[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 24 (Friday, February 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5604-5607]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2584]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-588-702, A-580-813, and A-583-816]


Final Results of Expedited Sunset Reviews: Certain Stainless 
Steel Butt-Weld Pipe and Tube Fittings From Japan, South Korea, and 
Taiwan

AGENCY:  Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION:  Notice of Final Results of Expedited Sunset Reviews: Certain 
Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe and Tube Fittings from Japan, South 
Korea and Taiwan.

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

SUMMARY:  On July 1, 1999, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') initiated sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders 
on certain stainless steel butt-weld pipe and tube fittings (``pipe and 
tube fittings'') from Japan, South Korea (``Korea''), and Taiwan (64 FR 
35588) pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(``the Act''). On the basis of a notice of intent to participate and an 
adequate response filed on behalf of a domestic interested party and 
inadequate response (in these cases, no response) from respondent 
interested parties in each of these reviews, the Department decided to 
conduct expedited reviews. As a result of these reviews, the Department 
finds that revocation of the antidumping duty orders would be likely to 
lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping at the levels 
indicated in the Final Results of Reviews section of this notice.

For Further Information Contact: Mark D. Young or Melissa G. Skinner, 
Office of Policy for Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
6397 or (202) 482-1560, respectively.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 4, 2000.

Statute and Regulations

    These reviews were conducted pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752 of 
the Act. The Department's procedures for conducting sunset reviews are 
set forth in Procedures for Conducting Five-year (``Sunset'') Reviews 
of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 
1998) (``Sunset Regulations''), and 19 CFR part 351 (1999) in general. 
Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to the 
Department's conduct of sunset reviews is set forth in the Department's 
Policy Bulletin 98:3--Policies Regarding the Conduct of Five-year 
(``Sunset'') Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders; 
Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998) (``Sunset Policy 
Bulletin'').

Scope

    The products covered by these reviews include certain stainless 
steel butt-weld pipe and tube fittings. These fittings are used in 
piping systems for chemical plants, pharmaceutical plants, food 
processing facilities, waste treatment facilities, semiconductor 
equipment applications, nuclear power plants and other areas. The 
subject merchandise are currently classifiable under the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') item number 
7307.23.00.00. The HTSUS item number is provided for convenience and 
customs purposes. The written description remains dispositive.
    With respect to the order on subject imports from Japan and Taiwan, 
the Department has made several scope rulings. The following products 
were determined to be within the scope of the order:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Product within scope            Importer             Citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superclean or ultraclean pipe   Benkan             56 FR 1801 (January
 fittings from Japan.            Corporation.       17, 1991).
A774 type stainless steel pipe  Tachia Yung Ho...  58 FR 28556 (May 14,
 fittings from Taiwan.                              1993).
Cast butt-weld pipe fittings    Eckstrom           Eckstrom Ind. v.
 from Taiwan.                    Industries.        United States, Court
                                                    No. 97-10-01913,
                                                    Slip. Op., 99-99
                                                    (Ct. Int'l Trade
                                                    Sept. 20, 1999).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following products were determined to be outside the scope of 
the order:

[[Page 5605]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Product outside scope           Importer             Citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certain gasket raised face      Fujikin of         60 FR 54212 (October
 seal sleeves and certain        America, Inc.      20, 1995).
 stainless steel ``Fine-fit''
 tube fittings imported from
 Japan.
Stainless steel tube fittings   Top Line Process   60 FR 54213 (October
 with non-welded end             Equipment          20, 1995).
 connection, and other           Corporation.
 products from Taiwan.
Primet joint metal seal         Daido............  61 FR 5533 (February
 fittings and primet joint                          13, 1996).
 weld fittings from Japan.
Sleeves of clean vacuum         Benkan...........  61 FR 5533 (February
 couplings and super-clean                          13, 1996).
 microfittings from Japan.
Superclean fittings from Japan  Benkan UCT         61 FR 40194 (August
                                 Corporation.       1, 1996).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These reviews cover imports from all manufacturers and exporters of 
pipe and tube fittings from Japan, Korea, and Taiwan.

