Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 32087-32089 [2015-13809]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 108 / Friday, June 5, 2015 / Notices List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum Summary Background Scope of the Order Discussion of the Methodology Comparisons to Normal Value A. Determination of Comparison Method B. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis Product Comparisons Date of Sale Constructed Export Price Normal Value A. Home Market Viability and Comparison Market B. Level of Trade C. Calculation of Normal Value Based on Comparison Market Prices D. Calculation of Normal Value Based on Constructed Value Currency Conversion Recommendation [FR Doc. 2015–13811 Filed 6–4–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–964] Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012– 2013 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On December 1, 2014, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) published its Preliminary Results of the 2012–2013 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on seamless refined copper pipe and tube (‘‘copper pipe’’) from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).1 The period of review (‘‘POR’’) is November 1, 2012 through October 31, 2013. We invited parties to comment on our Preliminary Results. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we made certain changes to our margin calculations for the mandatory respondent Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc., Hong Kong GD Trading Co., Ltd., and Golden Dragon Holding (Hong Kong) International, Ltd. (collectively, ‘‘Golden Dragon’’). The final weightedaverage dumping margins for this review are listed in the ‘‘Final Results’’ section below. DATES: Effective date: June 5, 2015. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: 1 See Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Administrative Review; 2011–2012, 79 FR 71089 (December 1, 2014) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:31 Jun 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Martinelli, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2923. Background On December 1, 2014, the Department published its Preliminary Results. On January 7, 2015, and January 12, 2015, Cerro Flow Products, LLC, Wieland Copper Products, LLC, Mueller Copper Tube Products Inc., and Mueller Copper Tube Company, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’), and Golden Dragon submitted case briefs and rebuttal briefs, respectively.2 On February 11, 2015, the Department held a public hearing on the final results of this proceeding in the Herbert Clark Hoover Building.3 On March 25, 2015, the Department extended the time period for issuing the final results of this review by 30 days, until April 30, 2015.4 On April 28, 2015, the Department extended the time period for issuing the final results of this review by an additional 30 days, until May 30, 2015.5 2 See Letter from Petitioners, ‘‘Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People’s Republic of China: Petitioners’ Case Brief,’’ (January 7, 2015); see also Letter from Golden Dragon, ‘‘Case Brief; Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from China,’’ (January 7, 2015); see also Letter from Petitioners, ‘‘Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People’s Republic of China: Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief,’’ (January 12, 2015); see also Letter from Golden Dragon, ‘‘Rebuttal Brief; Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from China,’’ (January 12, 2015). 3 See Enforcement and Compliance Public Hearing in the Matter of: Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube Third Administrative Review, Before: Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, Office IV, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, (February 11, 2015). 4 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, through Howard Smith, Acting Office Director, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, Office IV, from James Martinelli, International Trade Compliance Analyst, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, Office IV ‘‘Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People’s Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review’’ (March 25, 2015). 5 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, through Howard Smith, Acting Office Director, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, Office IV, from James Martinelli, International Trade Compliance Analyst, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, Office IV ‘‘Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People’s Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review’’ (April 28, 2015). Because May 30, 2015 is a non-business day, the deadline is the next business day, June 1, 2015. PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 32087 Scope of the Order The merchandise subject to the order is seamless refined copper pipe and tube. The product is currently classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) item numbers 7411.10.1030 and 7411.10.1090. Products subject to this order may also enter under HTSUS item numbers 7407.10.1500, 7419.99.5050, 8415.90.8065, and 8415.90.8085. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this order remains dispositive.6 Withdrawals of Administrative Review Requests In the Preliminary Results, the Department rescinded this administrative review with regard to Luvata Tube (Zhongshan) Ltd. & Luvata Alltop (Zhongshan) Ltd. (collectively, ‘‘Luvata’’), Shanghai Hailiang Copper Co., Ltd., and Zhejiang Hailiang Co., Ltd., as parties timely withdrew all review requests with respect to these companies, which all had a separate rate from a prior completed segment of this proceeding.7 Reviews were also requested for 11 additional companies listed in the Initiation Notice, and those requests were also timely withdrawn.8 However, for the final results, we are not rescinding the reviews for these 11 companies because they did not have a separate rate at the time of initiation of this review, and, therefore, each company will remain part of the PRCwide entity. The PRC-wide entity is 6 For a complete description of the scope of this order, see Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, regarding ‘‘Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2012–2013 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People’s Republic of China’’ (‘‘Decision Memorandum’’) dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice. 7 See Preliminary Results at 71090. 