[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 28 (Friday, February 11, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7237-7240]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-586]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-485-805]


Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line, 
and Pressure Pipe From Romania: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review and Final Determination Not To Revoke Order in 
Part

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

SUMMARY: On September 7, 2004, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the preliminary results of the antidumping duty 
administrative review of certain small diameter carbon and alloy 
seamless standard, line, and pressure pipe (seamless pipe) from 
Romania. This review covers one manufacturer/exporter of the subject 
merchandise. The period of review (POR) is August 1, 2002, through July 
31, 2003. Based on our analysis of comments received, these final 
results differ from the preliminary results. The final results are 
listed below in the ``Final Results of Review'' section.

EFFECTIVE DATES: February 11, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Layton or Erin Begnal, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0371 and (202) 482-1442, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Department published the preliminary results of the antidumping 
duty administrative review of seamless pipe from Romania. See Certain 
Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line, and Pressure 
Pipe From Romania: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary Determination 
Not To Revoke in Part, 69 FR 54119 (September 7, 2004) (Preliminary 
Results). The review covers one manufacturer/exporter, S.C. Silcotub 
S.A. (Silcotub).
    Romania's designation as a non-market-economy (NME) country 
remained in effect until January 1, 2003.\1\ Because the first five 
months of the POR fell before Romania's graduation to market-economy 
status and the last seven months of this POR came after its graduation, 
in its antidumping questionnaire to Silcotub, dated November 14, 2003, 
the Department determined that it would treat Romania as an NME country 
from August 1, 2002, through December 31, 2002, and a market-economy 
(ME) country from January 1, 2003, through July 31, 2003. The first 
part of this notice refers to the NME portion of the POR (NME POR) and 
the Department's NME methodology, and the second part of this notice 
refers to the ME portion of the POR (ME POR) and the Department's ME 
methodology. In the section of this notice entitled Final Results of 
the Review, we have calculated a weighted-average dumping margin 
reflecting the margin we calculated for the NME POR and the dumping 
margin we calculated for the ME POR. This weighted-average figure 
reflects the margin of dumping for the entire POR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless 
Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe from Romania: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 68 FR 12672, 12673 (March 
17, 2003), the Department reviewed the non-market-economy status of 
Romania and determined to reclassify Romania as a market economy for 
purposes of antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings,pursuant 
to section 771(18)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (The 
Act), effective January 1, 2003. See Memorandum from Lawrence 
Norton, Import Policy Analyst, to Joseph Spetrini, Acting Assistant 
Secretary for Import Administration: Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review of Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, 
Line, and Pressure Pipe from Romania--Non-Market Economy Status 
Review (March 10, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results of review. 
Silcotub filed a brief on November 12, 2004, and a rebuttal brief on 
November 18, 2004. On December 10, 2004, the Department rejected 
Silcotub's case brief because it contained new factual information.\2\

[[Page 7238]]

