Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016, 33919-33921 [2018-15327]

Download as PDF amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Notices for the production of passenger vehicle and sport utility vehicle (SUV) subassemblies. Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), FTZ activity would be limited to the specific foreign-status materials and components and specific finished products described in the submitted notification (as described below) and subsequently authorized by the FTZ Board. Production under FTZ procedures could exempt Brose from customs duty payments on the foreign-status components used in export production. On its domestic sales, for the foreignstatus materials/components noted below, Brose would be able to choose the duty rates during customs entry procedures that apply to seat frames, motor vehicle seat adjusters, automobile door modules, lift gate spindles, handsfree lift gate access modules, and cooling fan modules (duty rate ranges from duty-free to 4.4%). Brose would be able to avoid duty on foreign-status components which become scrap/waste. Customs duties also could possibly be deferred or reduced on foreign-status production equipment. The components and materials sourced from abroad include: Automotive grease/lubricant; thermal transfer film; plastic tubes; plastic hoses; self-adhesive plastic sheets in rolls; vehicle door plastic handles; plastic mountings; plastic brackets; decals; plastic spacers; plastic seals; rubber o-rings; rubber seals; rubber gaskets; rubber spacers; rubber end stops; rubber caps; blank self-adhesive labels; steel self-tapping screws; screws, bolts, and nut assemblies; steel nuts; steel torsion spring washers and lock washers; steel washers, steel spacers; steel rivets; steel cotters and cotter pins; steel pins; helical steel springs; steel springs; steel cable drum wire; steel metal clips/clamps; motor vehicle locks; base metal mountings; steel brackets; metal mountings for seats; steel tubular rivets; fan impellers, shrouds, and frames; steel bearing balls; transmission shafts; plain shaft bearings; gear boxes, gears, and gearing to adjust vehicle seats; grooved pulleys; gearing housings; motors to lift/tilt vehicle seats (electric DC motors, universal AC/DC motors, DC motors, and multi-phase AC motors); DC generators; electrical lighting or signaling equipment; loudspeakers; antipinch sensors; proximity sensors/ switches; electronic control modules; coaxial cables; automotive wiring harnesses; vehicle bumper carrier plates; door carrier plates; mechanical cables for motor vehicles; seat pans; coated cross tubes; side panels; slider assemblies; seat frames; black ink VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:19 Jul 17, 2018 Jkt 244001 ribbons; and, colored ink ribbons (duty rate ranges from duty-free to 8.5%). Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board’s Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is August 27, 2018. 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 Board’s website, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz. For further information, contact Juanita Chen at juanita.chen@trade.gov or 202–482–1378. Dated: July 12, 2018. Elizabeth Whiteman, Acting Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2018–15328 Filed 7–17–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–580–876] Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015– 2016 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) finds that manufacturers/ exporters of welded line pipe from the Republic of Korea sold welded line pipe at less than normal value during the period of review (POR), May 22, 2015, through November 30, 2016. DATES: Applicable July 18, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Goldberger or Ross Belliveau, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4136 or (202) 482–4952, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background This review covers 24 producers and/ or exporters. Commerce selected two companies, Hyundai Steel Company (Hyundai Steel) and SeAH Steel Company (SeAH), for individual examination. The producers and/or exporters not selected for individual PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 33919 examination are listed in the ‘‘Final Results of the Review’’ section of this notice. On January 9, 2018, Commerce published the Preliminary Results.1 On February 23, 2018, we postponed the final results by 60 days, until July 11, 2018.2 On March 23, 2018, we received case briefs from Hyundai Steel, SeAH, Husteel Co. Ltd. (Husteel), NEXTEEL Co., Ltd., and Maverick Tube Corporation (Maverick).3 On April 2, 2018, we received rebuttal briefs from Hyundai Steel, SeAH, Husteel, and Maverick.4 On June 27, 2018, Maverick and SeAH submitted comments in response to factual information Commerce placed on the record on June 25, 2018.5 On July 2, 2018, Maverick 1 See Welded Line Pipe from Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015–2016, 83 FR 1023 (January 9, 2018) (Preliminary Results). 2 See Memorandum, ‘‘Welded Line Pipe from Korea from the Republic of Korea: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of 2015–2016 Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews,’’ dated February 23, 2018. 3 See Hyundai Steel’s Case Brief, ‘‘Case Brief of Hyundai Steel Company,’’ dated March 23, 2018; SeAH’s Case Brief, ‘‘Case Brief of SeAH Steel Corporation,’’ dated March 23, 2018; Husteel’s Case Brief, ‘‘Case Brief of Husteel Co., Ltd.,’’ dated March 23, 2018; NEXTEEL’s letter, ‘‘Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: NEXTEEL’s Letter in Support of Respondents’ Case Briefs,’’ dated March 23, 2018; and Maverick’s Case Brief, ‘‘Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Case Brief,’’ dated March 23, 2018 (Maverick Case Brief). Maverick resubmitted certain pages of its case brief to reflect the public disclosure of certain information previously treated as business proprietary. See Maverick’s letter, ‘‘Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Resubmission of Selected Pages in Case Brief,’’ dated April 25, 2018. 4 See Hyundai Steel’s Rebuttal Brief, ‘‘Rebuttal Brief of Hyundai Steel Company,’’ dated April 2, 2018; SeAH’s Rebuttal Brief, ‘‘Rebuttal Brief of SeAH Steel Corporation,’’ dated April 2, 2018; Husteel’s Rebuttal Brief, ‘‘Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea. Case No. A–580–876: Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated April 2, 2018; and Maverick’s Rebuttal Brief, ‘‘Rebuttal Brief of Maverick Tube Corporation,’’ dated April 2, 2018. Hyundai Steel resubmitted certain pages of its case brief to reflect the public disclosure of certain information previously treated as business proprietary. See Hyundai Steel’s letter, ‘‘Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Resubmission of Certain Pages of Hyundai Steel’s Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated April 25, 2018. 