8 See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 78 FR 79392 (December 30, 2013) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’). The 11 companies include: China Hailiang Metal Trading, Foshan Hua Hong Copper Tube Co., Ltd., Guilin Lijia Metals Co., Ltd., Hong Kong Hailiang Metal, Ningbo Jintian Copper Tube Co., Ltd., Shanghai Hailiang Metal Trading Limited, Sinochem Ningbo Ltd. & Sinochem Ningbo Import & Export Co., Ltd., Taicang City Jinxin Copper Tube Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Jiahe Pipes Inc., and Zhejiang Naile Copper Co., Ltd. These companies are not included in the collapsed entity of Hong Kong Hailiang Metal Trading Limited, Zhejiang Hailiang Co., Ltd., and Shanghai Hailiang Copper Co., Ltd. E:\FR\FM\05JNN1.SGM 05JNN1 32088 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 108 / Friday, June 5, 2015 / Notices currently subject to this administrative review.9 Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by parties in this review are addressed in the Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues that parties raised and to which we responded in the Decision Memorandum follows as an appendix to this notice. The Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/ frn/index.html. The signed paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on a review of the record and comments received from interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we made revisions to the margin calculations for Golden Dragon.10 We made the following changes to the margin calculation for Golden Dragon. • We included Golden Dragon’s recycled copper, which is reintroduced into the production process, in the calculation of the copper consumption rate. We also gave Golden Dragon a byproduct offset for the reintroduced copper.11 • We revised the calculation for the truck freight calculation using factual information available on the record.12 9 See, e.g., Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 47363, 47365 (August 8, 2012), unchanged in Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2010– 2011, 78 FR 10130 (February 13, 2013). A change in practice with respect to the conditional review of the PRC-wide entity is not applicable to this administrative review. See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65964, 65969–70 (November 4, 2013) (apply the change in practice to reviews for which the notice of opportunity to request an administrative review is published on or after December 4, 2013). 10 See Decision Memorandum. 11 Id. at Comments 3 and 4. 12 Id. at Comment 6. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:31 Jun 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 • We removed import data from outside of the POR that was inadvertently included.13 Final Results We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the POR: Weightedaverage dumping margin (percent) Exporter Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc., Hong Kong GD Trading Co., Ltd., and Golden Dragon Holding (Hong Kong) International, Ltd .......... PRC-Wide Entity 14 ..................... 10.50 60.85 Assessment Rates Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review. For Golden Dragon, the Department calculated importer-specific assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer’s examined sales and the total entered value of those sales. We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importerspecific assessment rate is not zero or de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent). Where an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. For the PRC-wide entity, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate all appropriate entries as an assessment rate for antidumping duties equal to the weighted-average dumping margin listed above in the Final Results section. The Department announced a refinement to its assessment practice in non-market economy (‘‘NME’’) cases. Pursuant to this refinement in practice, 13 Id. at Comment 7. PRC-Wide Entity includes, inter alia, Shanghai Hailiang Metal Trading Limited, Hong Kong Hailiang Metal, China Hailiang Metal Trading, Foshan Hua Hong Copper Tube Co., Ltd., Guilin Lijia Metals Co., Ltd., Sinochem Ningbo Import & Export Co., Ltd., Sinochem Ningbo Ltd., Taicang City Jinxin Copper Tube Co., Ltd., Ningbo Jintian Copper Tube Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Jiahe Pipes Inc., and Zhejiang Naile Copper Co., Ltd. 14 The PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 for entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales databases submitted by companies individually examined during this review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the rate for the NME-wide entity. In addition, if the Department determines that an exporter under review had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that exporter’s case number (i.e., at that exporter’s rate) will be liquidated at the rate for the NME-wide entity.15 Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters identified above, the cash deposit rate will be equal to their weighted-average dumping margin in these final results of review; (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters that received a separate rate in a previously completed segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the existing exporter-specific rate; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity (i.e., 60.85 percent); and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Disclosure We intend to disclose the calculations performed regarding these final results within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Notification to Importers Regarding the Reimbursement of Duties