Silcotub filed a redacted case brief on December 14, 2004. The domestic 
interested party, United States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel), filed a 
case brief on November 12, 2004, and a rebuttal brief on November 18, 
2004. On January 5, 2005, we issued a letter requesting parties to 
comment on two issues: (1) The most appropriate methodology for the 
Department to use in calculating an all-others rate for future entries; 
and (2) whether it was more appropriate to calculate the company-
specific cash-deposit rate based on the weighted-average margin 
reflecting sales from both the ME and NME portions of the POR or on 
sales from the ME portion alone. We received comments on these issues 
from U.S. Steel on January 11, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Letter from Department of Commerce to Silcotub regarding 
2002-2003 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on 
Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line, and 
Pressure Pipe from Romania (December 3, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the order are seamless carbon and alloy 
(other than stainless) steel standard, line, and pressure pipes and 
redraw hollows produced, or equivalent, to the ASTM A-53, ASTM A-106, 
ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-335, ASTM A-589, ASTM A-795, and the API 
5L specifications and meeting the physical parameters described below, 
regardless of application. The scope of the order also includes all 
products used in standard, line, or pressure pipe applications and 
meeting the physical parameters described below, regardless of 
specification. Specifically included within the scope of the order are 
seamless pipes and redraw hollows, less than or equal to 4.5 inches 
(114.3 mm) in outside diameter, regardless of wall-thickness, 
manufacturing process (hot finished or cold-drawn), end finish (plain 
end, beveled end, upset end, threaded, or threaded and coupled), or 
surface finish.
    The seamless pipes subject to the order are currently classifiable 
under the subheadings 7304.10.10.20, 7304.10.50.20, 7304.31.30.00, 
7304.31.60.50, 7304.39.00.16, 7304.39.00.20, 7304.39.00.24, 
7304.39.00.28, 7304.39.00.32, 7304.51.50.05, 7304.51.50.60, 
7304.59.60.00, 7304.59.80.10, 7304.59.80.15, 7304.59.80.20, and 
7304.59.80.25 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS).
    Specifications, Characteristics, and Uses: Seamless pressure pipes 
are intended for the conveyance of water, steam, petrochemicals, 
chemicals, oil products, natural gas and other liquids and gasses in 
industrial piping systems. They may carry these substances at elevated 
pressures and temperatures and may be subject to the application of 
external heat. Seamless carbon steel pressure pipe meeting the ASTM A-
106 standard may be used in temperatures of up to 1000 degrees 
Fahrenheit, at various ASME code stress levels. Alloy pipes made to 
ASTM A-335 standard must be used if temperatures and stress levels 
exceed those allowed for ASTM A-106. Seamless pressure pipes sold in 
the United States are commonly produced to the ASTM A-106 standard.
    Seamless standard pipes are most commonly produced to the ASTM A-53 
specification and generally are not intended for high temperature 
service. They are intended for the low temperature and pressure 
conveyance of water, steam, natural gas, air and other liquids and 
gasses in plumbing and heating systems, air conditioning units, 
automatic sprinkler systems, and other related uses. Standard pipes 
(depending on type and code) may carry liquids at elevated temperatures 
but must not exceed relevant ASME code requirements. If exceptionally 
low temperature uses or conditions are anticipated, standard pipe may 
be manufactured to ASTM A-333 or ASTM A-334 specifications.
    Seamless line pipes are intended for the conveyance of oil and 
natural gas or other fluids in pipe lines. Seamless line pipes are 
produced to the API 5L specification.
    Seamless water well pipe (ASTM A-589) and seamless galvanized pipe 
for fire protection uses (ASTM A-795) are used for the conveyance of 
water.
    Seamless pipes are commonly produced and certified to meet ASTM A-
106, ASTM A-53, API 5L-B, and API 5L-X42 specifications. To avoid 
maintaining separate production runs and separate inventories, 
manufacturers typically triple or quadruple certify the pipes by 
meeting the metallurgical requirements and performing the required 
tests pursuant to the respective specifications. Since distributors 
sell the vast majority of this product, they can thereby maintain a 
single inventory to service all customers.
    The primary application of ASTM A-106 pressure pipes and triple or 
quadruple certified pipes is use in pressure piping systems by 
refineries, petrochemical plants, and chemical plants. Other 
applications are in power generation plants (electrical-fossil fuel or 
nuclear), and in some oil field uses (on shore and off shore) such as 
for separator lines, gathering lines and metering runs. A minor 
application of this product is for use as oil and gas distribution 
lines for commercial applications. These applications constitute the 
majority of the market for the subject seamless pipes. However, ASTM A-
106 pipes may be used in some boiler applications.
    Redraw hollows are any unfinished pipe or ``hollow profiles'' of 
carbon or alloy steel transformed by hot rolling or cold drawing/
hydrostatic testing or other methods to enable the material to be sold 
under ASTM A-53, ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-335, ASTM 
A-589, ASTM A-795, and API 5L specifications.
    The scope of the order includes all seamless pipe meeting the 
physical parameters described above and produced to one of the 
specifications listed above, regardless of application, with the 
exception of the specific exclusions discussed below, and whether or 
not also certified to a non-covered specification. Standard, line, and 
pressure applications and the above-listed specifications are defining 
characteristics of the scope of the order. Therefore, seamless pipes 
meeting the physical description above, but not produced to the ASTM A-
53, ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-335, ASTM A-589, ASTM A-
795, and API 5L specifications shall be covered if used in a standard, 
line, or pressure application, with the exception of the specific 
exclusions discussed below.
    For example, there are certain other ASTM specifications of pipe 
which, because of overlapping characteristics, could potentially be 
used in ASTM A-106 applications. These specifications generally include 
ASTM A-161, ASTM A-192, ASTM A-210, ASTM A-252, ASTM A-501, ASTM A-523, 
ASTM A-524, and ASTM A-618. When such pipes are used in a standard, 
line, or pressure pipe application, with the exception of the specific 
exclusions discussed below, such products are covered by the scope of 
the order.
    Specifically excluded from the scope of the order are boiler tubing 
and mechanical tubing, if such products are not produced to ASTM A-53, 
ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-335, ASTM A-589, ASTM A-795, 
and API 5L specifications and are not used in standard, line, or 
pressure pipe applications. In addition, finished and unfinished OCTG 
are excluded from the scope of the order, if covered by the scope of 
another antidumping duty order from the same country. If not covered by 
such an OCTG order, finished and unfinished OCTG are included in this 
scope when used in standard, line or pressure applications.
    With regard to the excluded products listed above, the Department 
will not instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to require 
end-use certification until such time as

