.
\65\ See Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations
Based upon the examination of the AD petitions on OCTG from India,
Korea, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey,
Ukraine, and Vietnam, we find that the petitions meet the requirements
of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD
investigations to determine whether imports of OCTG from India, Korea,
the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and
Vietnam are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at
less than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our
preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the date of
this initiation.
Respondent Selection
The petitioners name 48 companies as producers/exporters of OCTG
from India, ten companies as producers/exporters of OCTG from Korea,
one company as a producer/exporter of OCTG from the Philippines, 13
companies as producers/exporters of OCTG from Saudi Arabia, five
companies as producers/exporters of OCTG from Taiwan, three companies
as producers/exporters of OCTG from Thailand, five companies as
producers/exporters of OCTG from Turkey, three companies as producers/
exporters of OCTG from Ukraine, and eight companies as producers/
exporters of OCTG from Vietnam.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ See the petitions at Volume I, Exhibit I-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 45511]]
Following standard practice in AD investigations involving market
economy countries, in the event the Department determines that the
number of known exporters or producers for any of these investigations
is large, the Department may select respondents based on U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of OCTG from the
relevant countries. We intend to release the CBP data under
Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to
information protected by APO within five days of publication of this
Federal Register notice.
We intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection
within 20 days of publication of this notice. The Department invites
comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within seven
days of publication of this Federal Register notice for India, Korea,
the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, and
Ukraine.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ See Bottom Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers From the
Republic of Korea and Mexico: Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Investigations, 76 FR 23281, 23285 (April 26, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to Vietnam, the petitioners have identified eight
potential respondents. In accordance with our standard practice for
respondent selection for NME countries, we intend to issue quantity and
value questionnaires to each potential respondent and base respondent
selection on the responses received. In addition, the Department will
post the quantity and value questionnaire along with the filing
instructions on the Import Administration Web site (https://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-and-news.html). Exporters and producers of
OCTG from Vietnam that do not receive quantity and value questionnaires
via mail may still submit a quantity and value response and can obtain
a copy from the Import Administration Web site. The quantity and value
questionnaire must be submitted by all Vietnamese exporters/producers
no later than August 12, 2013.\68\ All quantity and value
questionnaires must be filed electronically using IA ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ As noted above, twenty calendar days from the signature
date of this notice is August 11, 2013, which is a Sunday.
Accordingly, we are setting the deadline on the next business day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate rate status in an NME investigation,
exporters and producers must submit a separate rate status
application.\69\ The specific requirements for submitting the separate
rate application in the Vietnam investigation are outlined in detail in
the application itself, which will be available on the Department's Web
site at https://trade.gov/ia/ia-highlights-and-news.html on the date of
publication of this initiation notice in the Federal Register. The
separate rate application will be due 60 days after publication of this
initiation notice. For exporters and producers who submit a separate
rate status application and have been selected as mandatory
respondents, these exporters and producers will no longer be eligible
for consideration for separate rate status unless they respond to all
parts of the questionnaire as mandatory respondents. The Department
requires that Vietnam respondents submit a response to both the
quantity and value questionnaire and the separate rate application by
their respective deadlines in order to receive consideration for
separate rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005) (``Separate
Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin''), available on the
Department's Web site at https://trade.gov/ia/policy/bull05-1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of Combination Rates
The Department will calculate combination rates for certain
respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME
investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin
states:
{w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates
only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now
assign in its NME Investigation 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.\70\
\70\ See Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin at 6
(emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the petitions have been
provided to the Governments of India, Korea, the Philippines, Saudi
Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, and Vietnam via IA ACCESS.
To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the
public version of the petitions to each exporter named in the
petitions, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
Meeting With the Government of Korea
Pursuant to a request by the Government of Korea, on July 17, 2013,
Department officials met with Korean Government officials to discuss
that government's inquiry regarding the status of the Department's
consideration of the petition and industry support, as provided under
section 732(b)(3)(B) of the Act.
ITC Notification
We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determinations by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine no later than August 16, 2013,
whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of OCTG from
India, Korea, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey,
Ukraine, and Vietnam are materially injuring or threatening material
injury to a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination for any country
will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that
country; otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to
statutory and regulatory time limits.