This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could 15 For a full discussion of this practice, see NonMarket Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011). E:\FR\FM\05JNN1.SGM 05JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 108 / Friday, June 5, 2015 / Notices result in the Department’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties has occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. Notifications to All Parties This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to Administrative Protective Order (‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. We are issuing and publishing this administrative review and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: May 29, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Appendix—Issues and Decision Memorandum Summary Background Scope of the Order List of Abbreviations and Acronyms Discussion of the Issues Comment 1: Whether the Department Properly Adjusted for VAT Comment 2: Whether the Department Properly Applied Its Differential Pricing Analysis Comment 3: Whether Golden Dragon Accurately Reported Its Copper Consumption Rate Comment 4: Whether Golden Dragon Is Entitled to a By-Product Offset Comment 5: Whether the Department Accurately Calculated Credit Expenses Comment 6: Whether the Department Accurately Calculated the Truck Surrogate Value Comment 7: Whether the Department Accurately Calculated the Solvents Surrogate Value Recommendation [FR Doc. 2015–13809 Filed 6–4–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:31 Jun 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–832] Pure Magnesium From the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of the 2009– 2010 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On May 21, 2015, the United States Court of International Trade (‘‘CIT’’ or ‘‘Court’’) sustained the Final Remand Results 1 issued by the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) concerning the 2009– 2010 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on pure magnesium from the People’s Republic of China.2 In the Final Remand Results, the Department changed the data source for inland freight and selected different financial statements for the calculation of the surrogate financial ratios, while it continued to find that the untimely and thus previously rejected factual information was irrelevant and showed no ‘‘fraud’’ on the part of the respondent, Tianjin Magnesium International Co., Ltd. (‘‘TMI’’). Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (‘‘CAFC’’) in Timken,3 as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,4 the Department is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department’s final results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on pure magnesium from the People’s Republic of China covering the period of review (‘‘POR’’) from May 1, 2009, through April 30, 2010.5 DATES: Effective Date: May 31, 2015 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eve Wang, AD/CVD Operations Office III, AGENCY: 1 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, Court Order No. 12–00006, Slip Op. 13–9 (CIT 2013), dated January 22, 2013 (‘‘Final Remand Results’’). 2 See US Magnesium LLC v. United States, Court Order No. 12–00006, Slip Op. 15–47 (CIT May 21, 2015) (‘‘TMI II’’). 3 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (‘‘Timken’’). 4 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (‘‘Diamond Sawblades’’). 5 See Pure Magnesium from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of the 2009–2010 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 76945 (December 9, 2011) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (‘‘Final Results’’). PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 32089 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–6231. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On December 9, 2011, the Department issued the Final Results.6 US Magnesium LLC (‘‘USM’’) challenged certain aspects of the Department’s Final Results. On January 22, 2013, the Court remanded the Final Results to the Department: (1) To consider whether previously rejected factual information contained prima facie evidence of fraud by TMI in accordance with the factors outlined in Home Products,7 and (2) to explain its rationale for selecting Infobanc data based on substantial evidence on the record or, alternatively, to select a new surrogate value for truck freight.8 Additionally, the Department requested a voluntary remand to reconsider: (1) The selection of Hindalco Industries Limited’s (‘‘Hindalco’’) financial statements for calculating surrogate financial ratios, and (2) USM’s claim that the Department made errors when calculating the surrogate value for labor.9 In accordance with TMI I, the Department opened the administrative record to accept the previously rejected factual information and concluded that this factual information did not demonstrate prima facie evidence of fraud by TMI.10 The Department also determined that the Infobanc data did not constitute the best information available to value truck freight and, instead, selected World Bank data for the Final Remand Results.11 Additionally, the Department selected Madras Aluminum Company’s financial statements to value the surrogate financial ratios. Lastly, the Department corrected errors in its calculation of the labor rate.12 On May 21, 2015, the Court entered judgement sustaining the Final Remand Results entirely. Timken Notice In Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC held that, pursuant to section 6 See Final Results. Home Prods. Int’l v. United States, 633 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (‘‘Home Products’’). 8 See US Magnesium LLC v. United States, Court Order No. 12–00006, Slip Op. 13–9 (CIT January 22, 2013) (‘‘TMI I’’). 9 Id. 10 See Final Remand Results. 11 Id. 12 Id. 7 See E:\FR\FM\05JNN1.SGM 05JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 108 (Friday, June 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32087-32089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13809]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-964]


Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube From the People's Republic 
of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 
2012-2013

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On December 1, 2014, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') published its Preliminary Results of the 2012-2013 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on seamless refined 
copper pipe and tube (``copper pipe'') from the People's Republic of 
China (``PRC'').\1\ The period of review (``POR'') is November 1, 2012 
through October 31, 2013. We invited parties to comment on our 
Preliminary Results. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we 
made certain changes to our margin calculations for the mandatory 
respondent Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc., Hong Kong GD 
Trading Co., Ltd., and Golden Dragon Holding (Hong Kong) International, 
Ltd. (collectively, ``Golden Dragon''). The final weighted-average 
dumping margins for this review are listed in the ``Final Results'' 
section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube From the People's 
Republic of China: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of 
Administrative Review; 2011-2012, 79 FR 71089 (December 1, 2014) 
(``Preliminary Results'').

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective date: June 5, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Martinelli, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
2923.

Background

    On December 1, 2014, the Department published its Preliminary 
Results. On January 7, 2015, and January 12, 2015, Cerro Flow Products, 
LLC, Wieland Copper Products, LLC, Mueller Copper Tube Products Inc., 
and Mueller Copper Tube Company, Inc. (collectively, ``Petitioners''), 
and Golden Dragon submitted case briefs and rebuttal briefs, 
respectively.\2\ On February 11, 2015, the Department held a public 
hearing on the final results of this proceeding in the Herbert Clark 
Hoover Building.\3\ On March 25, 2015, the Department extended the time 
period for issuing the final results of this review by 30 days, until 
April 30, 2015.\4\ On April 28, 2015, the Department extended the time 
period for issuing the final results of this review by an additional 30 
days, until May 30, 2015.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Letter from Petitioners, ``Seamless Refined Copper Pipe 
and Tube from the People's Republic of China: Petitioners' Case 
Brief,'' (January 7, 2015); see also Letter from Golden Dragon, 
``Case Brief; Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from China,'' 
(January 7, 2015); see also Letter from Petitioners, ``Seamless 
Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People's Republic of China: 
Petitioners' Rebuttal Brief,'' (January 12, 2015); see also Letter 
from Golden Dragon, ``Rebuttal Brief; Seamless Refined Copper Pipe 
and Tube from China,'' (January 12, 2015).
    \3\ See Enforcement and Compliance Public Hearing in the Matter 
of: Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube Third Administrative 
Review, Before: Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, Office IV, 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, (February 11, 2015).
    \4\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, 
through Howard Smith, Acting Office Director, Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Operations, Office IV, from James Martinelli, 
International Trade Compliance Analyst, Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Operations, Office IV ``Seamless Refined Copper 
Pipe and Tube from the People's Republic of China: Extension of 
Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review'' (March 25, 2015).
    \5\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, 
through Howard Smith, Acting Office Director, Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Operations, Office IV, from James Martinelli, 
International Trade Compliance Analyst, Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Operations, Office IV ``Seamless Refined Copper 
Pipe and Tube from the People's Republic of China: Extension of 
Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review'' (April 28, 2015). Because May 30, 2015 is a non-business 
day, the deadline is the next business day, June 1, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise subject to the order is seamless refined copper 
pipe and tube. The product is currently classified under Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') item numbers 
7411.10.1030 and 7411.10.1090. Products subject to this order may also 
enter under HTSUS item numbers 7407.10.1500, 7419.99.5050, 
8415.90.8065, and 8415.90.8085. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided 
for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
scope of this order remains dispositive.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For a complete description of the scope of this order, see 
Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 
Compliance, from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, regarding ``Decision 
Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2012-2013 Administrative 
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Seamless Refined Copper Pipe 
and Tube from the People's Republic of China'' (``Decision 
Memorandum'') dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this 
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Withdrawals of Administrative Review Requests