History of the Orders

Japan

    The Department published its final affirmative determination of 
sales at less than fair value (``LTFV'') with respect to imports of 
pipe and tube fittings from Japan on February 4, 1988 (53 FR 3227). In 
this determination, the Department published three weighted-average 
dumping margins (which included a de minimis margin \1\) and an ``all 
others'' rate. The Department published its antidumping duty order on 
pipe and tube fittings from Japan on March 25, 1988.\2\ The Department 
has conducted four administrative reviews of this order since its 
imposition.\3\ In each of the four reviews we calculated one company-
specific margin. The order remains in effect for all manufacturers and 
exporters of the subject merchandise from Japan, other than Fuji who 
was excluded from the antidumping duty order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ One of the three companies investigated, Fuji Acetylene 
Industries Co., Ltd. (``Fuji''), was excluded from the antidumping 
duty order, since the Department found that it had a de minimis 
dumping margin.
    \2\ See Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Stainless Steel Butt-
Weld Pipe and Tube Fittings from Japan, 53 FR 9787 (March 25, 1988).
    \3\ See Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe and Tube Fittings from 
Japan; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 56 
FR 14922 (April 12, 1991); 56 FR 20592 (May 6, 1991); 57 FR 46372 
(October 8, 1992); 59 FR 12240 (March 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Korea

    The Department published its final affirmative determination of 
sales at LTFV with respect to imports of pipe and tube fittings from 
Korea on December 29, 1992 (57 FR 61881). In this determination, the 
Department published weighted-average dumping margins for one company 
and an ``all others'' rate. The Department published its antidumping 
duty order on pipe and tube fittings from Korea on February 23, 
1993.\4\ The Department has not conducted an administrative review of 
this order since its imposition. The order remains in effect for all 
manufacturers and exporters of the subject merchandise from Korea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Stainless Steel Butt-
Weld Pipe and Tube Fittings from Korea, 58 FR 11029 (February 23, 
1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Taiwan

    On May 14, 1993, the Department issued its final affirmative 
determination of sales at LTFV regarding pipe and tube fittings from 
Taiwan (58 FR 28556). In this determination, the Department published 
weighted-average dumping margins for three companies and an ``all 
others'' rate. The Department subsequently published an amended final 
determination and antidumping duty order on June 16, 1993.\5\ Since the 
order was issued, the Department has completed three administrative 
reviews with respect to pipe and tube fittings from Taiwan.\6\ The 
order remains in effect for all manufacturers and exporters of the 
subject merchandise from Taiwan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Amended Final Determination and Antidumping Duty Order: 
Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe and Tube Fittings from 
Taiwan, 58 FR 33250 (June 16, 1993).
    \6\ See Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings From 
Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 63 
FR 67855 (December 9, 1998) ( 3rd review); 65 FR 2116 (January 13, 
2000) (1st & 2nd review).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    On July 1, 1999, the Department initiated sunset reviews of the 
antidumping duty orders on pipe and tube fittings from Japan, Korea, 
and Taiwan (64 FR 35588), pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act. We 
received Notices of Intent To Participate in each of the three sunset 
reviews, on behalf of Alloy Piping Products, Inc. (``Alloy''), Flowline 
Division of Markovitz Enterprises, Inc. (``Flowline''), Gerlin, Inc. 
(``Gerlin''), and Taylor Forge Stainless, Inc. (``Taylor'') 
(collectively ``domestic interested parties''), by July 16, 1999, 
within the deadline specified in Sec. 351.218(d)(1)(i) of the Sunset 
Regulations. Pursuant to section 771(9)(C) of the Act, the domestic 
interested parties claimed interested-party status as U.S. 
manufacturers whose workers are engaged in the production of domestic 
like products. Moreover, the domestic interested parties stated that 
they have been involved in these proceedings since their inception. The 
Department received complete substantive responses from the domestic 
interested parties by August 2, 1999, within the 30-day deadline 
specified in the Sunset Regulations under Sec. 351.218(d)(3)(i). We did 
not receive a substantive response from any respondent interested party 
to these proceedings. As a result, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C), the Department determined to conduct expedited, 
120-day, reviews of these orders.
    In accordance with section 751(c)(5)(C)(v) of the Act, the 
Department may treat a review as extraordinarily complicated if it is a 
review of a transition order (i.e., an order in effect on January 1, 
1995). The reviews at issue concern transition orders within the 
meaning of section 751(c)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act. Therefore, the 
Department determined that the sunset reviews of the antidumping duty 
orders on pipe and tube fittings from Japan, Korea, and Taiwan are 
extraordinarily complicated and extended the time limit for completion 
of the final results of these reviews until not later than January 27, 
2000, in accordance with section 751(c)(5)(B) of the Act.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Five-Year 
Reviews, 64 FR 62167 (November 16, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the deadline for this determination was originally January 
27, 2000, due to the Federal Government shutdown on January 25 and 26, 
2000, resulting from inclement weather, the time frame for issuing this 
determination has been extended by one day.

