[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 134 (Monday, July 13, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41949-41951]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15052]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-870]


Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods From the Republic of Korea: 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2017-2018

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that SeAH 
Steel Corporation (SeAH), producer/exporter of certain oil country 
tubular goods (OCTG) from the Republic of Korea (Korea), sold subject 
merchandise in the United States at prices below normal value (NV) 
during the period of review (POR) September 1, 2017 through August 31, 
2018, but producer/exporter Hyundai Steel Company (Hyundai Steel) did 
not sell subject merchandise in the United States below NV during the 
POR.

DATES: Applicable July 13, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Davina Friedmann, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0698.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On November 18, 2019, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of 
this administrative review.\1\ We invited interested parties to comment 
on the Preliminary Results. Between January 2 and 14, 2020, Commerce 
received timely filed case and rebuttal briefs from various interested 
parties.\2\ On February 7, 2020, we held a public hearing concerning 
the issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of 
Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review; 2017-2018, 84 FR 63615 (November 18, 2019) (Preliminary 
Results), and accompanying Decision Memorandum.
    \2\ See Letter from AJU Besteel Co., Ltd. (AJU Besteel), 
``Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea--
Letter in Support of Case Briefs,'' dated January 3, 2020; Letter 
from the following Domestic Interested Parties (DIPs): Maverick Tube 
Corporation (Maverick), Tenaris Bay City, Inc. (Tenaris), United 
States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel), TMK IPSCO, Vallourec Star, 
L.P., and Welded Tube USA, ``Oil Country Tubular Goods from the 
Republic of Korea: Case Brief of Maverick Tube Corporation and 
Tenaris Bay City, Inc.,'' dated January 3, 2020; Letter from ILJIN 
Steel Corporation (ILJIN), ``Oil Country Tubular Goods from the 
Republic of Korea: Case Brief,'' dated January 3, 2020; Letter from 
SeAH, ``Administrative Review of the Antidumping Order on Oil 
Country Tubular Goods from Korea: Case Brief of SeAH Steel 
Corporation,'' dated January 3, 2020; Letter from Husteel Co., Ltd. 
(Husteel), ``Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea, 
9/1/2017-8/31/2018 Administrative Review, Case No. A-580-870: Case 
Brief,'' dated January 3, 2020; Letter from NEXTEEL Co., Ltd. 
(NEXTEEL), ``Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea: 
NEXTEEL's Letter in Support of Respondents' Case Briefs,'' dated 
January 3, 2020; Letter from United States Steel Corporation (U.S. 
Steel), ``Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea: Case 
Brief of United States Steel Corporation,'' dated January 3, 2020; 
Letter from Hyundai Steel, ``Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from 
the Republic of Korea--Case Brief,'' dated January 3, 2020; see also 
Letter from SeAH, ``Administrative Review of the Antidumping Order 
on Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea--Rebuttal Brief of SeAH 
Steel Corporation,'' dated January 10, 2020; Letter from DIPs, ``Oil 
Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea: Rebuttal Brief of 
Maverick Tube Corporation and Tenaris Bay City, Inc.,'' dated 
January 10, 2020; Letter from U.S. Steel, ``Oil Country Tubular 
Goods from the Republic of Korea: Rebuttal Brief of United States 
Steel Corporation,'' dated January 10, 2020; and Letter from Hyundai 
Steel, ``Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of 
Korea--Rebuttal Brief,'' dated January, 10 2020.
    \3\ See Hearing Transcript from Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc., 
filed on ACCESS on February 14, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 12, 2020, we extended the deadline for the final 
results.\4\ On April 24, 2020, Commerce tolled all deadlines in 
administrative reviews by 50 days, thereby extending the deadline for 
these results until July 6, 2020.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Memorandum, ``Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the 
Republic of Korea: Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,'' dated March 12, 2020.
    \5\ See Memorandum, ``Tolling of Deadlines for Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews in Response to 
Operational Adjustments Due to COVID-19,'' dated April 24, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These final results cover 32 companies.\6\ Based on an analysis of 
the comments received, we have made changes to the weighted-average 
dumping margins determined for the respondents. The weighted-average 
dumping margins are listed in the ``Final Results of Review'' section, 
below. Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a) 
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The 32 companies consist of two mandatory respondents and 30 
companies not individually examined.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order 7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from India, the 
Republic of Korea, Taiwan, the Republic of Turkey, and the Socialist 
Republic of Vietnam: Antidumping Duty Orders; and Certain Oil 
Country Tubular Goods from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: 
Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 79 FR 
53691 (September 10, 2014) (Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The merchandise covered by the Order is certain OCTG, which 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, regardless of end finish (e.g., 
whether or not plain end, threaded, or threaded and coupled) whether or 
not conforming to American Petroleum Institute (API) or non-API 
specifications, whether finished (including limited service OCTG 
products) or unfinished (including green tubes and limited service OCTG 
products), whether or not thread protectors are attached. The scope of 
the Order also covers OCTG coupling stock. For a complete description 
of the scope of the Order, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Memorandum, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 
Final Results of the 2017-2018 Administrative Review of the 
Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the 
Republic of Korea,'' dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, 
this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by parties 
in this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. The 
issues are identified in Appendix I to this notice. The Issues and 
Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically 
via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to 
registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete 
version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed and electronic 
versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in 
content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of the comments received, we made certain 
changes to the margin calculations for SeAH and Hyundai Steel. For a 
discussion of these changes, see the

[[Page 41950]]

``Margin Calculations'' section of the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Rate for Non-Examined Companies

    The statute and Commerce's regulations do not address the 
establishment of a rate to be applied to companies not selected for 
examination when Commerce limits its examination in an administrative 
review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. Generally, Commerce 
looks to section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for 
calculating the all-others rate in a market economy investigation, for 
guidance when calculating the rate for companies which were not 
selected for individual review in an administrative review. Under 
section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-others rate is normally ``an 
amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted average 
dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually 
investigated, excluding any zero or de minimis margins, and any margins 
determined entirely {on the basis of facts available{time} .''
    For these final results, we calculated a weighted-average dumping 
margin for SeAH that is not zero, de minimis, or determined entirely on 
the basis of facts available. Accordingly, Commerce has assigned to the 
companies not individually examined (see Appendix II for a full list of 
these companies) a margin of 3.96 percent, which is the weighted-
average dumping margin calculated for SeAH for these final results.

