[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 122 (Tuesday, June 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35649-35652]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-14249]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-201-836]


Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube from Mexico

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: (June 24, 2008.
SUMMARY: On January 30, 2008, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published its preliminary determination in the 
investigation of sales at less than fair value in the antidumping duty 
investigation of light-walled rectangular pipe and tube (LWR) from 
Mexico. See Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value: Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube from Mexico, 73 FR 
5515 (January 30, 2008) (Preliminary Determination).
    The Department has determined that LWR from Mexico is being, or is 
likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value, as 
provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
Act). The final margins of sales at less than fair value are listed 
below in the section entitled ``Final Determination of Investigation.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Patrick Edwards or Judy Lao, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
8029 or (202) 482-7924, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The preliminary determination in this investigation was published 
on January 30, 2008. See Preliminary Determination. Since then, we have 
requested that the respondents in this proceeding, Maquilacero S.A. de 
C.V. (Maquilacero) and Productos Laminados de Monterrey, S.A. de C.V. 
(PROLAMSA) (collectively, respondents), provide the downstream sales 
data, regarding their affiliates' sales to the first unaffiliated 
customer in the comparison market (i.e., Mexico). See Letter from 
Angelica L. Mendoza, Program Manager, Office 7, to Maquilacero S.A. de 
C.V., entitled ``Request for Downstream Sales Data,'' dated January 24, 
2008; see also, letter from Angelica L. Mendoza, Program Manager, 
Office 7, to Productos Laminados de Monterrey, S.A. de C.V., entitled 
``Request for Downstream Sales Data,'' dated January 24, 2008. 
Maquilacero filed the downstream sales response on behalf of its 
affiliate on February 6, 2008. PROLAMSA filed the downstream sales 
response on behalf of its affiliate on February 6, 2008.
    We conducted sales and cost verifications of the responses 
(including the downstream sales responses) submitted by Maquilacero and 
PROLAMSA. See Memorandum to the File from Patrick Edwards and Judy Lao, 
Case Analysts, through Angelica L. Mendoza, Program Manager, Office 7, 
entitled ``Verification of the Sales Responses of Maquilacero S.A. de 
C.V. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Light-Walled Rectangular 
Pipe and Tube from Mexico,'' dated April 11, 2008 (Maquilacero 
Verification Report); see also Memorandum to the File from Patrick 
Edwards and Dena Crossland, Case Analysts, through Angelica L. Mendoza, 
Program Manager, Office 7, entitled ``Verification of the Sales

[[Page 35650]]