Determination

    In accordance with section 751(c)(1) of the Act, the Department 
conducted these reviews to determine whether

[[Page 5606]]

revocation of the antidumping duty orders would be likely to lead to 
continuation or recurrence of dumping. Section 752(c) of the Act 
provides that, in making these determinations, the Department shall 
consider the weighted-average dumping margins determined in the 
investigation and subsequent reviews and the volume of imports of the 
subject merchandise for the period before and the period after the 
issuance of the antidumping duty order, and it shall provide to the 
International Trade Commission (``the Commission'') the magnitude of 
the margins of dumping likely to prevail if the order were revoked.
    The Department's determinations concerning continuation or 
recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margins are discussed 
below. In addition, parties' comments with respect to continuation or 
recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margins are addressed 
within the respective sections below.

Continuation or Recurrence of Dumping

    Drawing on the guidance provided in the legislative history 
accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''), specifically 
the Statement of Administrative Action (``the SAA''), H.R. Doc. No. 
103-316, vol. 1 (1994), the House Report, H.R. Rep. No. 103-826, pt.1 
(1994), and the Senate Report, S. Rep. No. 103-412 (1994), the 
Department issued its Sunset Policy Bulletin providing guidance on 
methodological and analytical issues, including the bases for 
likelihood determinations. In its Sunset Policy Bulletin, the 
Department indicated that determinations of likelihood will be made on 
an order-wide basis. See Sunset Policy Bulletin, 63 FR at 18872. In 
addition, the Department indicated that normally it will determine that 
revocation of an antidumping duty order is likely to lead to 
continuation or recurrence of dumping where (a) dumping continued at 
any level above de minimis after the issuance of the order, (b) imports 
of the subject merchandise ceased after the issuance of the order, or 
(c) dumping was eliminated after the issuance of the order and import 
volumes for the subject merchandise declined significantly. See Id.
    In addition to considering the guidance on likelihood cited above, 
section 751(c)(4)(B) of the Act provides that the Department shall 
determine that revocation of the order would be likely to lead to 
continuation or recurrence of dumping where a respondent interested 
party waives its participation in the sunset review. In these instant 
reviews, the Department did not receive a substantive response from any 
respondent interested party. Pursuant to Sec. 351.218(d)(2)(iii) of the 
Sunset Regulations, this constitutes a waiver of participation.
    In their substantive responses, the domestic interested parties 
argue that revocation of these antidumping duty orders would likely 
lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping by Japanese, Korean, 
and Taiwanese, producers/manufacturers. They argue further that since 
the imposition of the antidumping duty orders, most respondents have 
continued to dump in the U.S. market and have reduce their sales of 
pipe and tube fittings dramatically. The domestic interested parties 
argue that this demonstrates the inability of the producers from 
subject countries to sell in the United States at any significant 
volume without dumping. Therefore, they assert, were the antidumping 
duty orders revoked, it is likely that Japanese, Korean, and Taiwanese 
producers would need to dump in order to sell their pipe and tube 
fittings in any significant quantities in the United States.

Japan

    The domestic interested parties argue that the imposition of the 
antidumping duty order had a dramatic effect on subject import volumes 
from Japan. They indicate that in the years following the order, 
Japanese imports have averaged 13 percent of their pre-order levels. 
Moreover, they assert, the dumping margins for Japanese manufacturers 
continue at significant levels. In sum, the domestic interested parties 
argue, the dramatic decline in import volumes following the imposition 
of the order in conjunction with continued margins of dumping indicates 
that dumping by Japanese pipe and tube fitting producers is likely to 
continue or recur in the event of revocation of the order.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See August 2, 1999, Substantive Response of the Domestic 
Interested Parties regarding pipe and tube fittings from Japan at 
12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Korea

    With respect to subject merchandise from Korea, the domestic 
interested parties maintain that, in the year the order was imposed, 
imports from Korea fell to 4,228 pounds from approximately 523,619 
pounds the year before. They argue further that, in the years following 
the imposition of the order, average import volumes of the subject 
merchandise were more than 90 percent lower than in the years 
preceeding the issuance of the order. Therefore, the domestic 
interested parties argue that the near cessation of imports from Korea 
demonstrates that Korean manufacturers need to dump pipe and tube 
fittings in the U.S. market in order to sell at pre-order volumes. To 
support this conclusion the domestic interested parties assert that 
dumping margins for all Korean manufacturers of pipe and tube fittings 
are extraordinarily high at 21.2 percent. Yet, they contend, Korean 
manufacturers never availed themselves of the administrative review 
process to demonstrate that their dumping has ceased or abated.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See August 2, 1999, Substantive Response of the Domestic 
Interested Parties regarding pipe and tube fittings from Korea at 
13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Taiwan

    The domestic interested parties assert that only one Taiwanese 
respondent has had dumping margins below de minimis levels since the 
issuance of the order. They argue that, following the issuance of the 
order, imports from Taiwan dropped to a level far below their pre-order 
level and have never been more than 50 percent of their pre-order 
level. The domestic interested parties conclude that Taiwanese 
importers need to dump pipe and tube fittings in the U.S. market in 
order to sell at pre-order volumes. To corroborate this conclusion, the 
domestic interested parties note that the dumping margins for all but 
one Taiwanese manufacturer are extraordinarily high and yet, they have 
never availed themselves of the administrative review process to 
demonstrate that their dumping has abated.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See August 2, 1999, Substantive Response of the Domestic 
Interested Parties regarding pipe and tube fittings from Taiwan at 
14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

General Discussion

    If companies continue dumping with the discipline of an order in 
place or imports ceased after the issuance of the order, the Department 
may reasonably infer that dumping would continue or recur if the 
discipline were removed. See section II.A.3 of the Sunset Policy 
Bulletin and the SAA at 890, and the House Report at 63-64. As pointed 
out above, dumping margins at levels above de minimis continue to exist 
for shipments of the subject merchandise from Japan, Korea, and Taiwan.
    Consistent with section 752(c) of the Act, the Department also 
considers the volume of imports before and after issuance of the order. 
As outlined in each respective section above, the domestic interested 
parties argue that a significant decline in the volume of imports of 
the subject merchandise from

[[Page 5607]]

