[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 88 (Wednesday, May 6, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26930-26931]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09678]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-881; C-533-882]


Large Diameter Welded Pipe From India: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Changed Circumstances Reviews

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On December 18, 2019, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) 
published a notice of initiation and expedited preliminary results of 
the changed circumstances reviews (CCR) of the antidumping duty (AD) 
and countervailing duty (CVD) orders on large diameter welded pipe from 
India which revoked, in part, these orders as they relate to certain 
specific large diameter welded pipe products. Commerce has adopted the 
scope exclusion language in these final results.

DATES: Applicable May 6, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Johnson or Jaron Moore, AD/
CVD Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4929 or (202) 
482-3640, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On March 6, 2019, Commerce published the AD and CVD orders on large 
diameter welded pipe from India.\1\ On December 18, 2019, in response 
to a request submitted by members of the domestic industry, including 
the petitioners from the underlying investigations,\2\ Commerce 
published the Initiation and Preliminary Results,\3\ in which Commerce 
preliminarily revoked, in part, the Orders with respect to certain 
large diameter welded pipe products with specific combinations of 
grades, diameters and wall thicknesses. These products have been 
incorporated into the exclusion language of the scope, below in bold.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Large Diameter Welded Pipe from India: Antidumping Duty 
Order, 84 FR 8079 (March 6, 2019) and Large Diameter Welded Pipe 
from India: Countervailing Duty Order, 84 FR 8085 (March 6, 2019) 
(Orders).
    \2\ The companies composing the ``domestic industry'' are: 
American Cast Iron Pipe Company; Berg Steel Pipe Corp./Berg Spiral 
Pipe Corp.; Dura-Bond Industries; Stupp Corporation; (individually 
and as members of the American Line Pipe Producers Association); 
Greens Bayou Pipe Mill, LP; JSW Steel (USA) Inc.; Skyline Steel; and 
Trinity Products LLC (collectively the petitioners in the less-than-
fair-value investigation) and Welspun Global Trade LLC.
    \3\ See Large Diameter Welded Pipe from India: Initiation and 
Expedited Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty and Countervailing 
Duty Changed Circumstances Reviews, 84 FR 69356 (December 18, 2019) 
(Initiation and Preliminary Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners, representing ``substantially all'' of the domestic 
industry,\4\ demonstrated ``good cause'' to conduct the CCRs less than 
24 months after the date of publication of notices of the final 
determinations in the investigations.\5\ Specifically, the domestic 
industry does not currently produce the particular large diameter 
welded pipe products subject to this partial revocation request, and 
the investment needed to do so far exceeds the potential benefit of 
such investment. In addition, the domestic producers provided an 
explanation indicating that the commercial reality has changed since 
the Orders were put in place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Id., 84 FR at 65357. Commerce has interpreted 
``substantially all'' to mean at least 85 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product covered by the order. See, 
e.g., Supercalendered Paper From Canada: Final Results of Changed 
Circumstances Review and Revocation of Countervailing Duty Order, 83 
FR 32268 (July 12, 2018).
    \5\ See 19 CFR 351.216(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Initiation and Preliminary Results, we provided all 
interested parties an opportunity to comment and to request a public 
hearing regarding our preliminary findings.\6\ On January 2, 2020, SeAH 
Steel Corporation (SeAH) commented on the Initiation and Preliminary 
Results.\7\ The domestic industry submitted rebuttal comments on 
January 9, 2020.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Initiation and Preliminary Results, 84 FR at 65357.
    \7\ See SeAH's Letter, ``Changed Circumstances Review of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders on Large Diameter Welded 
Pipe from India--Comments on Preliminary Results of Review,'' dated 
January 2, 2020 (SeAH Comments).
    \8\ See the Domestic Industry's Letter, ``Large Diameter Welded 
Pipe from India: Response to SeAH's Comments on Preliminary Results 
of Review,'' dated January 9, 2020 (Petitioners' Rebuttal Comments).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Orders

