[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 154 (Wednesday, August 10, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49437-49439]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20331]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-201-805]


Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From Mexico: 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

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

SUMMARY: In response to requests by interested parties, the Department 
of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of 
the antidumping duty order on certain circular welded non-alloy steel 
pipe from Mexico. This administrative review covers mandatory 
respondents Mueller Comercial de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. (Mueller), 
Southland Pipe Nipples Company, Inc. (Southland), Lamina y Placa 
Comercial, S.A. de C.V. (Lamina), and Tuberia Nacional, S.A. de C.V. 
(TUNA).\1\ The period of review (POR) is November 1, 2009, through 
October 31, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Department determined that Lamina is the successor-in-
interest to TUNA. See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Changed Circumstances Review: Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy 
Steel Pipe From Mexico, 75 FR 82374 (December 30, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The respondents provided certifications of no shipments. We sought 
further clarification of a specific entry indicated by U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection (CBP) data and analyzed parties' explanations of this 
entry. The Department's review of import data supports the claims of 
the respondents. We preliminarily determine that the respondents did 
not have reviewable sales, shipments, or entries during the POR. 
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results.

DATES: Effective Date: August 10, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Flessner or Robert James, 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-
6312 or (202) 482-0469, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On November 2, 1992, the Department published the antidumping duty 
order on certain circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from Mexico. See 
Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy 
Steel Pipe from Brazil, the Republic of Korea (Korea), Mexico, and 
Venezuela and Amendment to Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value: Certain Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from Korea, 57 FR 49453 
(November 2, 1992) (Antidumping Duty Order). On November 1, 2010, the 
Department published a notice of opportunity to request an 
administrative review in the Federal Register. See Antidumping or 
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; 
Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 75 FR 67079 (November 1, 
2010). On November 30, 2010, the Department received multiple requests 
for administrative review. Mueller requested a review of itself and 
Southland. Southland requested a review of itself and Mueller. U.S. 
Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel) requested reviews of Mueller, Southland, 
TUNA, and Lamina. Wheatland Tube Company (Wheatland) requested reviews 
of Mueller and Southland. Allied Tube and Conduit and TMK IPSCO 
Tubulars (Allied/TMK) requested reviews of Mueller, Southland, TUNA, 
and Lamina. On December 28, 2010, the Department published a Federal 
Register notice initiating an antidumping administrative review. See 
Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 75 FR 81565 (December 28, 
2010) (Initiation Notice). The Department stated in its initiation of 
this review that it intended to rely on CBP data to select respondents 
if respondent selection was considered appropriate. See Initiation 
Notice. For the purpose of potential respondent selection, we made a 
data inquiry to CBP and placed certain documents from this data query 
on the record. See memorandum from Mark Flessner to the File entitled, 
``Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Carbon Steel Pipe from Mexico: 
Customs and Border Protection Documents,'' dated March 17, 2011 (CBP 
Documents Memorandum). For further discussion of these documents, see 
the ``No Shipments Claims'' section below.
    On January 25, 2011, Wheatland requested that the Department 
conduct a duty absorption inquiry with regard to Mueller, Lamina, and 
Ternium Nacional, S.A. de C.V. (Ternium).

[[Page 49438]]