    In the Preliminary Results, the Department rescinded this 
administrative review with regard to Luvata Tube (Zhongshan) Ltd. & 
Luvata Alltop (Zhongshan) Ltd. (collectively, ``Luvata''), Shanghai 
Hailiang Copper Co., Ltd., and Zhejiang Hailiang Co., Ltd., as parties 
timely withdrew all review requests with respect to these companies, 
which all had a separate rate from a prior completed segment of this 
proceeding.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Preliminary Results at 71090.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reviews were also requested for 11 additional companies listed in 
the Initiation Notice, and those requests were also timely 
withdrawn.\8\ However, for the final results, we are not rescinding the 
reviews for these 11 companies because they did not have a separate 
rate at the time of initiation of this review, and, therefore, each 
company will remain part of the PRC-wide entity. The PRC-wide entity is

[[Page 32088]]

currently subject to this administrative review.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 78 FR 
79392 (December 30, 2013) (``Initiation Notice''). The 11 companies 
include: China Hailiang Metal Trading, Foshan Hua Hong Copper Tube 
Co., Ltd., Guilin Lijia Metals Co., Ltd., Hong Kong Hailiang Metal, 
Ningbo Jintian Copper Tube Co., Ltd., Shanghai Hailiang Metal 
Trading Limited, Sinochem Ningbo Ltd. & Sinochem Ningbo Import & 
Export Co., Ltd., Taicang City Jinxin Copper Tube Co., Ltd., 
Zhejiang Jiahe Pipes Inc., and Zhejiang Naile Copper Co., Ltd. These 
companies are not included in the collapsed entity of Hong Kong 
Hailiang Metal Trading Limited, Zhejiang Hailiang Co., Ltd., and 
Shanghai Hailiang Copper Co., Ltd.
    \9\ See, e.g., Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From the 
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results and Partial 
Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 47363, 
47365 (August 8, 2012), unchanged in Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven 
Selvedge From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2010-2011, 78 FR 10130 
(February 13, 2013). A change in practice with respect to the 
conditional review of the PRC-wide entity is not applicable to this 
administrative review. See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of 
Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in 
Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket 
Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65964, 
65969-70 (November 4, 2013) (apply the change in practice to reviews 
for which the notice of opportunity to request an administrative 
review is published on or after December 4, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by parties 
in this review are addressed in the Decision Memorandum. A list of the 
issues that parties raised and to which we responded in the Decision 
Memorandum follows as an appendix to this notice. The Decision 
Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via 
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to 
registered users at http://access.trade.gov, and is available to all 
parties in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department 
of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision 
Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed paper copy and electronic version of the 
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on a review of the record and comments received from 
interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we made revisions 
to the margin calculations for Golden Dragon.\10\ We made the following 
changes to the margin calculation for Golden Dragon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     We included Golden Dragon's recycled copper, which is 
reintroduced into the production process, in the calculation of the 
copper consumption rate. We also gave Golden Dragon a by-product offset 
for the reintroduced copper.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id. at Comments 3 and 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     We revised the calculation for the truck freight 
calculation using factual information available on the record.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id. at Comment 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     We removed import data from outside of the POR that was 
inadvertently included.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id. at Comment 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Final Results

