Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 18105-18108 [2017-07684]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 72 / Monday, April 17, 2017 / Notices
hearing. The Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance official number
and title for the program under which
these petitions are submitted is 11.313,
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms.
Miriam Kearse,
Lead Program Analyst.
[FR Doc. 2017–07627 Filed 4–14–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–WH–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Foreign-Trade Zones Board
[B–23–2017]
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 203—Moses
Lake, Washington, Proposed Revision
to Production Authority, SGL
Automotive Carbon Fibers, LLC,
(Carbon Fiber), Moses Lake,
Washington
SGL Automotive Carbon Fibers, LLC
(SGLACF), operator of FTZ 203—Site 3,
submitted a notification that proposes a
revision to its existing production
authority at its facility located in Moses
Lake, Washington. The notification
conforming to the requirements of the
regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR
400.22) was received on March 30,
2017.
SGLACF previously requested and
received FTZ Board approval for
authority to produce carbon fiber from
foreign-status polyacrylonitrile (PAN)
fiber for export only within Site 3 of
FTZ 203 (see FTZ Board Order 1889, 78
FR 16247, 3/14/2013). Under that
existing authority, SGLACF must export
all carbon fiber made from foreign-status
PAN fiber. In the current request,
SGLACF proposes to replace the exportonly limitation pertaining to carbon
fiber produced from foreign-status PAN
fiber with a requirement for the
company to admit all foreign-status
PAN fiber (duty rate 7.5%) in privileged
foreign (PF) status (19 CFR 146.41).
SGLACF’s notification indicates the
following: Production under FTZ
procedures with the proposed PF status
requirement for admission of foreignstatus PAN fiber could exempt the
company from customs duty payments
on foreign-status PAN fiber used in
export production. For SGLACF’s
domestic sales of carbon fiber, PF status
would not allow the company to elect
the carbon fiber duty rate (free) on the
value of foreign-status PAN fiber used to
produce the carbon fiber, thereby
precluding inverted tariff savings. In
addition, at the time of customs entry
for each shipment of carbon fiber to the
U.S. market, the company would apply
the PAN fiber duty rate (7.5%) on an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:14 Apr 14, 2017
Jkt 241001
estimated value of PAN fiber contained
in scrap resulting from the production
process (based on the actual percentage
of scrap from the preceding year’s
production). SGLACF’s scrap rate was
about 1% in 2016. The company is
seeking these changes to its FTZ
authority for ‘‘logistical recordkeeping
purposes.’’
Public comment is invited from
interested parties. Submissions shall be
addressed to the FTZ Board’s Executive
Secretary at the address below. The
closing period for their receipt is May
30, 2017.
A copy of the notification will be
available for public inspection at the
Office of the Executive Secretary,
Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room
21013, U.S. Department of Commerce,
1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230–0002, and in the
‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the FTZ
Board’s Web site, which is accessible
via www.trade.gov/ftz.
For further information, contact Diane
Finver at Diane.Finver@trade.gov or
(202) 482–1367.
Dated: April 11, 2017.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–07705 Filed 4–14–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–580–870]
Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods
from the Republic of Korea: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2014–2015
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 14, 2016, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on certain
oil country tubular goods (OCTG) from
the Republic of Korea (Korea). The
period of review (POR) is July 18, 2014,
through August 31, 2015. Based on our
analysis of the comments received, we
have made certain changes to the
margin calculations, and, therefore, the
final results differ from the preliminary
results. The final weighted-average
dumping margins are listed below in the
section ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’
Further, we continue to find that certain
companies had no reviewable
shipments of subject merchandise
during the POR.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DATES:
18105
Effective April 17, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Deborah Scott or Victoria Cho, AD/CVD
Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482–2657 or (202) 482–5075,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 14, 2016, the Department
published the Preliminary Results of
this administrative review.1 For the
events that occurred since the
Preliminary Results, see the Issues and
Decision Memorandum.2 These final
results cover 50 companies.3 The
Department conducted this review in
accordance with section 751(a) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the order
is certain 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
order also covers OCTG coupling stock.
For a complete description of the scope
1 See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the
Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014–
2015, 81 FR 71074 (October 14, 2016) (Preliminary
Results), and accompanying Memorandum from
Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations
to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary
for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Decision
Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of the
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain
Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of
Korea,’’ dated October 5, 2016 (Preliminary
Decision Memorandum).