Japan, Taiwan, and Korea since the imposition of the orders provides 
further evidence that dumping would continue if the orders were 
revoked. In their substantive responses, the domestic interested 
parties provided statistics demonstrating the decline in import volumes 
of pipe and tube fittings from Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. The Department 
agrees with the domestic interested parties' arguments that imports of 
the subject merchandise fell sharply after the orders were imposed and 
never regained pre-order volumes.
    As noted above, in conducting its sunset reviews, the Department 
considered the weighted-average dumping margins and volume of imports 
in determining whether revocation of these antidumping duty orders 
would lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping. Based on this 
analysis, the Department finds that the existence of dumping margins at 
levels above de minimis and a reduction in export volumes after the 
issuance of the orders is highly probative of the likelihood of 
continuation or recurrence of dumping. A deposit rate above de minimis 
continues in effect for exports of the subject merchandise by all 
(except as indicated in footnotes 11 & 12) known Japanese,\11\ Korean 
and Taiwanese,\12\ manufacturers/exporters of the subject merchandise. 
Therefore, given that dumping has continued over the life of the 
orders, import volumes have declined significantly after the imposition 
of the order, respondent parties have waived participation in these 
reviews, and absent argument and evidence to the contrary, the 
Department determines that dumping is likely to continue or recur if 
the orders were revoked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ One Japanese producer was excluded from the antidumping 
duty order based on a de minimis dumping margin calculated in the 
Final Less Than Fair Value Determination. Supra at footnote 1.
    \12\ As noted above, one Taiwanese producer/exporter currently 
has a de minimis dumping margin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Magnitude of the Margin

    In the Sunset Policy Bulletin, the Department stated that normally 
it will provide to the Commission the margin that was determined in the 
final determination in the original investigation. Further, for 
companies not specifically investigated or for companies that did not 
begin shipping until after the order was issued, the Department 
normally will provide a margin based on the ``all others'' rate from 
the investigation. See Sunset Policy Bulletin 63 FR 18873. Exceptions 
to this policy include the use of a more recently calculated margin, 
where appropriate, and consideration of duty-absorption determinations. 
See id. at 18873-74. To date, the Department has not issued any duty-
absorption findings in any of these three cases.
    In their substantive response, the domestic interested parties 
recommended that, consistent with the Sunset Policy Bulletin, the 
Department provide to the Commission the company-specific margins from 
the original investigations. Moreover, regarding companies not reviewed 
in the original investigations, the domestic interested parties 
suggested that the Department report the ``all others'' rates included 
in the original investigations.
    The Department agrees with the domestic interested parties. The 
Department finds that the margins calculated in the original 
investigations are probative of the behavior of Japanese, Korean, and 
Taiwanese manufacturers/exporters if the orders were revoked as they 
are the only margins which reflect their actions absent the discipline 
of the order.
    Therefore, the Department will report to the Commission the 
company-specific and all others rates from the original investigations 
as contained in the Final Results of Reviews section of this notice.

Final Results of Reviews

    As a result of these reviews, the Department finds that revocation 
of the antidumping duty orders would likely lead to continuation or 
recurrence of dumping at the margins listed below:

                                  Japan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                   Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mie Horo...................................................        65.08
Nippon Benkan Kogyo, K.K...................................        37.24
All others.................................................        49.31
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fuji Acetylene Industries, Co., Ltd. was excluded from the 
antidumping duty order based on a de minimis dumping margin calculated 
in the Final Less Than Fair Value Determination. See Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Stainless Steel 
Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Japan, 53 FR 3227 (February 4, 1988).

                                  Korea
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                   Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Asia Bend Co. Ltd......................................        21.20
All others.................................................        21.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                 Taiwan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                   Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tachia Yung Ho Machine Industry Co. Ltd....................        76.20
Ta Chen Stainless Pipe Co. Ltd.............................         0.64
Tru-Flow Industrial Co., Ltd...............................        76.20
All others.................................................        51.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 of the Department's regulations. 
Timely 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 five-year (``sunset'') review and notice are in accordance 
with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: January 28, 2000.
Holly A. Kuga,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-2584 Filed 2-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P