Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 52 / Monday, March 19, 2007 / Notices 12761 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–201–817] 

Oil Country Tubular Goods from 

Mexico: Notice of NAFTA Panel 

Decision Not In Harmony With Final 

Results of Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On January 16, 2007, a Bi–

National Panel (‘‘Panel’’) constituted 

under the North American Free Trade 

Agreement (‘‘NAFTA’’) affirmed the 

U.S. Department of Commerce’s (‘‘the 

Department’s’’) redetermination on 

remand of the final results of the fourth 

antidumping duty administrative review 

on oil country tubular goods from 

Mexico. See In the Matter of: Oil 

Country Tubular Goods from Mexico; 

Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Review and Determination Not to 

Revoke, USA–MEX–2001–1904–05 

(January 16, 2007) (‘‘NAFTA Final 

Decision’’). This case arises out of the 

Department’s determination in the final 

results of administrative review 

covering the period August 1, 1998, to 

July 31, 1999. See Oil Country Tubular 

Goods from Mexico: Final Results of 

Antidumping Review and Determination 

Not To Revoke in Part, 66 FR 15832 and 

accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum (‘‘Final Results’’). 

Consistent with the decision of the 

United States Court of Appeals for the 

Federal Circuit in Timken Co. v. United 

States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) 

(‘‘Timken’’), the Department is notifying 

the public that the NAFTA Final 

Decision and the Notice of Final Panel 

Action are not in harmony with the 

Department’s Final Results. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 19, 2007 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Drury or Angelica Mendoza, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 7, Import 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–0195 or (202) 482–

3019, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For the 

Final Results, the Department reviewed 

sales to the United States by Hylsa S.A. 

de C.V. (‘‘Hylsa’’) and Tubos de Aceros 

de Mexico, S.A. (‘‘TAMSA’’), both 

Mexican producers of OCTG. Both 

TAMSA and Hylsa requested revocation 

from the Order in accordance with 19 

CFR § 351.222(e)(1). The Department 

declined to revoke the order in part with 

respect to TAMSA, as it determined that 

TAMSA ‘‘did not sell the subject 

merchandise in the United States in 

commercial quantities in each of the 

three years cited by TAMSA to support 

its request for revocation.’’ See Final 

Results, Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at page 10. The 

Department declined to revoke the order 

in part with respect to Hylsa due to the 

finding of a dumping margin in the 

review. Id. at 23. 

Subsequent to the completion of the 

fourth administrative review, both Hylsa 

and TAMSA challenged the 

Department’s findings and requested 

that a Bi–National Panel review the final 

determination. The Panel issued a 

decision on January 27, 2006, upholding 

the Department’s determinations with 

respect to TAMSA, but remanding the 

review to the Department with respect 

to Hylsa (to recalculate Hylsa’s packing 

cost and cost of production on a 

product–specific basis). See In the 

Matter of: Oil Country Tubular Goods 

from Mexico; Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review and Determination Not to 

Revoke, USA–MEX–01–1904–05 

(January 27, 2006) (‘‘NAFTA First 

Decision’’). 

In accordance with the NAFTA First 

Decision, the Department filed its 

remand results on April 27, 2006. Based 

on the instructions of the Panel, the 

Department recalculated Hylsa’s 

packing and cost of production by 

product costs and calculated a new 

antidumping duty margin for Hylsa, 

resulting in a margin of zero. The 

Department proceeded to conduct a 

revocation analysis, but found that 

Hylsa did not ship in commercial 

quantities to the U.S. market during the 

time period under consideration and 

found that the finding of dumping by 

Hylsa in the ninth administrative review 

was relevant to the determination 

whether the antidumping duty order 

was otherwise necessary to offset 

dumping. Based on these factors, the 

Department declined to revoke the 

order. See Redetermination on Remand, 

Oil Country Tubular Goods from 

Mexico: Fourth Administrative Review, 

April 27, 2006. 

On August 11, 2006, the Panel again 

remanded the decision to the 

Department for further consideration. 

See In the Matter of: Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from Mexico; Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and 

Determination Not to Revoke, USA–

MEX–01–1904–05 (August 11, 2006) 

(‘‘NAFTA Second Decision’’). The Panel 

rejected the Department’s reliance on 

the results of the ninth administrative 

review and also directed the Department 

to reexamine its revocation analysis ‘‘in 

light of the issues raised by the Panel.’’

Id. at 21. In accordance with the Second 

Decision, the Department reexamined 

Hylsa’s request for revocation under 19 

CFR § 351.222(e)(1) and determined that 

Hylsa had not made sales in commercial 

quantities for the three review periods 

under analysis. See Redetermination on 

Remand, Oil Country Tubular Goods 

from Mexico: Fourth Administrative 

Review, October 5, 2006, at 13–16. 

On January 16, 2007, the Panel 

affirmed the Department’s second 

remand redetermination. See NAFTA 

Final Decision. The Panel issued its 

Notice of Final Panel Action on 

February 2, 2007. 

In Timken, the Federal Circuit held 

that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the 

Act’’), the Department must publish a 

notice of a court decision that is not ‘‘in 

harmony’’ with a Department 

determination, and must suspend 

liquidation of entries pending a 

‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. Timken, 

393 F.2d at 341. Because NAFTA panels 

step into the shoes of the courts they are 

replacing, they must apply the law of 

the national court that would otherwise 

review the administrative 

determination. Therefore, we are 

publishing notice that the Panel’s 

February 2, 2007, Notice of Final Panel 

Action and its January 16, 2007, NAFTA 

Final Decision are not in harmony with 

the Department’s Final Results. This 

notice is published in fulfillment of the 

publication requirements of Timken. 

Accordingly, the Department will 

continue the suspension of liquidation 

of the subject merchandise pending the 

expiration of the period of appeal or, if 

appealed, pending a final and 

conclusive court decision. In the event 

the Panel’s ruling is not appealed, the 

Department will instruct U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection to revise the 

liquidation rates covering the subject 

merchandise. 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of 

the Act. 

Dated: March 8, 2007. 

David M. Spooner, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E7–4912 Filed 3–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES