[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 193 (Thursday, October 6, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60656-60658]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21772]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-549-502]


Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand: Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final 
Determination of No Shipments; 2020-2021

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that the 
producers or exporters subject to this review did not make sales of 
circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes (CWP) from Thailand at 
less than normal value during the period of review (POR) March 1, 2020, 
through February 29, 2021. We further determine that K Line Logistics 
(Thailand) Ltd. (K-Line) had no shipments during the POR.

DATES: Applicable October 6, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Romani or Thomas Schauer, AD/
CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0198 or (202) 
482-0410, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On April 6, 2022, Commerce published the preliminary results of the 
2020-2021 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on CWP 
from Thailand.\1\ This review covers a sole mandatory respondent, Saha 
Thai Steel Pipe Public Co., Ltd., also known as Saha Thai Steel Pipe 
(Public) Co., Ltd. (Saha Thai), and 28 non-examined producers or 
exporters of subject merchandise. We invited interested parties to 
comment on the Preliminary Results.\2\ On June 15, 2022, Wheatland Tube 
Company (Wheatland), a domestic interested party,\3\ Nucor Tubular 
Products Inc. (Nucor), a domestic interested party,\4\ and Saha Thai 
\5\ timely submitted case briefs. On June 22, 2022, Wheatland,\6\ 
Nucor,\7\ and Saha Thai \8\ submitted timely rebuttal briefs. Commerce 
conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff 
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from 
Thailand: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review and Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2020-2021, 87 
FR 19856 (April 6, 2022) (Preliminary Results), and accompanying 
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
    \2\ See Preliminary Results, 87 FR at 19857.
    \3\ See Wheatland's Letter, ``Circular Welded Steel Pipes and 
Tubes from Thailand: Case Brief,'' dated June 15, 2022.
    \4\ See Nucor's Letter, ``Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and 
Tubes from Thailand: Case Brief,'' dated June 15, 2022. In its case 
brief, Nucor stated that it ``concurs with and adopt by reference 
the arguments set forth in the case brief submitted by Wheatland'' 
and that it ``does not wish to address any issues or arguments that 
are substantively different from those addressed by Wheatland in its 
case brief.''
    \5\ See Saha Thai's Letter, ``Saha Thai's Case Brief; Circular 
Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tubes from Thailand: Letter in Lieu of 
Case Brief (AR 20-21),'' dated June 15, 2021.
    \6\ See Wheatland's Letter, ``Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes 
and Tubes from Thailand: Letter in Lieu of Rebuttal Brief,'' dated 
June 22, 2022.
    \7\ See Nucor's Letter, ``Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and 
Tubes from Thailand: Rebuttal Brief,'' dated June 22, 2022.'' In its 
rebuttal brief, Nucor stated that it ``concurs with and adopts by 
reference the arguments set forth in the rebuttal brief submitted by 
Wheatland'' and that it ``does not wish to address any issues or 
arguments that are substantively different from those addressed by 
Wheatland in its rebuttal brief.''
    \8\ See Saha Thai's Letter, ``Saha Thai's Case Brief; Circular 
Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tubes from Thailand: Rebuttal Brief (AR 
20-21),'' dated June 22, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order 9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Antidumping Duty Order; Circular Welded Carbon Steel 
Pipes and Tubes from Thailand, 51 FR 8341 (March 11, 1986) (Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The products covered by the Order are CWP. A full description of 
the scope of the Order is contained in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Memorandum, ``Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and 
Tubes from Thailand: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final 
Determination of No Shipments; 2020-2021,'' 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 submitted by 
parties in this administrative review are addressed in the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum and are listed 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 https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    We made no changes to our calculations for the final results of 
review.

Final Determination of No Shipments

    We preliminarily found that K Line had no shipments of subject 
merchandise during the POR.\11\ No party commented on the Preliminary 
Results regarding the no-shipments decision with respect to K-Line. 
Therefore, for the final results, we continue to find that K-Line had 
no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR and will issue 
appropriate instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 
based on the final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Preliminary Results, 87 FR at 19856.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rate for Non-Examined Companies

    The statute and Commerce's regulations do not address the 
establishment of a weighted-average dumping margin to be applied to 
companies not selected for individual examination when Commerce limits 
its examination in an administrative review

[[Page 60657]]

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 less-than-fair-value 
investigation, for guidance when calculating the weighted-average 
dumping margin for companies which were not selected for individual 
examination 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 (i.e., less than 0.5 percent) margins, 
and any margins determined entirely on the basis of facts available.
    In this review, we have calculated a weighted-average dumping 
margin for the mandatory respondent, Saha Thai, that is zero percent. 
Where the rates for the individually examined companies are all zero, 
de minimis, or determined entirely using facts available, section 
735(c)(5)(B) of the Act instructs that Commerce ``may use any 
reasonable method to establish the estimated all-others rate for 
exporters and producers not individually investigated, including 
averaging the estimated weighted average dumping margins determined for 
the exporters and producers individually investigated.'' One such 
reasonable method is to weight average the zero and de minimis rates, 
and the rates determined entirely pursuant to facts available. In fact, 
the SAA states that this is the ``expected'' method in such 
circumstances.\12\ Accordingly, we determined the weighted-average 
dumping margin for the 28 companies that were not selected for 
individual examination based on the weighted average dumping margin 
calculated for Saha Thai, i.e., zero percent, consistent with section 
735(c)(5)(B) of the Act. This is the only rate determined in this 
review for an individually examined company, and, thus, it is applied 
to the 28 firms not selected for individual examination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Statement of Administrative Action Accompanying the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H.R. Doc. 103-316, vol. 1 (1994) (SAA) 
at 873.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Results of Administrative Review