    We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins 
exist for the POR:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Weighted-
                                                                average
                          Exporter                              dumping
                                                                margin
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc., Hong Kong GD        10.50
 Trading Co., Ltd., and Golden Dragon Holding (Hong Kong)
 International, Ltd.........................................
PRC-Wide Entity \14\........................................       60.85
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    \\Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``the Act''), and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department will 
determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') shall 
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this 
review. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 
15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The PRC-Wide Entity includes, inter alia, Shanghai Hailiang 
Metal Trading Limited, Hong Kong Hailiang Metal, China Hailiang 
Metal Trading, Foshan Hua Hong Copper Tube Co., Ltd., Guilin Lijia 
Metals Co., Ltd., Sinochem Ningbo Import & Export Co., Ltd., 
Sinochem Ningbo Ltd., Taicang City Jinxin Copper Tube Co., Ltd., 
Ningbo Jintian Copper Tube Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Jiahe Pipes Inc., and 
Zhejiang Naile Copper Co., Ltd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Golden Dragon, the Department calculated importer-specific 
assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping 
calculated for the importer's examined sales and the total entered 
value of those sales. We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties 
on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-
specific assessment rate is not zero or de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 
percent). Where an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de 
minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries 
without regard to antidumping duties.
    For the PRC-wide entity, the Department will instruct CBP to 
liquidate all appropriate entries as an assessment rate for antidumping 
duties equal to the weighted-average dumping margin listed above in the 
Final Results section.
    The Department announced a refinement to its assessment practice in 
non-market economy (``NME'') cases. Pursuant to this refinement in 
practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales 
databases submitted by companies individually examined during this 
review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at 
the rate for the NME-wide entity. In addition, if the Department 
determines that an exporter under review had no shipments of the 
subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that 
exporter's case number (i.e., at that exporter's rate) will be 
liquidated at the rate for the NME-wide entity.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For a full discussion of this practice, see Non-Market 
Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 
76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this administrative review for 
shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as 
provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters 
identified above, the cash deposit rate will be equal to their 
weighted-average dumping margin in these final results of review; (2) 
for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters that 
received a separate rate in a previously completed segment of this 
proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the existing 
exporter-specific rate; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject 
merchandise that have not been found to be entitled a separate rate, 
the cash deposit rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity (i.e., 60.85 
percent); and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise 
which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be 
the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that non-PRC 
exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in 
effect until further notice.

Disclosure

    We intend to disclose the calculations performed regarding these 
final results within five days of the date of publication of this 
notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Notification to Importers Regarding the Reimbursement of Duties

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding 
the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the 
relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this 
requirement could

[[Page 32089]]

result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of 
antidumping duties has occurred and the subsequent assessment of 
doubled antidumping duties.

Notifications to All Parties

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
Administrative Protective Order (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues 
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the 
proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of 
APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby 
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO 
is a violation which is subject to sanction.
    We are issuing and publishing this administrative review and notice 
in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: May 29, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix--Issues and Decision Memorandum

Summary
Background
Scope of the Order
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms
Discussion of the Issues
    Comment 1: Whether the Department Properly Adjusted for VAT
    Comment 2: Whether the Department Properly Applied Its 
Differential Pricing Analysis
    Comment 3: Whether Golden Dragon Accurately Reported Its Copper 
Consumption Rate
    Comment 4: Whether Golden Dragon Is Entitled to a By-Product 
Offset
    Comment 5: Whether the Department Accurately Calculated Credit 
Expenses
    Comment 6: Whether the Department Accurately Calculated the 
Truck Surrogate Value
    Comment 7: Whether the Department Accurately Calculated the 
Solvents Surrogate Value
Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2015-13809 Filed 6-4-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P