Submission of Factual Information
On April 10, 2013, the Department published Definition of Factual
Information and Time Limits for Submission of Factual Information:
Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 2013), which modified two
regulations related to AD and CVD proceedings: the definition of
factual information (19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits for
the submission of factual information (19 CFR 351.301). The final rule
identifies five categories of factual information in 19 CFR
351.102(b)(21), which are summarized as follows: (i) Evidence submitted
in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of
allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors
under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration
under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by the
Department; and (v) evidence other than factual information described
in (i)-(iv). The final rule requires any party, when submitting factual
information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)
the information is being
[[Page 45512]]
submitted and, if the information is submitted to rebut, clarify, or
correct factual information already on the record, to provide an
explanation identifying the information already on the record that the
factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. The final rule
also modified 19 CFR 351.301 so that, rather than providing general
time limits, there are specific time limits based on the type of
factual information being submitted. These modifications are effective
for all proceeding segments initiated on or after May 10, 2013, and
thus are applicable to these investigations. Please review the final
rule, available at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to submitting factual information in these
investigations.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\71\
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are
in effect for company/government officials, as well as their
representatives, in all segments of any AD or CVD proceedings initiated
on or after March 14, 2011.\72\ The formats for the revised
certifications are provided at the end of the Interim Final Rule.
Foreign governments and their officials may continue to submit
certifications in either the format that was in use prior to the
effective date of the Interim Final Rule, or in the format provided in
the Interim Final Rule.\73\ The Department intends to reject factual
information submissions if the submitting party does not comply with
the revised certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\72\ See Certification of Factual Information for Import
Administration during Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 7491 (February 10, 2011)
(Interim Final Rule), amending 19 CFR 351.303(g)(1) and (2).
\73\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Supplemental Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 54697 (September
2, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the
Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January
22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations
should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures
(e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR
351.103(d)).
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: July 22, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise covered by the investigations is certain oil
country tubular goods (``OCTG''), which are hollow steel products of
circular cross-section, including oil well casing and tubing, of
iron (other than cast iron) or steel (both carbon and alloy),
whether seamless or welded, regardless of end finish (e.g., whether
or not plain end, threaded, or threaded and coupled) whether or not
conforming to American Petroleum Institute (``API'') or non-API
specifications, whether finished (including limited service OCTG
products) or unfinished (including green tubes and limited service
OCTG products), whether or not thread protectors are attached. The
scope of the investigations also covers OCTG coupling stock.
Excluded from the scope of the investigations are: casing or
tubing containing 10.5 percent or more by weight of chromium; drill
pipe; unattached couplings; and unattached thread protectors.
The merchandise subject to the investigations is currently
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(``HTSUS'') under item numbers: 7304.29.10.10, 7304.29.10.20,
7304.29.10.30, 7304.29.10.40, 7304.29.10.50, 7304.29.10.60,
7304.29.10.80, 7304.29.20.10, 7304.29.20.20, 7304.29.20.30,
7304.29.20.40, 7304.29.20.50, 7304.29.20.60, 7304.29.20.80,
7304.29.31.10, 7304.29.31.20, 7304.29.31.30, 7304.29.31.40,
7304.29.31.50, 7304.29.31.60, 7304.29.31.80, 7304.29.41.10,
7304.29.41.20, 7304.29.41.30, 7304.29.41.40, 7304.29.41.50,
7304.29.41.60, 7304.29.41.80, 7304.29.50.15, 7304.29.50.30,
7304.29.50.45, 7304.29.50.60, 7304.29.50.75, 7304.29.61.15,
7304.29.61.30, 7304.29.61.45, 7304.29.61.60, 7304.29.61.75,
7305.20.20.00, 7305.20.40.00, 7305.20.60.00, 7305.20.80.00,
7306.29.10.30, 7306.29.10.90, 7306.29.20.00, 7306.29.31.00,
7306.29.41.00, 7306.29.60.10, 7306.29.60.50, 7306.29.81.10, and
7306.29.81.50.
The merchandise subject to the investigations may also enter
under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7304.39.00.24,
7304.39.00.28, 7304.39.00.32, 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, 7304.39.00.76,
7304.39.00.80, 7304.59.60.00, 7304.59.80.15, 7304.59.80.20,
7304.59.80.25, 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, 7304.59.80.70, 7304.59.80.80, 7305.31.40.00,
7305.31.60.90, 7306.30.50.55, 7306.30.50.90, 7306.50.50.50, and
7306.50.50.70.
The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and
customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the
investigations is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2013-18164 Filed 7-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
