[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 6 (Monday, January 10, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1112-1114]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00181]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-876]


Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Court 
Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of Antidumping Administrative 
Review; Notice of Amended Final Results

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

SUMMARY: On January 3, 2022, the U.S. Court of International Trade 
(CIT) issued its final judgment in Husteel Co., Ltd. v. United States, 
Consol. Court No. 19-00112, sustaining the Department of Commerce 
(Commerce)'s second remand results pertaining to the administrative 
review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on welded line pipe (WLP) 
from the Republic of Korea (Korea) covering the period December 1, 
2016, through November 30, 2017. Commerce is notifying the public that 
the CIT's final judgment is not in harmony with Commerce's final 
results of the administrative review, and that Commerce is amending the 
final results with respect to the dumping margins assigned to NEXTEEL 
Co., Ltd. (NEXTEEL), SeAH Steel Corporation (SeAH), and non-selected 
respondents.

DATES: Applicable January 13, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Goldberger, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4136.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 14, 2019, Commerce published its final results in the 2016-
2017 AD administrative review of WLP from Korea.\1\ Commerce calculated

[[Page 1113]]

weighted-average dumping margins of 38.87 percent for NEXTEEL, 27.38 
percent for SeAH, and 32.49 percent for the non-selected 
respondents.\2\ After correcting ministerial errors contained in the 
Final Results, on July 23, 2019, Commerce published the Amended Final 
Results and revised the calculated weighted-average dumping margins for 
SeAH and the non-selected respondents to 22.70 percent and 29.89 
percent, respectively.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final 
Determination of No Shipments; 2016-2017, 84 FR 27762 (June 14, 
2019) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum (IDM).
    \2\ Id.
    \3\ See Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Amended 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017, 
84 FR 35371 (July 23, 2019) (Amended Final Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Husteel Co., Ltd., Hyundai Steel Co. (Hyundai Steel), NEXTEEL, and 
SeAH appealed Commerce's Amended Final Results. On August 26, 2020, the 
CIT remanded the Amended Final Results to Commerce regarding its: (1) 
Rejection of SeAH's third country sales to calculate normal value (NV); 
(2) particular market situation (PMS) determination and resulting 
adjustment to the reported cost of production (COP) for WLP; (3) 
reliance on the constructed value (CV) profit ratio and selling 
expenses calculated for Hyundai Steel in the first administrative 
review; (4) reclassification of NEXTEEL's reported losses relating to 
the suspended production of certain product lines; (5) adjustment to 
NEXTEEL's CV to account for sales of non-prime products; (6) refusal to 
employ its quarterly cost methodology to calculate SeAH's costs; (7) 
allocation of the general and administrative expenses of SeAH's U.S. 
affiliate Pusan Pipe America (PPA) across all of SeAH's U.S. sales of 
WLP sold through PPA; and (8) calculation of the rate assigned to the 
non-examined companies in light of any adjustments made to the 
calculations for either respondent stemming from the remand.\4\ 
Therefore, the CIT remanded the Amended Final Results to Commerce to 
provide further explanation or reconsider its treatment of these items.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Husteel Co., Ltd. v. United States, 471 F. Supp. 3d 1349 
(CIT 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its first remand redetermination, issued in January 2021, 
Commerce recalculated SeAH's weighted-average dumping margin using the 
company's Canadian sales as the basis for NV and without making the PMS 
adjustment to the COP. As a result, SeAH's weighted-average dumping 
margin was 7.24 percent.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court 
Remand, Consol. Court No. 19-00112, dated January 7, 2021 at 42; see 
also Corrected Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court 
Remand, Consol. Court No. 19-00112, dated January 21, 2021, where 
Commerce revised: (1) NEXTEEL's margin calculation to use SeAH's 
final revised calculations as the basis for CV profit and selling 
expenses, resulting in a rate of 11.67 percent; and (2) the review-
specific average rate applicable to the non-selected respondents to 
be 9.21 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 7, 2021, the CIT remanded the Amended Final Results to 
Commerce for a second time, ordering Commerce to provide further 
explanation or reconsideration of the adjustment to NEXTEEL'S CV to 
account for sales of non-prime products, consistent with the Court's 
opinion and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)'s 
ruling in Dillinger.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Husteel Co., Ltd. v. United States, 520 F. Supp. 3d 
1296, 1309 (CIT 2021) (citing Dillinger France S.A. v. United 
States, 981 F.3d 1318, 1321-41 (Fed. Cir. 2020 (Dillinger)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its second remand redetermination, issued in September 2021, 
Commerce recalculated NEXTEEL's weighted average-dumping margin based 
on the actual costs of prime and non-prime merchandise reported by 
NEXTEEL. The revised weighted-average dumping margin for NEXTEEL was 
11.41 percent and the resulting review-specific average rate for the 
non-selected respondents was 9.09 percent.\7\ The CIT sustained 
Commerce's second redetermination.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court 
Remand, Consol. Court No. 19-00112, Slip Op. 21-70 dated September 
2, 2021, at 5-6.
    \8\ See Husteel Co., Ltd. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 
19-00012, Slip Op. 22-1 (CIT January 3, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken,\9\ as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades,\10\ the CAFC held that, pursuant to sections 516A(c) and (e) 
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce must publish 
a notice of court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Commerce 
determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a 
``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's January 3, 2022, judgment 
constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with 
Commerce's Final Results and Amended Final Results. Thus, this notice 
is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 
1990) (Timken).
    \10\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United 
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amended Final Results

    Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending 
its Final Results and Amended Final Results with respect to NEXTEEL, 
SeAH, and the non-selected respondents as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Weighted-
                                                                average
                    Producer or exporter                        dumping
                                                                margin
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEXTEEL Co., Ltd............................................       11.41
SeAH Steel Corporation......................................        7.24
Companies Not Selected for Individual Review................        9.09
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The exporters or producers not selected for individual review are 
listed in the appendix.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    Because NEXTEEL, SeAH, and the non-selected companies have a 
superseding cash deposit rate, i.e., there have been final results 
published in a subsequent administrative review, we will not issue 
revised cash deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(CBP). This notice will not affect the current cash deposit rates for 
those exporters/producers.

Liquidation of Suspended Entries

    At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by CIT order from 
liquidating entries that: Were produced and/or exported by NEXTEEL, 
SeAH, and the non-selected companies, and were entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption during the period December 1, 2016, 
through November 30, 2017. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant 
to the terms of the injunction during the pendency of any appeals 
process.
    In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or, if appealed, 
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to 
instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of 
subject merchandise produced and/or exported by NEXTEEL, SeAH, and the 
non-selected companies in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). We will 
instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries 
covered by this review when the importer-specific ad valorem assessment 
rate is not zero or de minimis. Where an import-specific ad valorem 
assessment rate is zero or de minimis,\11\ we will instruct CBP to 
liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 
516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.


[[Page 1114]]


    Dated: January 4, 2022.
Ryan Majerus,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, performing the 
non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for 
Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix--Review-Specific Average Rate Applicable to Companies Not 
Selected for Individual Review

1. AJU Besteel Co., Ltd.
2. BDP International, Inc.
3. Daewoo International Cooperation
4. Dongbu Incheon Steel Co.
5. Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd.
6. Dongkuk Steel Mill
7. Dong Yang Steel Pipe
8. EEW Korea Co., Ltd.
9. Husteel Co., Ltd.
10. Hyundai RB Co. Ltd.
11. Hyundai Steel Company/Hyundai HYSCO
12. Kelly Pipe Co., LLC.
13. Keonwoo Metals Co., Ltd.
14. Kolon Global Corp.
15. Korea Cast Iron Pipe Ind. Co., Ltd.
16. Kurvers Piping Italy S.R.L.
17. MSTEEL Co., Ltd.
18. Miju Steel MFG Co., Ltd.
19. Poongsan Valinox (Valtimet Division)
20. POSCO
21. POSCO Daewoo
22. R&R Trading Co. Ltd.
23. Sam Kang M&T Co., Ltd.
24. Sin Sung Metal Co., Ltd.
25. SK Networks
26. Soon-Hong Trading Company
27. Steel Flower Co., Ltd.
28. TGS Pipe
29. Tokyo Engineering Korea Ltd.

[FR Doc. 2022-00181 Filed 1-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P