[[Page 7239]]

petitioner or other interested parties provide to the Department a 
reasonable basis to believe or suspect that the products are being used 
in a covered application. If such information is provided, we will 
require end-use certification only for the product(s) (or 
specification(s)) for which evidence is provided that such products are 
being used in covered applications as described above. For example, if, 
based on evidence provided by petitioner, the Department finds a 
reasonable basis to believe or suspect that seamless pipe produced to 
the A-161 specification is being used in a standard, line or pressure 
application, we will require end-use certifications for imports of that 
specification. Normally we will require only the importer of record to 
certify to the end use of the imported merchandise. If it later proves 
necessary for adequate implementation, we may also require producers 
who export such products to the United States to provide such 
certification on invoices accompanying shipments to the United States.
    Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes, our written description of the merchandise subject to 
this scope is dispositive.

Separate Rates

    Because we are conducting this review in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.408, we are applying our NME methodology for Silcotub in the first 
five months of this review (August-December 2002). Silcotub has 
requested a separate, company-specific antidumping duty rate in this 
review. In the preliminary results, we found that Silcotub had met the 
criteria for the application of separate antidumping duty rates. See 
Preliminary Results. We have not received any other information since 
the preliminary results which would warrant reconsideration of our 
separate rates determination with respect to this company. Therefore, 
we determine that Silcotub should be assigned a rate separate from the 
NME entity for the NME portion of this administrative review period.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision Memorandum'' 
(Decision Memorandum) from Barbara E. Tillman, Acting Deputy Assistant 
Secretary, Import Administration, to Joseph E. Spetrini, Acting 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated February 4, 2005, 
which is hereby adopted by this notice.
    A list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have 
responded in the Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as an 
Appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised 
in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public 
memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099 of 
the main Commerce building.
    In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be 
accessed directly on the Internet at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The 
paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are 
identical in content.

Fair Value Comparisons

    We calculated constructed export price (CEP) and normal value (NV) 
based on the same methodology we used in the preliminary results. 
Changes to ocean freight, unpaid freight for billets, model-matching, 
home-market credit expenses, U.S. credit expense, inventory carrying 
costs, and the indirect selling expenses of Duferco S.A. are detailed 
in the analysis memorandum and/or the Decision Memorandum.

Cost of Production

    We calculated the cost of production (COP) for the merchandise 
based on the same methodology we used in the preliminary results. We 
found that Silcotub made sales below cost, and we disregarded such 
sales where appropriate.