Responses of Productos Laminados de Monterrey, S.A. de C.V. in the 
Antidumping Duty Investigation of Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and 
Tube from Mexico,'' dated April 24, 2008 (PROLAMSA Verification 
Report), and Memorandum to the File from Patrick Edwards, Case Analyst, 
through Angelica L. Mendoza, Program Manager, entitled ``Verification 
of Sales Responses of Productos Laminados de Monterrey, S.A. de C.V. 
and Prolamsa, Inc. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Light-
Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube from Mexico,'' dated April 24, 2008 
(PROLAMSA CEP Verification Report); see also Memorandum to the File 
through Neal M. Halper, from Gina K. Lee, entitled ``Verification of 
the Cost Response of Productos Laminados de Monterrey, S.A. de C.V. in 
the Antidumping Investigation of Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube 
from Mexico,'' dated April 15, 2008 (PROLAMSA Cost Verification 
Report), and Memorandum to the File through Neal M. Halper, from Robert 
B. Gregor, entitled ``Verification of the Cost Response of Maquilacero, 
S.A. de C.V. in the Antidumping Investigation of Light-Walled 
Rectangular Pipe and Tube from Mexico,'' dated April 15, 2008 
(Maquilacero Cost Verification Report). All verification reports are on 
file and available in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 1117, of the 
main Department of Commerce building.
    Based on the Department's findings at verification, as well as the 
minor corrections presented by Maquilacero and PROLAMSA at the start of 
their respective verifications, we requested respondents to submit 
revised sales databases. See Letter from Angelica L. Mendoza, Program 
Manager, Office 7, to Maquilacero S.A. de C.V., dated April 18, 2008; 
see also Letter from Angelica L. Mendoza, Program Manager, Office 7, to 
Productos Laminados de Monterrey, S.A. de C.V., dated April 30, 2008. 
As requested, Maquilacero submitted its revised sales databases on 
April 28, 2007, and PROLAMSA submitted its revised databases on May 7, 
2008.
    We have also determined that an allegation of targeted dumping 
submitted by petitioners on December 26, 2007, and supplemented on 
January 25, 2008, was inadequate. See Memorandum from Angelica L. 
Mendoza, Program Manager, Office 7, to Richard O. Weible, Director, 
Office 7, regarding ``Final Analysis on Targeting Dumping,'' dated 
April 30, 2008 (Targeted Dumping Memo). Furthermore, with regard to 
PROLAMSA, we released an additional memorandum in which we explained 
the Department's intention to revise certain aspects of the programs 
used to calculate PROLAMSA's margin at the Preliminary Determination, 
based on the Department's finding of inadvertent errors in the 
programming language. See Memorandum to the File from Patrick Edwards, 
Case Analyst, entitled ``Intended Changes to the Comparison Market and 
U.S. Margin Calculation Programs for Productos Laminados de Monterrey, 
S.A. de C.V. and Revision to Briefing Schedule,'' dated May 1, 2008 (CM 
Program Changes Memo). We invited parties to comment on these proposed 
changes.
    Due to the release of the Targeted Dumping Memo and the CM Program 
Changes Memo subsequent to the release of the verification reports in 
this investigation, the Department extended the briefing schedule for 
parties to file case and rebuttal briefs by two days. As such, we 
received a case brief from petitioners, PROLAMSA, and Maquilacero on 
May 7, 2008; the same parties filed rebuttal briefs on May 12, 2008. On 
May 23, 2008, the Department requested that PROLAMSA submit an 
electronic version of its revised cost database, reflecting the 
adjustments made to the database for certain minor corrections 
presented during its cost verification, and which was also filed in 
hard-copy on the official record on February 27, 2008. See Memorandum 
to the File from Patrick Edwards, Senior Case Analyst, through Angelica 
L. Mendoza, Program Manager, Office 7, titled ``Request for Cost 
Database with Post-Cost Verification Corrections - Productos Laminados 
de Monterrey S.A. de C.V. (PROLAMSA,'' dated May 27, 2008. PROLAMSA 
filed the electronic version of its revised cost database on May 27, 
2008.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this antidumping investigation are addressed in the ``Issues and 
Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination of the Antidumping Duty 
Investigation of Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube from Mexico 
(2006-2007)'' (Decision Memorandum) from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to David M. Spooner, 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated June 13, 2008, 
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which 
parties have raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in 
the Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an appendix. 
Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this 
investigation and the corresponding recommendations in the Decision 
Memorandum which is on file in the CRU. In addition, a complete version 
of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at 
http://ia.ita.doc.gov/. The paper copy and electronic version of the 
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Targeted Dumping

    We determined that Petitioners' allegations of targeted dumping 
failed to provide a reasonable basis to find a pattern of export prices 
for comparable merchandise that differ significantly among purchasers 
or regions. We determined further that Petitioners had not demonstrated 
that any such differences could not be taken into account using the 
average-to-average methodology, pursuant to section 777A(d)(1)(B) of 
the Act. We concluded that, for the final determination, we should 
continue to utilize the average-to-average methodology in calculating 
the final margins for respondents. For this final determination, we 
continue to utilize the average-to-average methodology in calculating 
the final margins for Maquilacero and PROLAMSA for the reasons set 
forth in the Decision Memorandum.