5 See Maverick’s Letter, ‘‘Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Response to Factual Information Placed on the Record by the Department on June 25,’’ dated June 27, 2018. We rejected SeAH’s June 27, 2018 letter, which contained untimely-filed written argument. See Commerce Letter re: 2015–2016 Administrative Review of Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea, dated June 28, 2018. However, upon further consideration, we authorized SeAH to resubmit its June 27, 2018 submission; we also authorized parties to submit rebuttal comments to SeAH’s written arguments. See Commerce Letter re: 2015– 2016 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea, dated June 29, 2018. SeAH resubmitted its rejected filing E:\FR\FM\18JYN1.SGM Continued 18JYN1 33920 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Notices submitted information rebutting SeAH’s submission.6 Scope of the Order The merchandise subject to the order is welded line pipe.7 The product is currently classified under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers: 7305.11.1030, 7305.11.1060, 7305.11.5000, 7305.12.1030, 7305.12.1060, 7305.12.5000, 7305.19.1030, 7305.19.5000, 7306.19.1010, 7306.19.1050, 7306.19.5110, and 7306.19.5150. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and for customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive. Final Results of the Review We are assigning the following weighted-average dumping margins to the firms listed below for the period May 22, 2015, through November 30, 2016: Exporter/producer Hyundai Steel Company/ Hyundai HYSCO 10 ............... SeAH Steel Company .............. Changes Since the Preliminary Results amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Based on a review of the record and comments received from interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we made certain changes to the preliminary weighted-average margin calculations for Hyundai Steel and SeAH.9 on June 29, 2018. See SeAH’s letter, ‘‘Administrative Review of the Antidumping Order on Welded Line Pipe from Korea—Response to New Factual Information,’’ dated June 29, 2018. 6 See Maverick’s Letter, ‘‘Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Rebuttal Comments to SeAH’s written argument,’’ dated July 2, 2018. 7 For a complete description of the scope of the order, see Preliminary Results and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 8 See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2015– 2016 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Welded Line Pipe from Korea,’’ (dated concurrently with these results) (IDM), which is hereby adopted by this notice. 9 See accompanying IDM. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:19 Jul 17, 2018 Jkt 244001 18.77 17.81 Review-Specific Average Rate Applicable to the Following Companies: 11 Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs are listed in the Appendix to this notice and addressed in the IDM.8 Interested parties can find a complete discussion of these issues and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which 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 also available to all interested parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024, of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the IDM can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/ frn/index.html. The signed IDM and the electronic version of the IDM are identical in content. Weightedaverage dumping margin (percent) Exporter/producer AJU BESTEEL CO., Ltd ........... Daewoo International Corporation ........................................ Dong Yang Steel Pipe .............. Dongbu Incheon Steel Co ........ Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd .............. Dongkuk Steel Mill .................... EEW Korea Co, Ltd .................. HISTEEL Co., Ltd ..................... Husteel Co., Ltd ........................ Keonwood Metals Co., Ltd ....... Kolon Global Corp .................... Korea Cast Iron Pipe Ind. Co., Ltd ......................................... Miju Steel MFG Co., Ltd ........... MSTEEL Co., Ltd ..................... NEXTEEL Co., Ltd ................... Poongsan Valinox (Valtimet Division) .................................... POSCO ..................................... Sam Kang M&T Co., Ltd .......... Sin Sung Metal Co., Ltd ........... Soon-Hong Trading Company .. Steel Flower Co., Ltd ................ Weightedaverage dumping margin (percent) 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 18.30 10 As discussed in Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 80 FR 61366 (October 13, 2015), and accompanying IDM at 1, Hyundai HYSCO merged with Hyundai Steel subsequent to the period of investigation and Hyundai HYSCO no longer exists. Accordingly, our examination of Hyundai Steel includes entries made by Hyundai HYSCO prior to the date of the merger. 11 This rate is based on the actual weightedaverage margin using the publicly-ranged data calculated for those companies selected for individual review. Because we cannot apply our normal methodology of calculating a weightedaverage margin due to requests to protect business proprietary information, we find this rate to be the best proxy of the actual weighted-average margin determined for the mandatory respondents. See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France, et al.: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final Results of Changed-Circumstances Review, and Revocation of an Order in Part, 75 FR 53661, 53663 (September 1, 2010); see also Memorandum, ‘‘Calculation of the Review-Specific Average Rate for the Final Results,’’ dated concurrently with this notice. PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Exporter/producer Weightedaverage dumping margin (percent) TGS Pipe .................................. 