Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube Products From Turkey: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments; 2013-2014, 76674-76676 [2015-31188]
Download as PDF
76674
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 237 / Thursday, December 10, 2015 / Notices
lodging, most meals, local ground
transportation, except as stated in the
proposed agenda, and air transportation
from the United States to the mission
site and return to the United States.
Washington, DC, Tel: (202) 482–1706,
Email: jeffrey.goldberg@trade.gov.
Frank Spector,
Acting Director, Trade Missions Program.
[FR Doc. 2015–31144 Filed 12–9–15; 8:45 am]
Timeline for Recruitment and
Applications
BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P
Mission recruitment will be
conducted in an open and public
manner, including publication in the
Federal Register, posting on the
Commerce Department trade mission
calendar (https://export.gov/industry/
education/) and other Internet Web
sites, press releases to general and trade
media, direct mail, notices by industry
trade associations and other multiplier
groups, and publicity at industry
meetings, symposia, conferences, and
trade shows. Recruitment for the
mission will begin immediately and
conclude no later than March 1, 2016.
Applications for the mission will be
accepted on a rolling basis. Applications
received after March 1, 2016, will be
considered only if space and scheduling
constraints permit.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Conditions for Participation
An applicant must submit a timely,
completed and signed mission
application and supplemental
application materials, including
adequate information on course
offerings, primary market objectives,
and goals for participation. The
institution must have appropriate
accreditation as specified per paragraph
one above. The institution must be
represented at the student fair by an
employee. No agents will be allowed to
represent a school on the mission or
participate at the student fair. Agents
will also not be allowed into the fairs to
solicit new partnerships. If the
Department of Commerce receives an
incomplete application, the Department
may reject the application, request
additional information, or take the lack
of information into account when
evaluating the applications.
Participants must travel to both stops
in Panama and Honduras on the
mission. Guatemala is the only optional
stop.
Each applicant must certify that the
services it seeks to export through the
mission are either produced in the
United States, or, if not, marketed under
the name of a U.S. firm and have at least
51 percent U.S. content of the value of
the service.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeffrey Goldberg, Industry & Analysis,
Office of Trade Promotion Programs,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:33 Dec 09, 2015
Jkt 238001
International Trade Administration
[A–489–501]
Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe
and Tube Products From Turkey: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Final
Determination of No Shipments; 2013–
2014
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On June 5, 2015, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on welded
carbon steel standard pipe and tube
products (welded pipe and tube) from
Turkey.1 The period of review (POR) is
May 1, 2013 through April 30, 2014.
The review covers the following
producers/exporters of the subject
merchandise: Borusan Istikbal Ticaret
T.A.S. and Borusan Mannesmann Boru
Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (collectively,
Borusan); 2 Toscelik Profil ve Sac
Endustrisi A.S. and Tosyali Dis Ticaret
A.S. (collectively, Toscelik); 3 and
ERBOSAN Erciyas Boru Sanayi ve
Ticaret A.S. (Erbosan). Based on our
analysis of the comments received, we
have made certain changes in the
margin calculations. Therefore, the final
results differ from the preliminary
results. The final weighted-average
dumping margins for the reviewed firms
are listed below in the section entitled,
‘‘Final Results of the Review.’’ Further,
we find that one of the companies
covered by this review had no
shipments of subject merchandise
during the POR.
DATES: Effective date: December 10,
2015.
AGENCY:
1 See Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and
Tube Products From Turkey: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013–
2014, 80 FR 32090 (June 5, 2015) (Preliminary
Results).
2 As explained in the Preliminary Results, the
Department treats Borusan Mannesmann Boru
Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. and Borusan Istikbal Ticaret
T.A.S. as the same legal entity. See Preliminary
Results, 80 FR at 32090 and n. 3.
3 As explained in the Preliminary Results, the
Department treats Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi
A.S. and Tosyali Dis Ticaret A.S. as the same legal
entity. Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Fred
Baker, Deborah Scott, or Robert James
AD/CVD Operations, Office VI,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–2924, (202) 482–2657, and (202)
482–0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Background
On June 5, 2015, the Department
published the Preliminary Results of
this review in the Federal Register. We
invited parties to comment on the
Preliminary Results. On July 26, 2015,
we received a case brief from Toscelik.