2 See Memorandum from James Maeder, Senior
Director, Office I, Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting
Assistant Secretary, for Enforcement and
Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for
the Final Results of the 2014–2015 Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain
Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of
Korea’’ (Issues and Decision Memorandum), dated
concurrently with this notice and incorporated
herein by reference.
3 The 50 companies consist of two mandatory
respondents, six companies for which we made a
final determination of no shipments, and 42
companies not individually examined.
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
18106
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 72 / Monday, April 17, 2017 / Notices
of the order, see the Issues and Decision
Memorandum.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs filed by parties in this
review are addressed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum, which is hereby
adopted with this notice. A list of the
issues which parties raised, and to
which we responded in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum, can be found in
Appendix I 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 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 on the Internet at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
The signed Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the electronic
version of the Issues and 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
SeAH Steel Corporation (SeAH), the
Department: (1) Reallocated SeAH’s hotrolled coil (HRC) costs based on the
common HRC grade; (2) adjusted
SeAH’s reported HRC costs to reflect the
particular market situation; (3) adjusted
SeAH’s reported cost of manufacturing
to reflect the arm’s-length prices for
affiliated services; (4) included the net
losses associated with damaged pipes in
the reported further manufacturing
costs; and (5) applied Pusan Pipe
America Inc. (PPA)’s general and
administrative (G&A) expense ratio to
the total cost of further manufactured
products, that is, the further
manufacturing cost plus the cost of
production of the imported OCTG,
because the denominator of the G&A
ratio included these costs. Also, the
Department allocated PPA’s G&A
expense to the cost of all non-further
manufactured subject products resold
by PPA.
For NEXTEEL Co., Ltd. (NEXTEEL),
the Department: (1) Adjusted
NEXTEEL’s reported HRC costs to
reflect the particular market situation;
(2) updated the constructed value
information used for NEXTEEL to reflect
SeAH’s information after adjustments
for the final results; (3) revised the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:14 Apr 14, 2017
Jkt 241001
payment dates for certain sales subject
to a lawsuit, and recalculated credit
expenses based on those dates; (4)
redefined the universe of sales to base
the margin calculation on sales which
entered the United States during the
POR; (5) corrected a clerical error (i.e.,
we revised the margin program to use
the correct quantity variable); and (6)
revised the calculation of certain U.S.
freight and storage expenses and the
universe of sales to which we applied
these expenses.
For a full discussion of these changes,
see the Issues and Decision
Memorandum.
Final Determination of No Shipments
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department preliminarily determined
that Hyundai Glovis, Hyundai Mobis,
Hyundai RB, Kolon Global, POSCO
Plantec, and Samsung C&T Corporation
had no shipments during the POR.4
Following publication of the
Preliminary Results, we received no
comments from interested parties
regarding these companies. As a result,
and because the record contains no
evidence to the contrary, we continue to
find that Hyundai Glovis, Hyundai
Mobis, Hyundai RB, Kolon Global,
POSCO Plantec, and Samsung C&T
Corporation made no shipments during
the POR. Accordingly, consistent with
the Department’s practice, we will
instruct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to liquidate any
existing entries of merchandise
produced by these six companies, but
exported by other parties, at the rate for
the intermediate reseller, if available, or
at the all-others rate.5
Rate for Non-Examined Companies
The statute and the Department’s
regulations do not address the
establishment of a rate to be applied to
companies not selected for examination
when the Department limits its
examination in an administrative review
pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the
Act. Generally, the Department looks to
section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which
provides instructions for calculating the
all-others rate in a market economy
investigation, for guidance when
calculating the rate for companies
which were not selected for individual
review in an administrative review.
Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act,
4 See
Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 71074.
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).
the all-others rate is normally ‘‘an
amount equal to the weighted average of
the estimated weighted average
dumping margins established for
exporters and producers individually
investigated, excluding any zero or de
minimis margins, and any margins
determined entirely {on the basis of
facts available}.’’
In this review, we calculated
weighted-average dumping margins for
SeAH and NEXTEEL that are not zero,
de minimis, or determined entirely on
the basis of facts available. Accordingly,
the Department assigned to the
companies not individually examined
(see Appendix II for a full list of these
companies) a margin of 13.84 percent,
which is the simple average 6 of SeAH’s
and NEXTEEL’s calculated weightedaverage dumping margins.