    The merchandise covered by these Orders is welded carbon and alloy 
steel line pipe (other than stainless steel pipe), more than 406.4 mm 
(16 inches) in nominal outside diameter (large diameter welded line 
pipe), regardless of wall thickness, length, surface finish, grade, end 
finish, or stenciling. Large diameter welded pipe may be used to 
transport oil, gas, slurry, steam, or other fluids, liquids, or gases.
    Large diameter welded line pipe is used to transport oil, gas, or 
natural gas liquids and is normally produced to the American Petroleum 
Institute (API) specification 5L. Large diameter welded line pipe can 
be produced to comparable foreign specifications, grades and/or 
standards or to proprietary specifications, grades and/or standards, or 
can be non-graded material. All line pipe meeting the physical 
description set forth above, including any dual- or multiple-certified/
stenciled pipe with an API (or comparable) welded line pipe 
certification/stencil, is covered by the scope of the Orders.
    Subject merchandise also includes large diameter welded line pipe 
that has been further processed in a third country, including but not 
limited to coating, painting, notching, beveling, cutting, punching, 
welding, or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the 
merchandise from the scope of the Orders if performed in the country of 
manufacture of the in-scope large diameter welded line pipe.
    Excluded from the scope of the Orders is structural pipe, which is 
produced only to American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 
standards A500, A252, or A53, or other relevant domestic 
specifications, or comparable foreign specifications, grades and/or 
standards or to proprietary specifications, grades and/or standards. 
Also excluded is large diameter welded pipe produced only to 
specifications of the American Water Works Association (AWWA) for water 
and sewage pipe. Also excluded is large diameter welded pipe in the 
following combinations of grades, outside diameters, and wall 
thicknesses:
     Grade X60, X65, or X70, 18 inches outside diameter, 0.688 
inches or greater wall thickness;
     Grade X60, X65, or X70, 20 inches outside diameter, 0.688 
inches or greater wall thickness;
     Grade X60, X65, X70, or X80, 22 inches outside diameter, 
0.750 inches or greater wall thickness; and
     Grade X60, X65, or X70, 24 inches outside diameter, 0.750 
inches or greater wall thickness.
    The large diameter welded line pipe that is subject to these Orders 
is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 7305.11.1030, 7305.11.1060, 
7305.11.5000, 7305.12.1030, 7305.12.1060, 7305.12.5000, 7305.19.1030, 
7305.19.1060, and 7305.19.5000. Merchandise currently

[[Page 26931]]

classifiable under subheadings 7305.31.4000, 7305.31.6090, 
7305.39.1000, and 7305.39.5000 and that otherwise meets the above scope 
language is also covered. While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope 
of these Orders is dispositive.