On July 27, 2015, we received case
briefs from Allied Tube & Conduit and
TMK IPSCO (petitioner) and from
Borusan. On August 10, 2015, we
received rebuttal briefs from petitioner,
Borusan, and Toscelik. The Department
conducted this review in accordance
with section 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order
is welded pipe and tube. The welded
pipe and tube subject to the order is
currently classifiable under subheading
7306.30.1000, 7306.30.5025,
7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040,
7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5085, and
7306.30.5090 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).
The HTSUS subheadings are provided
for convenience and customs purposes
only. The written description is
dispositive.4
Final Determination of No Shipments
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department preliminarily determined
that Erbosan had no shipments during
the POR.5 Following publication of the
Preliminary Results, we received no
comments from interested parties
regarding this company. As a
consequence, and because the record
contains no evidence to the contrary, we
continue to find that Erbosan made no
4 A full written description of the scope of the
order is contained in the memorandum from Gary
Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations,
to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations,
‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final
Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and
Tube Products from Turkey; 2013–2014,’’ (Issues
and Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently
with this notice and which is incorporated herein
by reference.
5 See Preliminary Results, 80 FR at 32091 and the
accompanying preliminary decision memorandum
at 3–4.
E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM
10DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 237 / Thursday, December 10, 2015 / Notices
shipments during the POR. Accordingly,
consistent with the Department’s
practice, we intend to instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
liquidate any existing entries of
merchandise produced by Erbosan, but
exported by other parties without their
own rate, at the all-others rate.6
Analysis of the Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs submitted in this review
are addressed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum, which is hereby adopted
with this notice. A list of the issues
raised is attached as an appendix to this
notice. The Issues and 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 https://access.trade.gov and it is
available to all parties in the Central
Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main
Department of Commerce building. In
addition, a complete version of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum can
be accessed directly at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
The signed Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the electronic
versions of the Issues Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of the
comments received, we made certain
changes to the Preliminary Results. For
a discussion of these changes, see Issues
and Decision Memorandum.
Final Results of the Review
As a result of this review, we
determine that the following weightedaverage dumping margins exist for the
period May 1, 2013 through April 30,
2014:
Weightedaverage
dumping
margin
(percent)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Producer or exporter
Borusan Mannesmann Boru
Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S.7 ..........
Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi
A.S.8 ........................................
3.16
0.00
6 See, e.g. Magnesium Metal From the Russian
Federation: Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 26922, 26923
(May 13, 2010), unchanged in Magnesium Metal
From the Russian Federation: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR
56989 (September 17, 2010).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:33 Dec 09, 2015
Jkt 238001
Disclosure
We intend to disclose the calculations
performed for these final results of
review within five days of the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.224(b).
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and
CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on
all appropriate entries covered by this
review pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C)
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b).
For Borusan, because its weightedaverage dumping margin is not zero or
de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent),
the Department has calculated importerspecific antidumping duty assessment
rates. We calculated importer-specific
ad valorem antidumping duty
assessment rates by aggregating the total
amount of dumping calculated for the
examined sales of each importer and
dividing each of these amounts by the
total entered value associated with those
sales. We will instruct CBP to assess
antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries covered by this review where an
importer-specific assessment rate is not
zero or de minimis. Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to
liquidate without regard to antidumping
duties any entries for which the
importer-specific assessment rate is zero
or de minimis.
For Toscelik, we will instruct CBP to
liquidate its entries during the POR
imported by the importers identified in
its questionnaire responses without
regard to antidumping duties because its
weighted-average dumping margin in
these final results is zero.9 Consistent
with the Department’s assessment
practice, for entries of subject
merchandise during the POR produced
by Borusan, Erbosan, or Toscelik for
which they did not know that the
merchandise was destined for the
United States, we will instruct CBP to
liquidate unreviewed entries at the allothers rate if there is no rate for the
intermediate company(ies) involved in
the transaction.10
We intend to issue instructions to
CBP 15 days after publication of the
final results of this review.
7 Also includes Borusan Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S.
See footnote 3.
8 Also includes Tosyali Dis Ticaret A.S. See
footnote 2.
9 See Antidumping Proceeding: Calculation of the
Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and
Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty
Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8103, 8103
(February 14, 2012).
10 For a full discussion of this practice, see
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954
(May 6, 2003).