Final Results of Review
The Department determines that the
following weighted-average dumping
margins exist for the period July 18,
2014 through August 31, 2015:
Exporter or producer
NEXTEEL Co., Ltd .....................
SeAH Steel Corporation .............
Non-examined companies 7 ........
Weightedaverage
dumping
margins
(percent)
24.92
2.76
13.84
Disclosure
The Department intends 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
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the
Department shall determine, and CBP
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries of subject
merchandise in accordance with the
final results of this review. The
Department intends to issue assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after the
date of publication of the final results of
this administrative review in the
Federal Register.
Where the respondent reported
reliable entered values, we calculated
importer- (or customer-) specific ad
valorem rates by aggregating the
dumping margins calculated for all U.S.
5 See,
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6 We calculated the all-others rate using a simple
average of the dumping margins calculated for the
mandatory respondents because complete publicly
ranged sales data were not available.
7 See Appendix II for a full list of these
companies.
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 72 / Monday, April 17, 2017 / Notices
sales to each importer (or customer) and
dividing this amount by the total
entered value of the sales to each
importer (or customer).8 Where the
Department calculated a weightedaverage dumping margin by dividing the
total amount of dumping for reviewed
sales to that party by the total sales
quantity associated with those
transactions, the Department will direct
CBP to assess importer- (or customer-)
specific assessment rates based on the
resulting per-unit rates.9 Where an
importer- (or customer-) specific ad
valorem or per-unit rate is greater than
de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent), the
Department will instruct CBP to collect
the appropriate duties at the time of
liquidation.10 Where an importer- (or
customer-) specific ad valorem or perunit rate is zero or de minimis, the
Department will instruct CBP to
liquidate appropriate entries without
regard to antidumping duties.11
For the companies which were not
selected for individual review, we will
assign an assessment rate based on the
methodology described in the ‘‘Rates for
Non-Examined Companies’’ section,
above.
Consistent with the Department’s
assessment practice, for entries of
subject merchandise during the POR
produced by SeAH, NEXTEEL, or the
non-examined companies for which the
producer did not know that its
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.12
As noted in the ‘‘Final Determination
of No Shipments’’ section, above, the
Department will instruct CBP to
liquidate any existing entries of
merchandise produced by Hyundai
Glovis, Hyundai Mobis, Hyundai RB,
Kolon Global, POSCO Plantec, and
Samsung C&T Corporation, but exported
by other parties, at the rate for the
intermediate reseller, if available, or at
the all-others rate.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
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
8 See
19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
9 Id.
10 Id.
19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
a full discussion of this practice, see
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954
(May 6, 2003).
this administrative review, as provided
for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1)
The cash deposit rates for the
companies listed in these final results
will be equal to the weighted-average
dumping margins established in the
final results of this review; (2) for
merchandise exported by producers or
exporters not covered in this review but
covered in a prior segment of this
proceeding, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the company-specific rate
published for the most recently
completed segment in which the
company was reviewed; (3) if the
exporter is not a firm covered in this
review or the original less-than-fairvalue (LTFV) investigation, but the
producer is, the cash deposit rate will be
the rate established for the most recently
completed segment of this proceeding
for the producer of the subject
merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit
rate for all other producers or exporters
will continue to be 5.24 percent,13 the
all-others rate established in the LTFV
investigation. These cash 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 POR. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
Department’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
Regarding Administrative Protective
Order
This notice also serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of
their responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which
continues to govern business
proprietary information in this segment
of the proceeding. Timely written
notification of the return or destruction
of APO materials or conversion to
judicial protective order is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the
regulations and the terms of an APO is
a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing this
notice in accordance with sections
11 See
12 For
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:14 Apr 14, 2017
Jkt 241001
13 See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from
the Republic of Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not
in Harmony With Final Determination, 81 FR 59603
(August 30, 2016).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
18107
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.213(h).
Dated: April 11, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement
and Compliance.