Final Results of Review

    Commerce determines that the following weighted-average dumping 
margins exist for the period September 1, 2017 through August 31, 2018:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Appendix II for a full list of these companies.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted- average
                 Exporter or producer                    dumping margin
                                                           (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyundai Steel Company................................               0.00
SeAH Steel Corporation...............................               3.96
All Others \9\.......................................               3.96
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed for these 
final results of review within five days of the date of publication of 
this notice in the Federal Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.224(b).

Assessment

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), 
Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 
shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject 
merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review. 
Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after 
the date of publication of the final results of this administrative 
review in the Federal Register.
    Where the respondent reported reliable entered values, we 
calculated importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem rates by 
aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales to each 
importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the total entered 
value of the sales to each importer (or customer).\10\ Where Commerce 
calculated a weighted-average dumping margin by dividing the total 
amount of dumping for reviewed sales to that party by the total sales 
quantity associated with those transactions, Commerce will direct CBP 
to assess importer- (or customer-) specific assessment rates based on 
the resulting per-unit rates.\11\ Where an importer- (or customer-) 
specific ad valorem or per-unit rate is greater than de minimis (i.e., 
0.50 percent), Commerce will instruct CBP to collect the appropriate 
duties at the time of liquidation.\12\ Where an importer- (or customer-
) specific ad valorem or per-unit rate is zero or de minimis, Commerce 
will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to 
antidumping duties.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ Id.
    \13\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the companies which were not selected for individual review, we 
will assign an assessment rate based on the methodology described in 
the ``Rates for Non-Examined Companies'' section, above.
    Consistent with Commerce's assessment practice, for entries of 
subject merchandise during the POR produced by SeAH, Hyundai Steel, or 
the non-examined companies for which the producer did not know that its 
merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to 
liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate 
for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For a full discussion of this practice, see Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 
68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all 
shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 
for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results 
of this administrative review, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) 
of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the companies listed in 
these final results will be equal to the weighted-average dumping 
margins established in the final results of this review; (2) for 
merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this 
review but covered in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash 
deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published 
for the most recently completed segment in which the company was 
reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or 
the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the 
producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the 
most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of 
the subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other 
producers or exporters will continue to be 5.24 percent,\15\ the all-
others rate established in the LTFV investigation. These cash deposit 
requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further 
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of 
Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony with Final 
Determination, 81 FR 59603 (August 30, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this 
requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that reimbursement 
of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double 
antidumping duties.

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also 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(a)(3), which continues to govern 
business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. 
Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO 
materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby 
requested. Failure to comply with the

[[Page 41951]]

regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

Notification to Interested Parties

    We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(h).

    Dated: July 6, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Changes Since the Preliminary Results
V. Rate for Non-Examined Companies
VI. Duty Absorption
VII. Discussion of the Issues
    1-A. Lawfulness of Commerce's Interpretation of the Particular 
Market Situation (PMS) Provision
    1-B. Evidence of a PMS
    1-C. Quantification of PMS Adjustment
    2. Application of Constructed Value (CV) Profit and Selling 
Expense Ratios to PMS-Adjusted Costs
    3. Calculation of CV Profit and Selling Expenses
    4. Differential Pricing
    5. Hyundai Steel's Cost Reconciliation
    6. Minor Inputs Obtained from Affiliated Parties
    7. Expenses Related to Raw Material Purchases
    8. Byproducts Reintroduced into Production
    9. Scrap Offsets
    10. U.S. Warehousing Expenses
    11. Warranty Expenses
    12. Packing Expenses for Hyundai Steel's Prime Sales
    13. Constructed Export Price (CEP) Profit Calculation
    14. Cost of Prime Products Sold in the United States
    15. Freight Revenue Cap
    16. Calculation of General and Administrative (G&A) Expenses 
Incurred by SeAH's U.S. Affiliate
VIII. Recommendation

Appendix II

List of Companies Not Individually Examined

1. AJU Besteel Co., Ltd.
2. BDP International
3. Daewoo America
4. Daewoo International Corporation
5. Dong Yang Steel Pipe
6. Dong-A Steel Co. Ltd.
7. Dongbu Incheon Steel
8. DSEC
9. Emdtebruecker Eisenwerk and Company
10. Hansol Metal
11. Husteel Co., Ltd.
12. Hyundai RB
13. ILJIN Steel Corporation
14. Jim And Freight Co., Ltd.
15. Kia Steel Co. Ltd.
16. KSP Steel Company
17. Kukje Steel
18. Kumkang Kind Co., Ltd.
19. Kurvers
20. NEXTEEL Co., Ltd.
21. POSCO Daewoo America
22. POSCO Daewoo Corporation
23. Steel Canada
24. Samsung
25. Samsung C and T Corporation
26. SeAH Besteel Corporation
27. Sumitomo Corporation
28. TGS Pipe
29. Yonghyun Base Materials
30. ZEECO Asia

[FR Doc. 2020-15052 Filed 7-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P