18.30 We intend to disclose the calculations performed within five days of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Assessment Rates Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), where Hyundai Steel and SeAH reported the entered value of their U.S. sales, we calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the sales for which entered value was reported. Where Hyundai Steel did not report entered value, we calculated the entered value in order to calculate the assessment rate. Where either the respondent’s weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), or an importer-specific rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. For the companies which were not selected for individual review, we will assign an assessment rate based on the average 12 of the cash deposit rates calculated for Hyundai Steel and SeAH. The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable.13 We intend to issue liquidation instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this administrative review. Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of 12 This rate was calculated as discussed in footnote 11, above. 13 See section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act. E:\FR\FM\18JYN1.SGM 18JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Notices this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for each specific company listed above will be that established in the final results of this review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent and, therefore, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for previously investigated companies not participating in this review, the cash deposit will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding in which the company participated; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this 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 recent segment for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 4.38 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation.14 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. amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Administrative Protective Order 14 See Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey: Antidumping Duty Orders, 80 FR 75056, 75057 (December 1, 2015). 19:19 Jul 17, 2018 Jkt 244001 Dated: July 11, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix List of Topics Discussed in the IDM I. Summary II. Background III. Margin Calculations IV. Discussion of the Issues General Issues: Comment 1: Existence of a Particular Market Situation (PMS) Comment 2: Additional PMS Adjustments Comment 3: Allegations of Improper Political Influence in Determining the PMS Comment 4: Differential Pricing Comment 5: Reimbursement of Antidumping Duties Hyundai Steel-Specific Issues: Comment 6: Collapsing Hyundai RB with Hyundai Steel Comment 7: Date of Sale for Hyundai Steel’s U.S. Sales Comment 8: Reporting of Hyundai Steel’s Downstream Sales Comment 9: Assignment of Costs for Hyundai Steel’s Non-Prime Pipe Comment 10: Hyundai Steel’s Foreign Inland Freight Expenses Comment 11: Calculation Error for Hyundai Steel in the Preliminary Results SeAH-Specific Issues: Comment 12: SeAH’s Third Country Comparison Market Viability Comment 13: Constructed Export Price (CEP) Offset for SeAH V. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2018–15327 Filed 7–17–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE This notice 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 return/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. VerDate Sep<11>2014 This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. National Institute of Standards and Technology [Docket No. 171003965–7965–01] Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program; Knowledge Sharing Strategies. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice; request for information. AGENCY: The Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program includes a network of centers located in all 50 States and Puerto Rico, and is a source of trusted advice about new technologies, production techniques and business management practices. In SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 33921 order for the MEP System to grow, improve and have a greater impact on the growth and competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers in the global marketplace, the MEP System needs to transform to an organizationally and operationally integrated MEP National Network. This transformation will require a learning and knowledge sharing infrastructure, which NIST MEP envisions will be stood up as ‘‘The MEP Network Learning and Knowledge Sharing System’’ (MEP NLKSS). NIST is requesting information from interested vendors and others on possible designs and implementation of networked learning and knowledge sharing. The responses will inform NIST’s planning of the MEP NLKSS, including assisting NIST MEP with the development of the final Statement of Work for a performance-based contract. DATES: NIST will accept responses to this request for information until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on August 17, 2018. ADDRESSES: Responses will be accepted by email only. Responses must be sent to meprfi@nist.gov with the subject line ‘‘MEP Network Learning and Knowledge Sharing System RFI Response.’’ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Simpson, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 4800, Gaithersburg, MD 20899–4800, 301–975–5020, meprfi@ nist.gov; or Mary Ann Pacelli, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 4800, Gaithersburg, MD 20899–4800, 301– 975–5020, meprfi@nist.gov. Please direct media inquiries to NIST’s Office of Public Affairs at 301–975–NIST (6478). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NIST will consider the information obtained in response to this request for information in the development of a Scope of Work for a competitively awarded contract to develop and/or implement any or all parts of the MEP NLKSS. Background—The MEP System The MEP System consists of NIST MEP and its MEP Centers located in all 50 States and Puerto Rico. For almost 30 years the MEP Centers have served as trusted advisors focused largely on the continuous improvement of U.S. manufacturers for the purpose of achieving improved productivity. MEP Centers are a diverse system of state, university-based, and other non-profit organizations, comprising more than 1,300 technical experts offering products, technical expertise and services that address the critical needs of their local manufacturers. MEP Centers are funded through cooperative agreements issued by NIST. E:\FR\FM\18JYN1.SGM 18JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 18, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33919-33921]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15327]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-876]


Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of Korea: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) finds that 
manufacturers/exporters of welded line pipe from the Republic of Korea 
sold welded line pipe at less than normal value during the period of 
review (POR), May 22, 2015, through November 30, 2016.

DATES: Applicable July 18, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Goldberger or Ross Belliveau, 
AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4136 or (202) 
482-4952, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    This review covers 24 producers and/or exporters. Commerce selected 
two companies, Hyundai Steel Company (Hyundai Steel) and SeAH Steel 
Company (SeAH), for individual examination. The producers and/or 
exporters not selected for individual examination are listed in the 
``Final Results of the Review'' section of this notice.
    On January 9, 2018, Commerce published the Preliminary Results.\1\ 
On February 23, 2018, we postponed the final results by 60 days, until 
July 11, 2018.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Welded Line Pipe from Korea: Preliminary Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016, 83 FR 1023 
(January 9, 2018) (Preliminary Results).
    \2\ See Memorandum, ``Welded Line Pipe from Korea from the 
Republic of Korea: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of 2015-
2016 Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews,'' dated February 23, 
2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 23, 2018, we received case briefs from Hyundai Steel, 
SeAH, Husteel Co. Ltd. (Husteel), NEXTEEL Co., Ltd., and Maverick Tube 
Corporation (Maverick).\3\ On April 2, 2018, we received rebuttal 
briefs from Hyundai Steel, SeAH, Husteel, and Maverick.\4\ On June 27, 
2018, Maverick and SeAH submitted comments in response to factual 
information Commerce placed on the record on June 25, 2018.\5\ On July 
2, 2018, Maverick

[[Page 33920]]