Mueller responded to this request on February 22, 2011.
    On January 26, 2011, the Department issued its standard antidumping 
questionnaire to Mueller and Southland (both represented by the same 
counsel) and to Lamina (at the time, the successor-in-interest to 
TUNA).
    On February 16, 2011, Lamina claimed that it and TUNA (on whose 
behalf it was responding) had made no shipments or entries for 
consumption of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. 
On February 25, 2011, Mueller claimed that it had made no shipments or 
entries for consumption of subject merchandise to the United States 
during the POR, providing documentation in support of its claim. On 
March 11, 2011, Mueller provided additional documentation in support of 
its claim.
    On April 7, 2011, Wheatland requested that the Department conduct 
verifications of both Mueller and Lamina. On April 8, 2011, Lamina 
responded to Wheatland's verification request.
    On April 13, 2011, Wheatland submitted comments concerning the CBP 
data contained in the March 17, 2011, memorandum cited above. On April 
19, 2011, U.S. Steel placed the verification report from the previous 
segment of this proceeding on the record of the instant segment.
    On May 19, 2011, we sent a ``No Shipments Inquiry'' to CBP to 
confirm that there were no shipments or entries of certain circular 
welded non-alloy steel pipe from Mexico by Mueller during the POR. On 
July 19, 2011, we sent additional such inquiries to CBP to confirm that 
there were no shipments or entries of certain circular welded non-alloy 
steel pipe from Mexico by TUNA, Lamina, and Southland during the POR. 
On July 19, 2011, Southland submitted a clarification of its February 
25, 2011, submission; it stated specifically that Southland (as an 
entity distinct from Mueller) neither produced nor exported any subject 
merchandise during the POR. We received no information from CBP to 
contradict the statements of Mueller, Southland, and Lamina (including 
TUNA) and the results of our data query that there were no shipments or 
entries of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR.

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are circular welded non-alloy 
steel pipes and tubes, of circular cross-section, not more than 406.4 
millimeters (16 inches) in outside diameter, regardless of wall 
thickness, surface finish (black, galvanized, or painted), or end 
finish (plain end, beveled end, threaded, or threaded and coupled). 
These pipes and tubes are generally known as standard pipes and tubes 
and are intended for the low pressure conveyance of water, steam, 
natural gas, and other liquids and gases in plumbing and heating 
systems, air conditioning units, automatic sprinkler systems, and other 
related uses, and generally meet ASTM A-53 specifications. Standard 
pipe may also be used for light load-bearing applications, such as for 
fence tubing, and as structural pipe tubing used for framing and 
support members for reconstruction or load-bearing purposes in the 
construction, shipbuilding, trucking, farm equipment, and related 
industries. Unfinished conduit pipe is also included in these orders. 
All carbon steel pipes and tubes within the physical description 
outlined above are included within the scope of this order, except line 
pipe, oil country tubular goods, boiler tubing, mechanical tubing, pipe 
and tube hollows for redraws, finished scaffolding, and finished 
conduit. Standard pipe that is dual or triple certified/stenciled that 
enters the U.S. as line pipe of a kind used for oil or gas pipelines is 
also not included in this order.
    The merchandise covered by the order and subject to this review are 
currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States (HTSUS) at subheadings: 7306.30.10.00, 7306.30.50.25, 
7306.30.50.32, 7306.30.50.40, 7306.30.50.55, 7306.30.50.85, and 
7306.30.50.90. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope 
of these proceedings is dispositive.

Preliminary Determination of No Shipments

A. No Shipments Claims

    As noted above, the respondents submitted letters to the Department 
indicating that they made no shipments or entries of subject 
merchandise to the United States during the POR that are subject to 
this administrative review. In response to the Department's query, CBP 
data showed that a single entry of subject merchandise may have entered 
for consumption into the United States during the POR. See CBP 
Documents Memorandum at Attachment 1. In its February 25, 2011, claim 
of no shipments, Mueller and Southland addressed the status of this 
single entry, providing additional documentation on March 11, 2011. The 
documentation submitted by Mueller and Southland demonstrated that the 
single entry in question had been mischaracterized as subject 
merchandise. This documentation demonstrated that Mueller and Southland 
had applied for--and received CBP approval for--a post-entry amendment 
to the entry in question. This is confirmed by the Department's ``No 
Shipments Inquiry'' to CBP with regard to Mueller. CBP provided no 
information identifying additional Mueller shipments. The customs 
documents related to the single suspect entry were the same that had 
been submitted by Mueller and Southland to explain that the entry had 
been mischaracterized by Southland's customs broker. See CBP Documents 
Memorandum at Attachment 2. The above explanation is equally applicable 
to TUNA, which is confirmed by the Department's ``No Shipments 
Inquiry'' to CBP with regard to TUNA. See CBP Documents Memorandum 
(containing proprietary information not susceptible to public summary).
    In addition, as stated above, the Department sent a ``No Shipments 
Inquiry'' to CBP with regard to Lamina and Southland to confirm that 
there were no shipments or entries of certain circular welded non-alloy 
steel pipe from Mexico by either respondent during the POR. We received 
no information from CBP to contradict the results of our data query and 
the claims made by each respondent.
    Therefore, because the evidence on the record indicates that 
Mueller, Southland, TUNA, and Lamina made no shipments of subject 
merchandise to the United States during the POR, we preliminarily 
determine that there are no reviewable transactions during the POR for 
each of the respondents for whom reviews were requested.
    Since the implementation of the 1997 regulations, our practice 
concerning no shipment respondents had been to rescind the 
administrative review if the respondent certifies that it had no 
shipments and we have confirmed through our examination of CBP data 
that there were no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. See 
Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27393 (May 19, 
1997); see also Oil Country Tubular Goods from Japan: Preliminary 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Partial 
Rescission of Review, 70 FR 53161, 53162 (September 5, 2007), unchanged 
in Oil Country Tubular Goods from Japan: Final Results and Partial 
Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 95 (January 
3, 2006). In such circumstances, we normally instructed CBP to 
liquidate any entries from the no shipment company at the