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
76675
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective for all
shipments of subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication date of the final results of
this administrative review, as provided
by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The
cash deposit rates for Borusan and
Toscelik will be equal to the weightedaverage dumping margins established in
the final results of this review; (2) for
previously reviewed or investigated
companies not participating in this
review, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the company-specific rate
published for the most recently
completed segment of this proceeding in
which the company was reviewed; (3) if
the exporter is not a firm covered in this
review, a previous review, or the
original less-than-fair-value (LTFV)
investigation, but the manufacturer is,
the cash deposit rate will be the rate
established for the most recently
completed segment of this proceeding
for the manufacturer of subject
merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit
rate for all other manufacturers or
exporters will continue to be 14.74
percent, the all-others rate established
in the LTFV investigation.11 These
deposit requirements, when imposed,
shall remain in effect until further
notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder
to importers of their responsibility
under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a
certificate regarding the reimbursement
of antidumping duties prior to
liquidation of the relevant entries
during this review period. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
result in the Secretary’s presumption
that reimbursement of antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return or
destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
11 See Antidumping Duty Order; Welded Carbon
Steel Standard Pipe and Tube Products From
Turkey, 51 FR 17784 (May 15, 1986).
E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM
10DEN1
76676
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 237 / Thursday, December 10, 2015 / Notices
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these
results in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 2, 2015.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum
Summary
Background
Scope of the Order
Discussion of the Issues
Company-Specific Comments
Borusan
9. Duty Drawback and Treatment of the Yield
Loss Factor
10. Home Market Sales of Overruns and the
Ordinary Course of Trade
11. Domestic Inland Freight Expenses
12. International Freight Expenses
Toscelik
13. Billing Adjustments
14. Duty Drawback
15. Duty Drawback Adjustment to Cost
16. Toscelik’s Net Financial Expense
Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2015–31188 Filed 12–9–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES
SAFETY BOARD
[Recommendation 2015–1]
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Emergency Preparedness and
Response at the Pantex Plant
Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board.
AGENCY:
19:33 Dec 09, 2015
The Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board (Board)
published a notice of a recommendation
to the Secretary of Energy in the Federal
Register of December 3, 2015, (80 FR
75665), concerning emergency
preparedness at the Pantex Plant. The
Board corrects that notice by providing
the additional information as set forth
below.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
General Comments
1. Duty Drawback
2. Duty Drawback and Treatment of the
Resource Utilization Support Fund
3. Deducting Certain Expenses from the Duty
Drawback Calculation
4. Making a Duty Drawback Adjustment to
Normal Value and/or Capping the U.S.
Duty Drawback Adjustment
5. Treatment of Duty Drawback in the Cash
Deposit Rate and Assessment Rate
6. Other Arguments Related to Duty
Drawback
7. Differential Pricing Analysis Should Not
Be Used Because the Cohen’s d Test
Does Not Measure Targeted or Masked
Dumping
8. Differential Pricing Analysis Reasoning for
Use of Average-to-Transaction
Comparison Methodology is Arbitrary
and Unlawful
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Notice, recommendation;
correction.
ACTION:
Jkt 238001
Mark Welch, General Manager, Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625
Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 700,
Washington, DC 20004–2901, or
telephone number (202) 694–7000.
Correction
In the Federal Register of December 3,
2015, in FR Doc. 2015–30562, on page
75673, in the first column, after line 37,
add the following information:
CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE
SECRETARY
Department of Energy
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security
Administrator, National Nuclear
Security Administration
Washington, DC 20585
November 4, 2015
The Honorable Joyce L. Connery
Chairman
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
65 Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 700
Washington, DC 20004
Dear Madam Chairman:
On behalf of the Secretary, thank you
for the opportunity to review the
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
(DNFSB) Draft Recommendation 2015–
1, Emergency Preparedness and
Response at the Pantex Plant. The
National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) has established
specific performance goals for the
Pantex Emergency Management
Program, to include improvements in
the three areas highlighted by the Draft
Recommendation 2015–1. These goals
are consistent with the mutually agreedupon benefits of implementing the
DNFSB Recommendation 2014–1.