Appendix I—List of Topics Discussed in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. List of Issues
A. General Issues
Comment 1: Calculation of Constructed
Value Profit
Comment 2: Differential Pricing
Comment 3: Particular Market Situation
Comment 4: Memoranda Placed on the
Record by the Department
B. SeAH-Specific Issues
Comment 5: Whether to Apply Total
Adverse Facts Available to SeAH
A. Whether SeAH Manipulated Its Margin
B. U.S. Sales of Non-Prime Products
C. CONNUMs With Negative Costs
D. Cost Difference Related to Timing
Differences of Production and Not to
Physical Characteristics
E. Information on Inputs From Affiliated
Parties
F. SeAH’s Inventory Movement Schedules
for OCTG
G. International Freight Expenses
H. Transaction-Specific Reporting of
Certain Movement Expenses
I. Reporting of Payment Terms for
Canadian Sales
J. U.S. Warehousing Expenses
K. Price Adjustments for Certain U.S. Sales
L. Korean Inland Freight
M. Warranty Expenses
N. Inventory Movement Schedules for ByProducts and Scrap
O. Costs To Repair Damaged Products
P. PPA’s Unconsolidated Financial
Statements
Comments 6–16: Whether To Apply Partial
Adverse Facts Available to SeAH
Comment 6: Date of Sale
Comment 7: International Freight
Comment 8: Canadian Inland Freight
Comment 9: Certain Movement Expenses
Comment 10: Packing Expenses
Comment 11: Adjustment to SeAH’s Costs
Related to U.S. Non-Prime Merchandise
Comment 12: Disregard SeAH’s Revised
Database Purporting To Reflect
Weighted-Average Costs of HRC
Comment 13: SeAH’s Cost Variances
Comment 14: PPA’s General and
Administrative (G&A) Expenses Related
to Resold U.S. Products
Comment 15: SeAH’s Scrap Offset
Comment 16: Valuation of SeAH’s NonPrime Products
Comment 17: Interested Party Standing
Comment 18: Timeliness of MarketViability Allegation
Comment 19: Reporting of Grade Codes
Comment 20: Freight Revenue Cap
Comment 21: International Freight for
Certain Third-Country Sales
Comment 22: SeAH’s Useable Cost
Database
Comment 23: Use of Average HRC Cost by
Grade for SeAH
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
18108
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 72 / Monday, April 17, 2017 / Notices
Comment 24: Procedural Issue Regarding
Service of Case Brief
Comment 25: Procedural Issue Regarding
Sanctions for Improper Conduct
C. NEXTEEL-Specific Issues
Comment 26: Whether To Apply Total
Adverse Facts Available to NEXTEEL
A. Lawsuit Between POSCO Daewoo and
Atlas
B. Expenses Incurred by a Certain Affiliate
C. Expenses and Revenues Booked by
NEXTEEL and a Certain Affiliate
D. Inventory Movement Schedule
E. Hot-Rolled Coil Grades Used To Produce
OCTG
Comment 27: NEXTEEL’s Unpaid U.S.
Sales to Atlas
Comment 28: Whether the Unpaid Sales
Constitute Bad Debt
Comment 29: Upgradeable HRC
Comment 30: Transferred Quantities of
OCTG in NEXTEEL’s COP Data
Comment 31: Sales Adjustment for Certain
Expenses
Comment 32: Major Input Adjustment for
Hot-Rolled Coil
Comment 33: Cost Adjustment for
Downgraded, Non-OCTG Pipe
Comment 34: Suspended Losses
Comment 35: Valuation Allowances of Raw
Materials and Finished Goods
Inventories
Comment 36: Affiliation
Comment 37: Universe of U.S. Sales
Comment 38: U.S. Freight and Storage
III. Background
IV. Scope of the Order
V. Margin Calculations
VI. Rate for Non-Examined Companies
VII. Discussion of the Issues
VIII. Recommendation
Appendix II—List of Companies Not
Individually Examined
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
A.R. Williams Materials
AJU Besteel Co., Ltd.
AK Steel
BDP International
Cantak Corporation
Daewoo International Corporation
Dong-A Steel Co., Ltd.
Dong Yang Steel Pipe
Dongbu Incheon Steel
Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd.
Dongkuk S and C
DSEC
EEW Korea
Erndtebruecker Eisenwerk and Company
GS Global
H K Steel
Hansol Metal
HG Tubulars Canada Ltd.
