[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 127 (Wednesday, July 2, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39516-39518]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-16665]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-357-810]


Notice of Final Results and Partial Recision of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; Oil Country Tubular Goods, Other Than Drill 
Pipe, from Argentina

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

ACTION: Notice of Final Results and Partial Recision of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review.

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

SUMMARY: On May 6, 2003, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published the preliminary results and preliminary partial recision of 
antidumping administrative review on oil country tubular goods, other 
than drill pipe, from Argentina. The review covers two manufacturer/
exporters, Siderca S.A.I.C. (Siderca) and Acindar Industria Argentina 
de Aceros S.A. (Acindar). The period of review is August 1, 2001, 
through July 31, 2002. We gave interested parties an opportunity to 
comment on our preliminary results. We received no comments. 
Furthermore, the Department made no changes in its analysis following 
publication of the preliminary results. Therefore, the final results of 
review are unchanged from those presented in the preliminary results of 
review.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 2, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Baker or Robert James, 
Enforcement Group III, Office 8, Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone (202) 482-
2924 and (202) 482-0649, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On May 6, 2003, the Department published its preliminary results 
and

[[Page 39517]]

preliminary partial recision of antidumping duty administrative review 
of oil country tubular goods, other than drill pipe, from Argentina. 
See Notice of Preliminary Results and Preliminary Partial Recision of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Oil Country Tubular Goods, 
Other Than Drill Pipe, from Argentina, 68 FR 23964 (May 6, 2003). We 
gave interested parties an opportunity to comment. No party submitted 
comments. We have now completed the administrative review in accordance 
with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Tariff 
Act).

Period of Review

    The period of review (POR) is August 1, 2001, through July 31, 
2002.

Scope of the Review

    Oil country tubular goods (OCTG) 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, whether or not conforming to American Petroleum 
Institute (API) or non-API specifications, whether finished or 
unfinished (including green tubes and limited service OCTG products).
    This scope does not cover casing or tubing pipe containing 10.5 
percent or more of chromium. Drill pipe was excluded from this order 
beginning August 11, 2001. See Continuation of Countervailing and 
Antidumping Duty Orders on Oil Country Tubular Goods From Argentina, 
Italy, Japan, Korea and Mexico, and Partial Revocation of Those Orders 
From Argentina and Mexico With Respect to Drill Pipe, 66 FR 38630 (July 
25, 2001).
    The OCTG subject to this order are currently classified in the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item 
numbers: 7304.29.10.10, 7304.29.10.20, 7304.29.10.30, 7304.29.10.40, 
7304.29.10.50, 7304.29.10.60, 7304.29.10.80, 7304.29.20.10, 
7304.29.20.20, 7304.29.20.30, 7304.29.20.40, 7304.29.20.50, 
7304.29.20.60, 7304.29.20.80, 7304.29.30.10, 7304.29.30.20, 
7304.29.30.30, 7304.29.30.40, 7304.29.30.50, 7304.29.30.60, 
7304.29.30.80, 7304.29.40.10, 7304.29.40.20, 7304.29.40.30, 
7304.29.40.40, 7304.29.40.50, 7304.29.40.60, 7304.29.40.80, 
7304.29.50.15, 7304.29.50.30, 7304.29.50.45, 7304.29.50.60, 
7304.29.50.75, 7304.29.60.15, 7304.29.60.30, 7304.29.60.45, 
7304.29.60.60, 7304.29.60.75, 7305.20.20.00, 7305.20.40.00, 
7305.20.60.00, 7305.20.80.00, 7306.20.10.30, 7306.20.10.90, 
7306.20.20.00, 7306.20.30.00, 7306.20.40.00, 7306.20.60.10, 
7306.20.60.50, 7306.20.80.10, and 7306.20.80.50.
    The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes. Our written description of the scope of this order is 
dispositive.