submitted information rebutting SeAH's submission.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Hyundai Steel's Case Brief, ``Case Brief of Hyundai 
Steel Company,'' dated March 23, 2018; SeAH's Case Brief, ``Case 
Brief of SeAH Steel Corporation,'' dated March 23, 2018; Husteel's 
Case Brief, ``Case Brief of Husteel Co., Ltd.,'' dated March 23, 
2018; NEXTEEL's letter, ``Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of 
Korea: NEXTEEL's Letter in Support of Respondents' Case Briefs,'' 
dated March 23, 2018; and Maverick's Case Brief, ``Welded Line Pipe 
from the Republic of Korea: Case Brief,'' dated March 23, 2018 
(Maverick Case Brief). Maverick resubmitted certain pages of its 
case brief to reflect the public disclosure of certain information 
previously treated as business proprietary. See Maverick's letter, 
``Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Resubmission of 
Selected Pages in Case Brief,'' dated April 25, 2018.
    \4\ See Hyundai Steel's Rebuttal Brief, ``Rebuttal Brief of 
Hyundai Steel Company,'' dated April 2, 2018; SeAH's Rebuttal Brief, 
``Rebuttal Brief of SeAH Steel Corporation,'' dated April 2, 2018; 
Husteel's Rebuttal Brief, ``Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of 
Korea. Case No. A-580-876: Rebuttal Brief,'' dated April 2, 2018; 
and Maverick's Rebuttal Brief, ``Rebuttal Brief of Maverick Tube 
Corporation,'' dated April 2, 2018. Hyundai Steel resubmitted 
certain pages of its case brief to reflect the public disclosure of 
certain information previously treated as business proprietary. See 
Hyundai Steel's letter, ``Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of 
Korea: Resubmission of Certain Pages of Hyundai Steel's Rebuttal 
Brief,'' dated April 25, 2018.
    \5\ See Maverick's Letter, ``Welded Line Pipe from the Republic 
of Korea: Response to Factual Information Placed on the Record by 
the Department on June 25,'' dated June 27, 2018. We rejected SeAH's 
June 27, 2018 letter, which contained untimely-filed written 
argument. See Commerce Letter re: 2015-2016 Administrative Review of 
Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea, dated June 28, 2018. 
However, upon further consideration, we authorized SeAH to resubmit 
its June 27, 2018 submission; we also authorized parties to submit 
rebuttal comments to SeAH's written arguments. See Commerce Letter 
re: 2015-2016 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Welded Line 
Pipe from the Republic of Korea, dated June 29, 2018. SeAH 
resubmitted its rejected filing on June 29, 2018. See SeAH's letter, 
``Administrative Review of the Antidumping Order on Welded Line Pipe 
from Korea--Response to New Factual Information,'' dated June 29, 
2018.
    \6\ See Maverick's Letter, ``Welded Line Pipe from the Republic 
of Korea: Rebuttal Comments to SeAH's written argument,'' dated July 
2, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise subject to the order is welded line pipe.\7\ The 
product is currently classified under the following Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers: 7305.11.1030, 
7305.11.1060, 7305.11.5000, 7305.12.1030, 7305.12.1060, 7305.12.5000, 
7305.19.1030, 7305.19.5000, 7306.19.1010, 7306.19.1050, 7306.19.5110, 
and 7306.19.5150. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for 
convenience and for customs purposes, the written product description 
remains dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For a complete description of the scope of the order, see 
Preliminary Results and accompanying Preliminary Decision 
Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs are listed in the 
Appendix to this notice and addressed in the IDM.\8\ Interested parties 
can find a complete discussion of these issues and the corresponding 
recommendations in this public memorandum, which 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 also available to all interested parties in the Central Records 
Unit, Room B8024, of the main Department of Commerce building. In 
addition, a complete version of the IDM can be accessed directly at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed IDM and the 
electronic version of the IDM are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Memorandum, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 
Final Results of the 2015-2016 Administrative Review of the 
Antidumping Duty Order on Welded Line Pipe from Korea,'' (dated 
concurrently with these results) (IDM), which is hereby adopted by 
this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on a review of the record and comments received from 
interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we made certain 
changes to the preliminary weighted-average margin calculations for 
Hyundai Steel and SeAH.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See accompanying IDM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Results of the Review