Husteel Co., Ltd.
Hyundai HYSCO 14
14 On September 21, 2016, the Department
published the final results of a changed
circumstances review with respect to OCTG from
Korea, finding that Hyundai Steel is the successorin-interest to Hyundai HYSCO for purposes of
determining antidumping duty cash deposits and
liabilities. See Notice of Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review:
Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of
Korea, 81 FR 64873 (September 21, 2016). Hyundai
Steel Company is also known as Hyundai Steel
Corporation and Hyundai Steel Co. Ltd.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:09 Apr 14, 2017
Jkt 241001
Hyundai HYSCO Co., Ltd.
Hyundai Steel Company
Hyundai Steel Co., Ltd.
ILJIN Steel Corporation
Kukbo Logix
Kukje Steel
Kumkang Industrial Co., Ltd.
McJunkin Red Man Tubular
NEXTEEL Q&T
Nippon Arwwl and Aumikin Vuaan Korea
Co., Ltd.
Phocennee
POSCO Processing and Acy Service
Samson
Sedae Entertech
Steel Canada
Steel Flower
Steelpia
Sung Jin
TGS Pipe
Toyota Tsusho Corporation
UNI Global Logistics
Yonghyun Base Materials
[FR Doc. 2017–07684 Filed 4–14–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
interested parties to comment on the
Preliminary Determination. We received
no comments from interested parties.
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this
investigation is finished carbon steel
flanges from Spain. For a full
description of the scope of this
investigation, see the ‘‘Scope of the
Investigation,’’ in Appendix I of this
notice.
Verification
Because the mandatory respondent in
this investigation did not provide the
information requested, the Department
did not conduct verification.
Analysis of Comments Received and
Changes Since the Preliminary
Determination
As noted above, we received no
comments pertaining to the Preliminary
Determination. For the purposes of the
final determination, the Department has
made no changes to the Preliminary
Determination.
[A–469–815]
Use of Adverse Facts Available
Finished Carbon Steel Flanges From
Spain: Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value
As stated in the Preliminary
Determination, we found that the
mandatory respondent in this
investigation, ULMA Forja, S.Coop
(ULMA), did not cooperate to the best
of its ability and, accordingly, we
determined it appropriate to apply facts
otherwise available with an adverse
inference, in accordance with section
776(a)–(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act).2 For the purposes of
the final determination, the Department
has made no changes to the Preliminary
Determination.
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) determines that
finished carbon steel flanges from Spain
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value
(LTFV). The period of investigation
(POI) is April 1, 2015, through March
31, 2016. The final estimated weightedaverage dumping margins of sales at
LTFV are shown in the ‘‘Final
Determination’’ section of this notice.
DATES: Effective April 17, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Flessner or Erin Kearney, AD/CVD
Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482–6312 or (202) 482–0167,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On February 8, 2017, the Department
published the preliminary affirmative
determination of sales at LTFV in the
investigation of finished carbon steel
flanges from Spain.1 We invited
1 See Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Spain:
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
All-Others Rate
As discussed in the Preliminary
Determination, the Department based
the selection of the ‘‘all-others’’ rate on
the simple average of the two dumping
margins calculated for subject
merchandise from Spain provided in the
Petition (as recalculated by the
Department for initiation purposes),3 in
Fair Value, 82 FR 9723 (February 8, 2017)
(Preliminary Determination).
2 See Preliminary Determination at 9724 and the
accompanying Memorandum from Gary Taverman,
Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations,
to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary
for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled,
‘‘Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary
Determination in the Antidumping Duty
Investigation of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from
Spain,’’ dated January 26, 2017 (Preliminary
Decision Memorandum), at 3–7.
3 See Letter from Weldbend Corporation and
Boltex Mfg. Co., L.P. (collectively, petitioners) to
the Secretary of the U.S. International Trade
Commission and the Secretary of Commerce
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 72 (Monday, April 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18105-18108]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07684]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-580-870]
Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 14, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative
review of the antidumping duty order on certain oil country tubular
goods (OCTG) from the Republic of Korea (Korea). The period of review
(POR) is July 18, 2014, through August 31, 2015. Based on our analysis
of the comments received, we have made certain changes to the margin
calculations, and, therefore, the final results differ from the
preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margins are
listed below in the section ``Final Results of Review.'' Further, we
continue to find that certain companies had no reviewable shipments of
subject merchandise during the POR.