Partial Recision

    On September 25, 2002, we initiated an administrative review of 
sales made by Siderca and Acindar. See Initiation of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, Requests for Revocation in 
Part and Deferral of Administrative Reviews, 67 FR 60210 (September 25, 
2002). However, as noted in the preliminary results, Siderca notified 
us that it had no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. We 
conducted an on-site verification of this information at Siderca's 
facilities in February 2003, and uncovered no evidence that Siderca had 
shipments to the United States during the POR. See the Department's 
March 4, 2003, verification report on file in room B-099 of the Herbert 
C. Hoover Department of Commerce building. Furthermore, we received no 
comments concerning Siderca for the final results. Therefore, we are 
rescinding the review with respect to Siderca. Siderca's cash deposit 
rate will remain at 1.36 percent, which is the rate established for 
Siderca in the less-than-fair-value investigation. See Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Oil Country Tubular 
Goods from Argentina, 60 FR 33539 (June 28, 1995) and Antidumping Duty 
Order: Oil Country Tubular Goods from Argentina, 60 FR 41055 (August 
11, 1995).

Use of Facts Available

    We find, in accordance with section 776(a)(2)(A) and (C) and 
776(b), that the application of adverse facts available is warranted 
since Acindar did not respond to our questionnaire, and therefore has 
not cooperated to the best of its ability. Section 776(a)(2) of the 
Tariff Act provides that ``if an interested party or any other person 
(A) withholds information that has been requested by the administering 
authority; (B) fails to provide such information by the deadlines for 
the submission of the information or in the form and manner requested, 
subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782; (C) significantly 
impedes a proceeding under this title; or (D) provides such information 
but the information cannot be verified as provided in section 782(i), 
the administering authority and the Commission shall, subject to 
section 782(d), use the facts otherwise available in reaching the 
applicable determination under this title.''
    On September 25, 2002, the Department issued its standard 
antidumping questionnaire to Acindar. Acindar made no written response 
to the questionnaire. Therefore, we determine that the use of facts 
available is warranted pursuant to section 776(a)(2)(A) and (C) of the 
Tariff Act because Acindar withheld information requested by the 
Department by not responding to the Department's questionnaire, thereby 
significantly impeding this proceeding. See Memorandum from Fred Baker 
to the File dated April 1, 2003. Thus, the curative provisions of 
section 782 of the Tariff Act are not applicable because Acindar did 
not provide any response.
    Section 776(b) of the Tariff Act provides that, if the Department 
finds that an interested party ``has failed to cooperate by not acting 
to the best of its ability to comply with a request for information,'' 
the Department may use information that is adverse to the interests of 
the party as facts otherwise available. Adverse inferences are 
appropriate ``to ensure that the party does not obtain a more favorable 
result by failing to cooperate than if it had cooperated fully.'' See 
Statement of Administrative Action (SAA) accompanying the URAA, H.R. 
Doc. 103-316 at 870 (1994). Furthermore, ``an affirmative finding of 
bad faith on the part of the respondent is not required before the 
Department may make an adverse inference.'' Antidumping Duties; 
Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27340 (May 19, 1997), 
(Final Rule).
    The Department finds that in not responding to the September 25, 
2002, questionnaire, Acindar failed to cooperate by not acting to the 
best of its ability to comply with requests for information. The 
Department requires that respondents provide answers to the 
questionnaire because the Department uses the information to determine 
accurate dumping margins for the company. Since the information is 
within the sole control of Acindar, when the company fails to provide 
such information we cannot otherwise obtain the information necessary 
to calculate a dumping margin. Further, at no time did Acindar indicate 
during the POR that it was having difficulty in complying with the 
Department's request for information. Consequently, Acindar should not 
be allowed to benefit by its non-cooperation. Therefore, pursuant to 
section 776(b) of the Tariff Act, we may, in making our determination, 
use an