[[Page 49439]]

deposit rate in effect on the date of entry.
    In our May 6, 2003, ``automatic assessment'' clarification, we 
explained that, where respondents in an administrative review 
demonstrate that they had no knowledge of sales through resellers to 
the United States, we would instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at 
the all-others rate applicable to the proceeding. See Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment Policy Notice).
    Because ``as entered'' liquidation instructions do not alleviate 
the concerns which the May 2003 clarification was intended to address, 
we find it appropriate in this case to instruct CBP to liquidate any 
existing entries of merchandise produced by the respondents, and 
exported by other parties at the all-others rate, should we continue to 
find that the respondents had no shipments of subject merchandise in 
the POR in our final results. See, e.g., Magnesium Metal From the 
Russian Federation: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 75 FR 26922, 26923 (May 13, 2010), unchanged in 
Magnesium Metal From the Russian Federation: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 56989, 56990 (September 
17, 2010). In addition, the Department finds that it is more consistent 
with the May 2003 clarification not to rescind the review in its 
entirety but, rather, to complete the review with respect to the 
respondents, issuing appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final 
results of the review. See the ``Assessment Rates'' section of this 
notice below.

B. Duty Absorption

    On January 25, 2011, Wheatland requested that the Department 
conduct a duty absorption inquiry with regard to Mueller, Lamina, and 
Ternium Nacional, S.A. de C.V. (Ternium). Mueller responded to this 
request on February 22, 2011. Section 751(a)(4) of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (the Act), provides for the Department, if requested, 
to determine during an administrative review initiated two or four 
years after publication of the order whether antidumping duties have 
been absorbed by the foreign producer or exporter if the subject 
merchandise is sold in the United States through an affiliated 
importer. See also 19 CFR 351.213(j). First, Ternium is not a 
respondent in this administrative review. Notwithstanding, because this 
review was not initiated at the two-year or four-year interval from 
publication of the antidumping duty order, a duty absorption inquiry is 
not authorized. See Antidumping Duty Order.

Assessment Rates

    Upon completion of the administrative review, the Department shall 
determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212. The Department intends to 
issue appraisement instructions directly to CBP 15 days after the date 
of publication of the final results of this review.
    As noted above, the Department clarified its ``automatic 
assessment'' regulation on May 6, 2003. See Assessment Policy Notice. 
This clarification will apply to POR entries by each respondent company 
if we continue to make a final determination of no shipments based upon 
their certifications that they made no POR shipments of subject 
merchandise for which they had knowledge of U.S. destination. We will 
instruct CBP to liquidate these entries at the all-others rate 
established in the less-than-fair-value investigation (32.62 percent) 
if there is no rate for the intermediary involved in the transaction. 
See Assessment Policy Notice for a full discussion of this 
clarification.
    The preliminary results of administrative review and this notice 
are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 
777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: August 2, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-20331 Filed 8-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P