The draft Recommendation’s risk
assessment states: ‘‘it is not possible to
do a quantitative assessment of the risk
of these [the Pantex Emergency
Management Program] elements to
provide adequate protection of the
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
workers and the public.’’ As a point of
clarification, the Department of Energy
(DOE) demonstrates adequate protection
of workers, the public and the
environment as an integral part of
operating a nuclear facility like that
situated at the Pantex Plant. To this end,
the Department has put in place a
system of requirements, standards,
policies and guidance that, when
effectively implemented, not only
provide reasonable assurance of
adequate protection, but takes a very
conservative approach to ensure such
protection. Functions such as
emergency management provide that
additional conservatism and margin of
protection. We are confident that, even
with deficiencies identified by the
DNFSB, the Pantex Emergency
Management Program can perform its
role to ensure this protection.
Accordingly, DOE recommends
removing the phrase: ‘‘in order to
provide an adequate protection to the
public and the workers’’ in justifying
the need for the draft recommendation.
To increase protection assurances and
drive improvement in an effective and
efficient manner, I suggest that the best
approach to address the concerns
identified in your Draft
Recommendation is to incorporate
ongoing NNSA performance
improvement initiatives and
enhancements into the existing
implementation plans for
Recommendation 2014–1. This
approach would enable the Department
to take a holistic, integrated approach to
making the needed improvements at
Pantex.
We appreciate the DNFSB’s
perspective and look forward to
continued positive interactions with
you and your staff to include Pantexspecific actions and milestones in the
existing Implementation Plan for
Recommendation 2014–1.
If you have any questions, please
contact me or Mr. Geoffrey Beausoleil,
Manager, NNSA Production Office, at
865–576–0752.
Sincerely,
Frank G. Klotz
E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM
10DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 237 (Thursday, December 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76674-76676]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31188]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-489-501]
Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube Products From Turkey:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final
Determination of No Shipments; 2013-2014
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On June 5, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on welded carbon steel standard pipe and tube
products (welded pipe and tube) from Turkey.\1\ The period of review
(POR) is May 1, 2013 through April 30, 2014. The review covers the
following producers/exporters of the subject merchandise: Borusan
Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S. and Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret
A.S. (collectively, Borusan); \2\ Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi
A.S. and Tosyali Dis Ticaret A.S. (collectively, Toscelik); \3\ and
ERBOSAN Erciyas Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (Erbosan). Based on our
analysis of the comments received, we have made certain changes in the
margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ from the
preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the
reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled, ``Final
Results of the Review.'' Further, we find that one of the companies
covered by this review had no shipments of subject merchandise during
the POR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube Products From
Turkey: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2013-2014, 80 FR 32090 (June 5, 2015) (Preliminary Results).
\2\ As explained in the Preliminary Results, the Department
treats Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. and Borusan
Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S. as the same legal entity. See Preliminary
Results, 80 FR at 32090 and n. 3.
\3\ As explained in the Preliminary Results, the Department
treats Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. and Tosyali Dis
Ticaret A.S. as the same legal entity. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective date: December 10, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Baker, Deborah Scott, or Robert
James AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-2924, (202) 482-2657, and (202) 482-0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On June 5, 2015, the Department published the Preliminary Results
of this review in the Federal Register. We invited parties to comment
on the Preliminary Results. On July 26, 2015, we received a case brief
from Toscelik. On July 27, 2015, we received case briefs from Allied
Tube & Conduit and TMK IPSCO (petitioner) and from Borusan. On August
10, 2015, we received rebuttal briefs from petitioner, Borusan, and
Toscelik. The Department conducted this review in accordance with
section 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order is welded pipe and tube. The
welded pipe and tube subject to the order is currently classifiable
under subheading 7306.30.1000, 7306.30.5025, 7306.30.5032,
7306.30.5040, 7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5085, and 7306.30.5090 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). The HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The
written description is dispositive.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ A full written description of the scope of the order is
contained in the memorandum from Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, ``Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube
Products from Turkey; 2013-2014,'' (Issues and Decision Memorandum),
dated concurrently with this notice and which is incorporated herein
by reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Determination of No Shipments
In the Preliminary Results, the Department preliminarily determined
that Erbosan had no shipments during the POR.\5\ Following publication
of the Preliminary Results, we received no comments from interested
parties regarding this company. As a consequence, and because the
record contains no evidence to the contrary, we continue to find that
Erbosan made no
[[Page 76675]]
shipments during the POR. Accordingly, consistent with the Department's
practice, we intend to instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) to liquidate any existing entries of merchandise produced by
Erbosan, but exported by other parties without their own rate, at the
all-others rate.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Preliminary Results, 80 FR at 32091 and the accompanying
preliminary decision memorandum at 3-4.