[[Page 39518]]

adverse inference in selecting from the facts otherwise available. This 
adverse inference may include reliance on data derived from the 
petition, a previous determination in an investigation or review, or 
any other information placed on the record. For this review we have 
determined to assign 60.73 percent as the facts available rate to 
Acindar. This rate represents the highest rate for any respondent in 
any prior segment of this proceeding. See Oil Country Tubular Goods: 
Final Results and Partial Recision of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 67 FR 13262 (March 19, 2003).
    Information from prior segments of the proceeding constitutes 
secondary information, and section 776(c) of the Tariff Act provides 
that the Department shall, to the extent practicable, corroborate 
secondary information from independent sources reasonably at its 
disposal. The Statement of Administrative Action (SAA) provides that 
``corroborate'' means simply that the Department will satisfy itself 
that the secondary information to be used has probative value. See 
Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the Uruguay Round 
Agreements Act, H.R. Doc. No. 103-316 at 870 (1994) and 19 CFR 
351.308(d).
    To corroborate secondary information, the Department will, to the 
extent practicable, examine the reliability and relevance of the 
information to be used. However, unlike other types of information, 
such as input costs or selling expenses, there are no independent 
sources for calculated dumping margins. Thus, in an administrative 
review, if the Department chooses as adverse facts available a 
calculated dumping margin from a prior segment of the proceeding, it is 
not necessary to question the reliability of the margin for that time 
period. With respect to the relevance aspect of corroboration, however, 
the Department will consider information reasonably at its disposal as 
to whether there are circumstances that would render a margin 
inappropriate. Where circumstances indicate that the selected margin is 
not appropriate as adverse facts available, the Department will 
disregard the margin and determine an appropriate margin. See, e.g., 
Fresh Cut Flowers from Mexico; Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 61 FR 6812, 6814 (Feb. 22, 1996) (where the 
Department disregarded the highest margin as adverse facts available 
because the margin was based on another company's uncharacteristic 
business expense resulting in an unusually high margin).
    As discussed above, it is not necessary to question the reliability 
of a calculated margin from a prior segment of the proceeding. Further, 
there are no circumstances indicating that this margin is inappropriate 
as facts available. In fact, this margin is Acindar's own margin from 
the 2000-2001 administrative review of OCTG. See Notice of Final 
Results and Recision in Part of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 
Oil Country Tubular Goods, Other Than Drill Pipe, From Argentina, 67 FR 
13262 (March 19, 2003). Therefore, we determine that the 60.73 percent 
rate has probative value for use as adverse facts available.

Final Results of Review

    As a result of our determination that it is appropriate to apply 
adverse facts available to Acindar, we determine that a the weighted-
average dumping margin of 60.73 percent exists for Acindar for the 
period August 1, 2001, through July 31, 2002.
    The Department will determine, and the U.S. Bureau of Customs and 
Border Protection (Customs) shall assess, antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries. The Department will issue appropriate assessment 
instructions directly to Customs within 15 days of publication of these 
final results of review. We will direct Customs to assess the resulting 
assessment rate against the entered customs values for the subject 
merchandise on each entry during the review period.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review 
for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication, as provided by 
section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for the 
reviewed company will be the rate shown above; (2) for previously 
reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit 
will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most 
recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this 
review, a prior review, or the original investigation, but the 
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be that established for the 
most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) if 
neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this 
review, any previous reviews, or the LTFV investigation, the cash 
deposit rate will be 1.36 percent, the ``all others'' rate established 
in the LTFV investigation. See Antidumping Duty Order: Oil Country 
Tubular Goods from Argentina, 60 FR 41055 (August 11, 1995).
    These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication 
of the final results of the next administrative review.

Notification of Interested Parties

    This notice also serves as a reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding 
the reimbursement of antidumping duties or countervailing 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 or countervailing 
duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping 
duties or countervailing duties.
    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues 
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the 
proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of 
APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby 
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO 
is a violation which is subject to sanction.
    We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(I)(1) of the Tariff Act.

    Dated June 25, 2003.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 03-16665 Filed 7-1-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S