No Revocation in Part

    On August 29, 2003, Silcotub requested that the Department revoke 
the antidumping duty order in part with regard to Silcotub based on the 
absence of dumping pursuant to section 351.222(b)(2) of the 
Department's regulations. Silcotub submitted, along with its revocation 
request, a certification stating the following: (1) The company did not 
sell subject merchandise at less than NV during the POR and in the 
future it would not sell such merchandise at less than NV (see section 
351.222 (e)(1)(i)) of the Department's regulations); (2) the company 
has sold subject merchandise to the United States in commercial 
quantities during each of the past three years (see section 
351.222(e)(1)(ii)) of the Department's regulations; and (3) the company 
agreed to its immediate reinstatement in the order, as long as any 
exporter or producer is subject to the order, if the Department 
concludes that the company sold the subject merchandise at less than NV 
subsequent to the revocation. See sections 351.222(b)(2)(i)(B) and 
351.222(e)(1)(iii) of the Department's regulations.
    For these final results, the Department has relied upon Silcotub's 
sales activity during the 2000-2001, 2001-2002, and 2002-2003 PORs in 
making its decision regarding Silcotub's revocation request. Although 
Silcotub had two consecutive years of sales at not less than NV, 
Silcotub has not received a zero or de minimis margin in the instant 
review. Thus, Silcotub is not eligible for consideration for 
revocation. Accordingly, we determine not to revoke the order with 
respect to Silcotub's sales of certain small diameter carbon and alloy 
seamless standard, line, and pressure pipe to the United States.

All-Others Rate

    As a result of Romania's transition from an NME to an ME during the 
course of the POR, we invited comments on the rate to be used as the 
all-others rate for the proceeding. The Department is has determined to 
apply an all-others rate of 13.06 percent. See Decision Memorandum at 
Comment 19

Final Results of Review

    As a result of our review, we determine that the following 
weighted-average percentage margin exists for the period August 1, 
2002, through July 31, 2003:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                   Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
S.C. Silcotub S.A..........................................         1.21
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment

    The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping 
duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 
351.212(b)(1), we have calculated importer-specific assessment rates by 
dividing the dumping margin found on the subject merchandise examined 
by the entered value of such merchandise. Where the importer-specific 
assessment rate is above de minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess 
antidumping duties on that importer's entries of subject merchandise. 
The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly 
to CBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of review.

Cash-Deposit Requirements

    The following 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 these 
final results of administrative review, as provided by

[[Page 7240]]

section 751(a) of the Act: (1) For the company named above, the cash-
deposit rate will be the rate listed above; (2) for merchandise 
exported by manufacturers or exporters not covered in this review but 
covered in a previous segment of this proceeding, the cash-deposit rate 
will continue to be the company-specific rate published in the prior 
segment of the proceeding in which that manufacturer or exporter 
participated; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review 
or in any previous segment of this proceeding but the manufacturer is, 
the cash-deposit rate will be that established for the manufacturer of 
the merchandise in these final results of review or in the most recent 
segment of the proceeding in which that manufacturer participated; and 
(4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in 
this or any previous review conducted by the Department, the cash 
deposit rate will be 13.06 percent. These deposit requirements shall 
remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next 
administrative review.

Notification

    This notice also serves as the final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 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 in the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.
    This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the return/destruction or conversion to judicial protective 
order of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 
19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Failure to comply is a violation of the APO.

    Dated: February 4, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
    This determination is issued and published in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Appendix--Decision Memorandum

Comment 1: Romania As Its Own Surrogate Country
Comment 2: Silcotub's Market-Economy General & Administrative 
Expense Ratio
Comment 3: Silcotub's Financial Expense Ratio
Comment 4: Indirect Selling Expenses of Duferco S.A.
Comment 5: Indirect Selling Expenses of Duferco Steel Inc.
Comment 6: Freight for Billets
Comment 7: Indexing Brokerage and Handling Rate Using U.S. Producer 
Price Index
Comment 8: Non-Market-Economy Packing Costs
Comment 9: Ocean Freight Expenses for U.S. Sales in the Non-Market-
Economy Portion of the POR
Comment 10: Treatment of the Schedule Field in the Model-Matching 
Methodology
Comment 11: Non-Market-Economy Natural Gas Price
Comment 12: Start-Up Adjustment
Comment 13: Model-Matching Methodology
Comment 14: Ordinary Course of Trade
Comment 15: Home Market Credit Expense
Comment 16: DSI's Credit Expense
Comment 17: Treatment of Negative Margins
Comment 18: Cash-Deposit Rate
Comment 19: All-Others Rate

 [FR Doc. E5-586 Filed 2-10-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P