DATES: Effective April 17, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Scott or Victoria Cho, AD/CVD
Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2657 or (202) 482-5075,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 14, 2016, the Department published the Preliminary
Results of this administrative review.\1\ For the events that occurred
since the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision
Memorandum.\2\ These final results cover 50 companies.\3\ The
Department conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of
Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2014-2015, 81 FR 71074 (October 14, 2016) (Preliminary
Results), and accompanying Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance, ``Decision Memorandum for the
Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review:
Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea,''
dated October 5, 2016 (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).
\2\ See Memorandum from James Maeder, Senior Director, Office I,
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K.
Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary, for Enforcement and
Compliance, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results
of the 2014-2015 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order
on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea''
(Issues and Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with this
notice and incorporated herein by reference.
\3\ The 50 companies consist of two mandatory respondents, six
companies for which we made a final determination of no shipments,
and 42 companies not individually examined.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the order is certain 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 order also covers OCTG coupling stock. For a complete description
of the scope
[[Page 18106]]
of the order, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by parties
in this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum,
which is hereby adopted with this notice. A list of the issues which
parties raised, and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum, can be found in Appendix I 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 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 on the Internet at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and 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 SeAH Steel Corporation (SeAH),
the Department: (1) Reallocated SeAH's hot-rolled coil (HRC) costs
based on the common HRC grade; (2) adjusted SeAH's reported HRC costs
to reflect the particular market situation; (3) adjusted SeAH's
reported cost of manufacturing to reflect the arm's-length prices for
affiliated services; (4) included the net losses associated with
damaged pipes in the reported further manufacturing costs; and (5)
applied Pusan Pipe America Inc. (PPA)'s general and administrative
(G&A) expense ratio to the total cost of further manufactured products,
that is, the further manufacturing cost plus the cost of production of
the imported OCTG, because the denominator of the G&A ratio included
these costs. Also, the Department allocated PPA's G&A expense to the
cost of all non-further manufactured subject products resold by PPA.
For NEXTEEL Co., Ltd. (NEXTEEL), the Department: (1) Adjusted
NEXTEEL's reported HRC costs to reflect the particular market
situation; (2) updated the constructed value information used for
NEXTEEL to reflect SeAH's information after adjustments for the final
results; (3) revised the payment dates for certain sales subject to a
lawsuit, and recalculated credit expenses based on those dates; (4)
redefined the universe of sales to base the margin calculation on sales
which entered the United States during the POR; (5) corrected a
clerical error (i.e., we revised the margin program to use the correct
quantity variable); and (6) revised the calculation of certain U.S.
freight and storage expenses and the universe of sales to which we
applied these expenses.
For a full discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision
Memorandum.
Final Determination of No Shipments
In the Preliminary Results, the Department preliminarily determined
that Hyundai Glovis, Hyundai Mobis, Hyundai RB, Kolon Global, POSCO
Plantec, and Samsung C&T Corporation had no shipments during the
POR.\4\ Following publication of the Preliminary Results, we received
no comments from interested parties regarding these companies. As a
result, and because the record contains no evidence to the contrary, we
continue to find that Hyundai Glovis, Hyundai Mobis, Hyundai RB, Kolon
Global, POSCO Plantec, and Samsung C&T Corporation made no shipments
during the POR. Accordingly, consistent with the Department's practice,
we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to liquidate
any existing entries of merchandise produced by these six companies,
but exported by other parties, at the rate for the intermediate
reseller, if available, or at the all-others rate.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 71074.
\5\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rate for Non-Examined Companies
The statute and the Department's regulations do not address the
establishment of a rate to be applied to companies not selected for
examination when the Department limits its examination in an
administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act.
Generally, the Department looks to section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which
provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in a market
economy investigation, for guidance when calculating the rate for
companies which were not selected for individual review in an
administrative review. Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-
others rate is normally ``an amount equal to the weighted average of
the estimated weighted average dumping margins established for
exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero
or de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely {on the
basis of facts available{time} .''