\6\ See, e.g. Magnesium Metal From the Russian Federation:
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR
26922, 26923 (May 13, 2010), unchanged in Magnesium Metal From the
Russian Federation: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 75 FR 56989 (September 17, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of the Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs submitted in this
review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is
hereby adopted with this notice. A list of the issues raised is
attached as an appendix to this notice. The Issues and 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 https://access.trade.gov and it is available to all
parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department
of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Issues Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of the comments received, we made certain
changes to the Preliminary Results. For a discussion of these changes,
see Issues and Decision Memorandum.
Final Results of the Review
As a result of this review, we determine that the following
weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period May 1, 2013
through April 30, 2014:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Producer or exporter dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S.\7\........... 3.16
Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S.\8\................... 0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure
We intend to disclose the calculations performed for these final
results of review within five days of the date of publication of this
notice in the Federal Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Also includes Borusan Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S. See footnote
3.
\8\ Also includes Tosyali Dis Ticaret A.S. See footnote 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review pursuant to
section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b).
For Borusan, because its weighted-average dumping margin is not
zero or de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent), the Department has
calculated importer-specific antidumping duty assessment rates. We
calculated importer-specific ad valorem antidumping duty assessment
rates by aggregating the total amount of dumping calculated for the
examined sales of each importer and dividing each of these amounts by
the total entered value associated with those sales. We will instruct
CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by
this review where an importer-specific assessment rate is not zero or
de minimis. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to
liquidate without regard to antidumping duties any entries for which
the importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis.
For Toscelik, we will instruct CBP to liquidate its entries during
the POR imported by the importers identified in its questionnaire
responses without regard to antidumping duties because its weighted-
average dumping margin in these final results is zero.\9\ Consistent
with the Department's assessment practice, for entries of subject
merchandise during the POR produced by Borusan, Erbosan, or Toscelik
for which they did not know that the merchandise was destined for the
United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at
the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate
company(ies) involved in the transaction.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Antidumping Proceeding: Calculation of the Weighted-
Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping
Duty Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8103, 8103 (February 14,
2012).
\10\ For a full discussion of this practice, see Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties,
68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of
the final results of this review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all
shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results
of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2) of the
Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for Borusan and Toscelik will be equal
to the weighted-average dumping margins established in the final
results of this review; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated
companies not participating in this review, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most
recently completed segment of this proceeding in which the company was
reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a
previous review, or the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV)
investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be
the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this
proceeding for the manufacturer of subject merchandise; and (4) the
cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will
continue to be 14.74 percent, the all-others rate established in the
LTFV investigation.\11\ These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Antidumping Duty Order; Welded Carbon Steel Standard
Pipe and Tube Products From Turkey, 51 FR 17784 (May 15, 1986).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written
notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to
comply
[[Page 76676]]
with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 2, 2015.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
Appendix--List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum
Summary
Background
Scope of the Order
Discussion of the Issues
General Comments
1. Duty Drawback
2. Duty Drawback and Treatment of the Resource Utilization Support
Fund
3. Deducting Certain Expenses from the Duty Drawback Calculation
4. Making a Duty Drawback Adjustment to Normal Value and/or Capping
the U.S. Duty Drawback Adjustment
5. Treatment of Duty Drawback in the Cash Deposit Rate and
Assessment Rate
6. Other Arguments Related to Duty Drawback
7. Differential Pricing Analysis Should Not Be Used Because the
Cohen's d Test Does Not Measure Targeted or Masked Dumping
8. Differential Pricing Analysis Reasoning for Use of Average-to-
Transaction Comparison Methodology is Arbitrary and Unlawful
Company-Specific Comments
Borusan
9. Duty Drawback and Treatment of the Yield Loss Factor
10. Home Market Sales of Overruns and the Ordinary Course of Trade
11. Domestic Inland Freight Expenses
12. International Freight Expenses
Toscelik
13. Billing Adjustments
14. Duty Drawback
15. Duty Drawback Adjustment to Cost
16. Toscelik's Net Financial Expense
Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2015-31188 Filed 12-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P