    We are assigning the following weighted-average dumping margins to 
the firms listed below for the period May 22, 2015, through November 
30, 2016:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ As discussed in Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of 
Korea: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 80 FR 
61366 (October 13, 2015), and accompanying IDM at 1, Hyundai HYSCO 
merged with Hyundai Steel subsequent to the period of investigation 
and Hyundai HYSCO no longer exists. Accordingly, our examination of 
Hyundai Steel includes entries made by Hyundai HYSCO prior to the 
date of the merger.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
                     Exporter/producer                         dumping
                                                                margin
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyundai Steel Company/Hyundai HYSCO \10\...................        18.77
SeAH Steel Company.........................................        17.81
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Review-Specific Average Rate Applicable to the Following Companies: 
\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ This rate is based on the actual weighted-average margin 
using the publicly-ranged data calculated for those companies 
selected for individual review. Because we cannot apply our normal 
methodology of calculating a weighted-average margin due to requests 
to protect business proprietary information, we find this rate to be 
the best proxy of the actual weighted-average margin determined for 
the mandatory respondents. See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from 
France, et al.: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Reviews, Final Results of Changed-Circumstances Review, and 
Revocation of an Order in Part, 75 FR 53661, 53663 (September 1, 
2010); see also Memorandum, ``Calculation of the Review-Specific 
Average Rate for the Final Results,'' dated concurrently with this 
notice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
                     Exporter/producer                         dumping
                                                                margin
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AJU BESTEEL CO., Ltd.......................................        18.30
Daewoo International Corporation...........................        18.30
Dong Yang Steel Pipe.......................................        18.30
Dongbu Incheon Steel Co....................................        18.30
Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd......................................        18.30
Dongkuk Steel Mill.........................................        18.30
EEW Korea Co, Ltd..........................................        18.30
HISTEEL Co., Ltd...........................................        18.30
Husteel Co., Ltd...........................................        18.30
Keonwood Metals Co., Ltd...................................        18.30
Kolon Global Corp..........................................        18.30
Korea Cast Iron Pipe Ind. Co., Ltd.........................        18.30
Miju Steel MFG Co., Ltd....................................        18.30
MSTEEL Co., Ltd............................................        18.30
NEXTEEL Co., Ltd...........................................        18.30
Poongsan Valinox (Valtimet Division).......................        18.30
POSCO......................................................        18.30
Sam Kang M&T Co., Ltd......................................        18.30
Sin Sung Metal Co., Ltd....................................        18.30
Soon-Hong Trading Company..................................        18.30
Steel Flower Co., Ltd......................................        18.30
TGS Pipe...................................................        18.30
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We intend to disclose the calculations performed within five days 
of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this 
proceeding, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, and 19 CFR 
351.212(b)(1), Commerce has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of 
this review.
    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), where Hyundai Steel and SeAH 
reported the entered value of their U.S. sales, we calculated importer-
specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the 
total amount of dumping calculated for the examined sales to the total 
entered value of the sales for which entered value was reported. Where 
Hyundai Steel did not report entered value, we calculated the entered 
value in order to calculate the assessment rate. Where either the 
respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis 
within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), or an importer-specific 
rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the 
appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.
    For the companies which were not selected for individual review, we 
will assign an assessment rate based on the average \12\ of the cash 
deposit rates calculated for Hyundai Steel and SeAH. The final results 
of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping 
duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this 
review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where 
applicable.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ This rate was calculated as discussed in footnote 11, 
above.
    \13\ See section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We intend to issue liquidation instructions to CBP 15 days after 
publication of the final results of this administrative review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all 
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the 
final results of

[[Page 33921]]

this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the 
Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for each specific company listed above 
will be that established in the final results of this review, except if 
the rate is less than 0.50 percent and, therefore, de minimis within 
the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit 
rate will be zero; (2) for previously investigated companies not 
participating in this review, the cash deposit will continue to be the 
company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment 
of this proceeding in which the company participated; (3) if the 
exporter is not a firm covered in this 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 recent segment 
for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate 
for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 4.38 
percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation.\14\ 
These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until 
further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea and the 
Republic of Turkey: Antidumping Duty Orders, 80 FR 75056, 75057 
(December 1, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Order

    This notice 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 return/destruction of APO materials or 
conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to 
comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable 
violation.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: July 11, 2018.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

List of Topics Discussed in the IDM

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Margin Calculations
IV. Discussion of the Issues
    General Issues:
    Comment 1: Existence of a Particular Market Situation (PMS)
    Comment 2: Additional PMS Adjustments
    Comment 3: Allegations of Improper Political Influence in 
Determining the PMS
    Comment 4: Differential Pricing
    Comment 5: Reimbursement of Antidumping Duties
    Hyundai Steel-Specific Issues:
    Comment 6: Collapsing Hyundai RB with Hyundai Steel
    Comment 7: Date of Sale for Hyundai Steel's U.S. Sales
    Comment 8: Reporting of Hyundai Steel's Downstream Sales
    Comment 9: Assignment of Costs for Hyundai Steel's Non-Prime 
Pipe
    Comment 10: Hyundai Steel's Foreign Inland Freight Expenses
    Comment 11: Calculation Error for Hyundai Steel in the 
Preliminary Results
    SeAH-Specific Issues:
    Comment 12: SeAH's Third Country Comparison Market Viability
    Comment 13: Constructed Export Price (CEP) Offset for SeAH
V. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2018-15327 Filed 7-17-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P