    Commerce determines that the following weighted-average dumping 
margins exist for the period March 1, 2020, through February 28, 2021:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-average
                Producer or exporter                    dumping margin
                                                          (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co., Ltd.; Saha Thai                   0.00
 Steel Pipe (Public) Company, Ltd..................
------------------------------------------------------------------------


   Review-Specific Average Rate Applicable to the Following Companies
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Average dumping
                Producer or exporter                   margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Examined Companies \13\........................                0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    Normally, Commerce discloses to the parties in a proceeding the 
calculations performed in connection with a final results of review 
within five days after public announcement of final results.\14\ 
However, because Commerce made no adjustments to the margin calculation 
methodology used in the Preliminary Results, there are no calculations 
to disclose for the final results of review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Appendix II for a full list of these companies.
    \14\ See 19 CFR 351.224(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), 
Commerce will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on 
all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the 
final results of this review.
    For Saha Thai, the calculated weighted-average dumping margin in 
the final results is zero or de minimis; accordingly, we will instruct 
CBP to liquidate the entries reported in this review without regard to 
antidumping duties. For entries of subject merchandise during the POR 
produced by Saha Thai for which it did not know 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.
    For the companies identified above that were not selected for 
individual examination, we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping 
duties at a rate equal to the weighted-average dumping margin for that 
company established in the final results of review.
    Because we have determined that K-Line had no shipments of subject 
merchandise in this review, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate any 
suspended entries that entered under K-Line's case number (i.e., at K-
Line's cash deposit rate) at the all-others rate (i.e., 15.67 percent).
    Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier 
than 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this 
review in the Federal Register. If a timely summons is filed at the 
U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will 
direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties 
to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired (i.e., within 
90 days of publication).

Cash Deposit Requirements

    Upon publication of this notice in the Federal Register, the 
following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments 
of CWP entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or 
after the publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the 
Act: (1) the cash deposit rates for the companies subject to this 
review will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin established 
in the final results of this review; (2) for merchandise exported by a 
company not covered in this review but covered in a prior completed 
segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be 
the company-specific rate published in the completed segment for the 
most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this

[[Page 60658]]

review, a prior review, or the original investigation but the producer 
has been covered in a prior completed segment of this proceeding, then 
the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in the completed 
segment for the most recent period for the producer of the merchandise; 
and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will 
continue to be 15.67 percent, the all-others rate established in the 
less-than-fair-value investigation for this proceeding.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Order, 51 FR at 8341.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in 
effect until further notice.
    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 and/or countervailing 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 the antidumping and/or countervailing duties 
occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

Notification to Importers

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

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 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 regulations and terms of an APO is a violation subject 
to sanction.

Notification to Interested Parties

    Commerce is issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

    Dated: September 30, 2022.
Lisa W. Wang,
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 to the Preliminary Results
V. Discussion of the Issue
    Comment: Adjustment for the Alleged Particular Market Situation 
(PMS)
VI. Recommendation

Appendix II--List of Companies Not Individually Examined

1. Apex International Logistics
2. Aquatec Maxcon Asia
3. Asian Unity Part Co., Ltd.
4. Better Steel Pipe Company Limited.
5. Bis Pipe Fitting Industry Co., Ltd.
6. Blue Pipe Steel Center Co. Ltd.
7. Chuhatsu (Thailand) Co., Ltd.
8. CSE Technologies Co., Ltd.
9. Expeditors International (Bangkok)
10. Expeditors Ltd.
11. FS International (Thailand) Co., Ltd
12. Kerry-Apex (Thailand) Co., Ltd.
13. Oil Steel Tube (Thailand) Co., Ltd.
14. Otto Ender Steel Structure Co., Ltd.
15. Pacific Pipe and Pump
16. Pacific Pipe Public Company Limited
17. Panalpina World Transport Ltd.
18. Polypipe Engineering Co., Ltd.
19. Schlumberger Overseas S.A.
20. Siam Fittings Co., Ltd.
21. Siam Steel Pipe Co., Ltd.
22. Sino Connections Logistics (Thailand) Co., Ltd.
23. Thai Malleable Iron and Steel
24. Thai Oil Group
25. Thai Oil Pipe Co., Ltd.
26. Thai Premium Pipe Co., Ltd.
27. Vatana Phaisal Engineering Company
28. Visavakit Patana Corp., Ltd.

[FR Doc. 2022-21772 Filed 10-5-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P