In this review, we calculated weighted-average dumping margins for
SeAH and NEXTEEL that are not zero, de minimis, or determined entirely
on the basis of facts available. Accordingly, the Department assigned
to the companies not individually examined (see Appendix II for a full
list of these companies) a margin of 13.84 percent, which is the simple
average \6\ of SeAH's and NEXTEEL's calculated weighted-average dumping
margins.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ We calculated the all-others rate using a simple average of
the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory respondents because
complete publicly ranged sales data were not available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of Review
The Department determines that the following weighted-average
dumping margins exist for the period July 18, 2014 through August 31,
2015:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Appendix II for a full list of these companies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter or producer dumping
margins
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEXTEEL Co., Ltd............................................ 24.92
SeAH Steel Corporation...................................... 2.76
Non-examined companies \7\.................................. 13.84
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure
The Department intends 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
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b),
the Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance
with the final results of this review. The Department intends to issue
assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of
the final results of this administrative review in the Federal
Register.
Where the respondent reported reliable entered values, we
calculated importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem rates by
aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S.
[[Page 18107]]
sales to each importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the
total entered value of the sales to each importer (or customer).\8\
Where the Department calculated a weighted-average dumping margin by
dividing the total amount of dumping for reviewed sales to that party
by the total sales quantity associated with those transactions, the
Department will direct CBP to assess importer- (or customer-) specific
assessment rates based on the resulting per-unit rates.\9\ Where an
importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem or per-unit rate is
greater than de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent), the Department will
instruct CBP to collect the appropriate duties at the time of
liquidation.\10\ Where an importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem
or per-unit rate is zero or de minimis, the Department will instruct
CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping
duties.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
\9\ Id.
\10\ Id.
\11\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the companies which were not selected for individual review, we
will assign an assessment rate based on the methodology described in
the ``Rates for Non-Examined Companies'' section, above.
Consistent with the Department's assessment practice, for entries
of subject merchandise during the POR produced by SeAH, NEXTEEL, or the
non-examined companies for which the producer did not know that its
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.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ For a full discussion of this practice, see Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties,
68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted in the ``Final Determination of No Shipments'' section,
above, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate any existing
entries of merchandise produced by Hyundai Glovis, Hyundai Mobis,
Hyundai RB, Kolon Global, POSCO Plantec, and Samsung C&T Corporation,
but exported by other parties, at the rate for the intermediate
reseller, if available, or at the all-others rate.
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 for by section 751(a)(2)(C)
of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the companies listed in
these final results will be equal to the weighted-average dumping
margins established in the final results of this review; (2) for
merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this
review but covered in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published
for the most recently completed segment in which the company was
reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or
the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the
producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the
most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of
the subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other
producers or exporters will continue to be 5.24 percent,\13\ the all-
others rate established in the LTFV investigation. These cash deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of
Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final
Determination, 81 FR 59603 (August 30, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 POR. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Department's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