Scope of Investigation

    The merchandise that is the subject of this investigation is 
certain welded carbon quality light walled steel pipe and tube, of 
rectangular (including square) cross section, having a wall thickness 
of less than 4 mm.
    The term carbon quality steel includes both carbon steel and alloy 
steel which contains only small amounts of alloying elements. 
Specifically, the term carbon quality includes products in which none 
of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity by weight 
respectively indicated:
    1.80 percent of manganese, or 2.25 percent of silicon, or 1.00 
percent of copper, or 0.50 percent of aluminum, or 1.25 percent of 
chromium, or 0.30 percent of cobalt, or 0.40 percent of lead, or 1.25 
percent of nickel, or 0.30 percent of tungsten, or 0.10 percent of 
molybdenum, or 0.10 percent of niobium, or 0.15 percent vanadium, or 
0.15 percent of zirconium.
    The description of carbon quality is intended to identify carbon 
quality products within the scope. The welded carbon quality 
rectangular pipe and tube subject to this investigation is currently 
classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) subheadings 7306.61.50.00 and 7306.61.70.60. While HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for

[[Page 35651]]

convenience and Customs purposes, our written description of the scope 
of this investigation is dispositive.

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation is from April 1, 2006, through March 
31, 2007.

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we verified the 
information submitted by the respondents for use in our final 
determination. We used standard verification procedures including 
examination of relevant accounting and production records, and original 
source documents provided by the respondents.

Changes since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at 
verification, we have made certain changes to the margin calculation 
for both Maquilacero and PROLAMSA. For a discussion of these changes, 
see memoranda from Patrick Edwards to The File entitled ``Light-Walled 
Rectangular Pipe and Tube from Mexico - Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value Analysis Memorandum for Maquilacero S.A. de 
C.V.,'' dated June 13, 2008 (Maquilacero Analysis Memo), and ``Light-
Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube from Mexico - Final Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value Analysis Memorandum for Productos 
Laminados de Monterrey S.A. de C.V.,'' dated June 13, 2008 (PROLAMSA 
Analysis Memo); see also, the memorandum from Robert B. Gregor to Neal 
M. Halper entitled ``Cost of Production and Constructed Value 
Calculation Adjustments for the Final Determination: Maquilacero S.A. 
de C.V.,'' dated June 13, 2008 (Maquilacero Cost Memo), and the 
memorandum from Gina K. Lee to Neal M. Halper entitled ``Cost of 
Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final 
Determination: Productos Laminados de Monterrey S.A. de C.V.,'' dated 
June 13, 2008 (PROLAMSA Cost Memo).

Adverse Facts Available

    For the final determination, we continue to find that, by failing 
to provide information we requested, certain producers and/or exporters 
of LWR from Mexico did not act to the best of their ability in 
responding to our requests for information.\1\ Thus, the Department 
continues to find that the use of adverse facts available (AFA) is 
warranted for these companies under sections 776(a)(2) and (b) of the 
Act. See Preliminary Determination, 72 FR 5518 through 5520. As we 
explained in the Preliminary Determination, the Department assigned to 
these producers and/or exporters the rate of 11.50 percent, which the 
Department selected as the AFA rate as it was the highest estimated 
margin alleged in the petition. Further, as discussed in the 
Preliminary Determination, we corroborated the AFA rate pursuant to 
section 776(c) of the Act. No party to this investigation provided 
comments regarding the AFA rate. The Department considers the AFA rate 
to be a fully-corroborated rate and continues to find that 11.50 
percent is the appropriate rate to be applied as the AFA rate for 
purposes of this final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ These certain producers/exporters are Industrias Monterrey 
S.A. de C.V., Nacional de Acero S.A. de C.V., PEASA-Productos 
Especializados de Acero, Tuberias Aspe, and Tuberias y Derivados 
S.A. de C.V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

All-Others Rate

    Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated all-
others rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted-average of the 
estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters 
and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de 
minimis margins and any margins determined entirely under section 776 
of the Act. For this final determination, we have calculated a margin 
for Maquilacero and PROLAMSA that is above de minimis. Therefore, for 
purposes of determining the all-others rate and pursuant to section 
735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, because other respondents are receiving 
margins based on adverse facts available, we are using the weighted-
average of the dumping margins which we have calculated for Maquilacero 
and PROLAMSA, i.e., 4.33 percent, as indicated in the ``Final 
Determination of Investigation'' section below.