Final Results of CCRs

    In its comments, SeAH argues that if Commerce modifies the scope of 
the Orders, it must do so with respect to all of the orders on large 
diameter welded pipe from countries that resulted from the 
investigations that were included in the International Trade 
Commission's (ITC) cumulated injury analysis. Specifically, in order to 
maintain the integrity of its proceedings, Commerce must modify the 
scope of the orders on Canada, China, Greece, Korea, and Turkey in 
addition to the India orders.\9\ SeAH also argues that it is possible 
that the ITC might have made a negative injury determination for 
Canada, Korea and Turkey if the imports of the products at issue had 
not been considered in its cumulative analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See SeAH Comments at 2 (citing Large Diameter Welded Pipe 
from China and India, Investigation Nos. 701-TA-593 and 594 and 731-
TA-1402 and 1404 (Final), USITC Pub. 4859 (January 2019), and Large 
Diameter Welded Pipe from Canada, Greece, Korea, and Turkey, 
Investigation Nos. 701-TA-595-596 and 731-TA-1401, 1403, 1405-1406 
(Final), USITC Pub. 4883 (April 2019)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, SeAH also asserts that, in order to maintain the integrity 
of its proceedings, Commerce cannot allow the domestic industry to 
select which of the various AD and CVD orders will have an exclusion 
and which of the orders will not. SeAH argues that one of the U.S. 
producers now seeks to exclude imports from a foreign affiliate whose 
AD and CVD cash deposit rates are based on adverse facts available, but 
not from other producers in other countries covered by the petitions. 
The domestic industry's request ``raises serious questions of unlawful 
anticompetitive intent.'' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id. at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its comments, the domestic industry argues that SeAH has no 
evidence to support its claim that the ITC may have made a different 
injury determination had the products at issue not been considered in 
the ITC's cumulated injury analysis. The domestic industry argues that 
whenever Commerce narrows the scope of an order, there is necessarily a 
product removed from the scope that could have been considered by the 
ITC in its injury analysis.\11\ The domestic industry argues that the 
statute and regulations give Commerce the authority to revoke an order 
in part based on changed circumstances when it concludes that the 
domestic producers accounting for substantially all of the production 
of the domestic like product express a lack of interest in part of the 
order.\12\ Finally, the domestic producers argue that the scope 
exclusion is extremely narrow and the merchandise at issue accounts for 
a very small portion of the U.S. market and is not produced in the 
United States. Therefore, LDWP from India, including that produced by 
the Indian affiliate of one of the U.S. producers, will still be 
subject to AD and CVD duties in the vast majority of the U.S. 
market.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Petitioners' Rebuttal Comments at 3.
    \12\ Id. at 3.
    \13\ Id. at 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 751(b) authorizes Commerce to modify the scopes of AD and 
CVD orders only for those orders in which we conduct a CCR.\14\ 
Further, 19 CFR 351.216(c) requires that ``good cause'' exists when it 
conducts a CCR within 24 months of the publication of a final 
determination of an investigation. In the Initiation and Preliminary 
Results, Commerce found that ``good cause'' existed to initiate these 
CCRs.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from the Republic of 
Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances 
Review, 84 FR 13888 (April 8, 2019) (Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod 
from Korea); see also Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic 
of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances 
Review, 84 FR 49508 (September 20, 2019).
    \15\ See Initiation and Preliminary Results, 84 FR at 69357.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These CCRs pertain to the India large diameter pipe orders. SeAH's 
comments referencing the other large diameter pipe orders are beyond 
the scope of these CCRs.
    Further, with respect to SeAH's argument that Commerce cannot allow 
the domestic producers to select which of the countries covered by the 
orders will have an exclusion and which will not, Commerce has the 
authority to revoke an order in part based on changed circumstances if 
it concludes that the domestic producers accounting for substantially 
all of the production of the domestic like product express a lack of 
interest in part of the order.\16\ In these CCRs, the ten domestic 
producers which requested the CCRs represent substantially all of the 
production of the domestic like product covered by these Orders, and 
have stated that they are no longer interested in the merchandise at 
issue being covered by the Orders.\17\ There is no information on the 
record to contradict the domestic industry's claim. SeAH's argument 
that the ITC may have made a negative injury determination if the 
products at issue were not included in its cumulated injury analysis is 
immaterial to these CCRs. Therefore, for the reasons stated in the 
Initiation and Preliminary Results, Commerce continues to find that it 
is appropriate to revoke the Orders, in part, with respect to certain 
large diameter welded pipe products with specific combinations of 
grades, diameters and wall thicknesses, as reflected in the ``Scope of 
the Orders'' section of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Korea (2019); see 
also Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not 
Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Final 
Results of the Changed Circumstances Review, 81 FR 9427 (February 
25, 2016).
    \17\ See the Domestic Industry's Letter, ``Large Diameter Welded 
Pipe from India: Petitioner's Request for Changed Circumstances 
Review and Partial Revocation,'' dated October 18, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    We are issuing this determination and publishing these final 
results and notice in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) 
and (2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216(e), 351.221(b), and 
351.221(c)(3).

    Dated: April 30, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-09678 Filed 5-5-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P