Notification to Interested Parties Regarding Administrative Protective
Order
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern
business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding.
Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO
materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an
APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).
Dated: April 11, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix I--List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum
I. Summary
II. List of Issues
A. General Issues
Comment 1: Calculation of Constructed Value Profit
Comment 2: Differential Pricing
Comment 3: Particular Market Situation
Comment 4: Memoranda Placed on the Record by the Department
B. SeAH-Specific Issues
Comment 5: Whether to Apply Total Adverse Facts Available to
SeAH
A. Whether SeAH Manipulated Its Margin
B. U.S. Sales of Non-Prime Products
C. CONNUMs With Negative Costs
D. Cost Difference Related to Timing Differences of Production
and Not to Physical Characteristics
E. Information on Inputs From Affiliated Parties
F. SeAH's Inventory Movement Schedules for OCTG
G. International Freight Expenses
H. Transaction-Specific Reporting of Certain Movement Expenses
I. Reporting of Payment Terms for Canadian Sales
J. U.S. Warehousing Expenses
K. Price Adjustments for Certain U.S. Sales
L. Korean Inland Freight
M. Warranty Expenses
N. Inventory Movement Schedules for By-Products and Scrap
O. Costs To Repair Damaged Products
P. PPA's Unconsolidated Financial Statements
Comments 6-16: Whether To Apply Partial Adverse Facts Available
to SeAH
Comment 6: Date of Sale
Comment 7: International Freight
Comment 8: Canadian Inland Freight
Comment 9: Certain Movement Expenses
Comment 10: Packing Expenses
Comment 11: Adjustment to SeAH's Costs Related to U.S. Non-Prime
Merchandise
Comment 12: Disregard SeAH's Revised Database Purporting To
Reflect Weighted-Average Costs of HRC
Comment 13: SeAH's Cost Variances
Comment 14: PPA's General and Administrative (G&A) Expenses
Related to Resold U.S. Products
Comment 15: SeAH's Scrap Offset
Comment 16: Valuation of SeAH's Non-Prime Products
Comment 17: Interested Party Standing
Comment 18: Timeliness of Market-Viability Allegation
Comment 19: Reporting of Grade Codes
Comment 20: Freight Revenue Cap
Comment 21: International Freight for Certain Third-Country
Sales
Comment 22: SeAH's Useable Cost Database
Comment 23: Use of Average HRC Cost by Grade for SeAH
[[Page 18108]]
Comment 24: Procedural Issue Regarding Service of Case Brief
Comment 25: Procedural Issue Regarding Sanctions for Improper
Conduct
C. NEXTEEL-Specific Issues
Comment 26: Whether To Apply Total Adverse Facts Available to
NEXTEEL
A. Lawsuit Between POSCO Daewoo and Atlas
B. Expenses Incurred by a Certain Affiliate
C. Expenses and Revenues Booked by NEXTEEL and a Certain
Affiliate
D. Inventory Movement Schedule
E. Hot-Rolled Coil Grades Used To Produce OCTG
Comment 27: NEXTEEL's Unpaid U.S. Sales to Atlas
Comment 28: Whether the Unpaid Sales Constitute Bad Debt
Comment 29: Upgradeable HRC
Comment 30: Transferred Quantities of OCTG in NEXTEEL's COP Data
Comment 31: Sales Adjustment for Certain Expenses
Comment 32: Major Input Adjustment for Hot-Rolled Coil
Comment 33: Cost Adjustment for Downgraded, Non-OCTG Pipe
Comment 34: Suspended Losses
Comment 35: Valuation Allowances of Raw Materials and Finished
Goods Inventories
Comment 36: Affiliation
Comment 37: Universe of U.S. Sales
Comment 38: U.S. Freight and Storage
III. Background
IV. Scope of the Order
V. Margin Calculations
VI. Rate for Non-Examined Companies
VII. Discussion of the Issues
VIII. Recommendation
Appendix II--List of Companies Not Individually Examined
A.R. Williams Materials
AJU Besteel Co., Ltd.
AK Steel
BDP International
Cantak Corporation
Daewoo International Corporation
Dong-A Steel Co., Ltd.
Dong Yang Steel Pipe
Dongbu Incheon Steel
Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd.
Dongkuk S and C
DSEC
EEW Korea
Erndtebruecker Eisenwerk and Company
GS Global
H K Steel
Hansol Metal
HG Tubulars Canada Ltd.
Husteel Co., Ltd.
Hyundai HYSCO \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ On September 21, 2016, the Department published the final
results of a changed circumstances review with respect to OCTG from
Korea, finding that Hyundai Steel is the successor-in-interest to
Hyundai HYSCO for purposes of determining antidumping duty cash
deposits and liabilities. See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Changed Circumstances Review: Oil Country Tubular Goods from
the Republic of Korea, 81 FR 64873 (September 21, 2016). Hyundai
Steel Company is also known as Hyundai Steel Corporation and Hyundai
Steel Co. Ltd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyundai HYSCO Co., Ltd.
Hyundai Steel Company
Hyundai Steel Co., Ltd.
ILJIN Steel Corporation
Kukbo Logix
Kukje Steel
Kumkang Industrial Co., Ltd.
McJunkin Red Man Tubular
NEXTEEL Q&T
Nippon Arwwl and Aumikin Vuaan Korea Co., Ltd.
Phocennee
POSCO Processing and Acy Service
Samson
Sedae Entertech
Steel Canada
Steel Flower
Steelpia
Sung Jin
TGS Pipe
Toyota Tsusho Corporation
UNI Global Logistics
Yonghyun Base Materials
[FR Doc. 2017-07684 Filed 4-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P