Final Determination of Investigation

    We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins 
exist for the period April 1, 2006, through March 31, 2007:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Weighted-
                Manufacturer or Exporter                  Average Margin
                                                           (Percentage)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maquilacero S.A. de C.V................................           2.92
Productos Laminados de Monterrey S.A. de C.V.                     5.73
 (PROLAMSA)............................................
Arco Metal S.A. de C.V.................................           4.33
Hylsa S.A. de C.V......................................           4.33
Industrias Monterrey S.A. de C.V.......................          11.50
Internacional de Aceros, S.A. de C.V...................           4.33
Nacional de Acero S.A. de C.V..........................          11.50
PEASA-Productos Especializados de Acero................          11.50
Perfiles y Herrajes LM, S.A. de C.V....................           4.33
Regiomontana de Perfiles y Tubos.......................           4.33
Talleres Acero Rey S.A. de C.V.........................           4.33
Tuberias Aspe..........................................          11.50
Tuberia Laguna, S.A. de C.V............................           4.33
Tuberias y Derivados S.A. de C.V.......................          11.50
All-Others.............................................           4.33
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.211(b)(1), we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of subject 
merchandise from Mexico entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after January 30, 2008, the date of the publication 
of Preliminary Determination, for all producers/exporters, except 
PROLAMSA. Because we found PROLAMSA to have a de minimis margin in the 
Preliminary Determination, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of subject 
merchandise from Mexico from PROLAMSA and entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of the publication of 
this final determination. We will instruct CBP to require a cash 
deposit or the posting of a bond equal to the weighted-average margin, 
as indicated in the chart above, as follows: (1) the rate for the 
respondents will be the rates we have determined in this final 
determination; (2) if the exporter is not a firm identified in this 
investigation but the producer is, the rate will be the rate 
established for the producer of the subject merchandise; (3) the rate 
for all other producers or exporters will be 4.33 percent. These 
suspension-of-liquidation instructions will remain in effect until 
further notice.

International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the 
International Trade Commission (ITC) of our final determination. As our 
final determination is affirmative and in accordance with section 
735(b)(2) of the

[[Page 35652]]

Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 days, whether the domestic 
industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with 
material injury, by reason of imports or sales (or the likelihood of 
sales) for importation of the subject merchandise. If the ITC 
determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not 
exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted will 
be refunded or canceled. If the ITC determines that such injury does 
exist, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing 
CBP to assess antidumping duties on all imports of the subject 
merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or 
after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.

Notification Regarding APO

    This notice also serves as a 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. 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 determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 
735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: June 13, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix

General Issues

Comment 1: Whether to Deny Home Market Price Adjustments
Comment 2: Whether to Accept Petitioners' Targeted Dumping Allegation
Comment 3: Whether to Subtract Negative Margins from Positive Margins 
(``Zeroing'')

Maquilacero S.A de C.V.

Comment 4: Whether to Treat Export Rebates as an Adjustment to Sales or 
Cost of Production
Comment 5: Whether to Use Affiliated Party Downstream Sales in the 
Department's Analysis

Productos Laminados de Monterrey S.A. de C.V.

Comment 6: Whether to Apply Adverse Facts Available to PROLAMSA's 
Affilated Party Downstream Sales
Comment 7: Whether to Make Changes to the Department's Programming for 
Currency Conversions used in its Preliminary Determination
Comment 8: Whether to Adjust Reported Costs of Manufacturing
Comment 9: Whether to Use Corrected Variance Allocation Presented at 
Verification
Comment 10: Whether to Calculate Cost of Manufacturing using Historical 
Depreciation Costs
[FR Doc. E8-14249 Filed 6-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S