[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 24 (Friday, February 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5587-5591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2580]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-201-827]


Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value and Postponement of Final Determination: Certain Large Diameter 
Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe From Mexico

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

EFFECTIVE DATE:  February 4, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Russell Morris or John R. Brinkmann, 
at (202) 482-1775 or (202) 482-4126, respectively; AD/CVD Enforcement 
II, Office VI, Group II, Import Administration, Room 1870, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.

The Applicable Statute and Regulations

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are 
references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective 
date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise 
indicated, all citations to the Department of Commerce's (the 
Department's) regulations refer to the regulations codified at 19 CFR 
part 351 (April 1999).

Preliminary Determination

    We preliminarily determine that certain large diameter carbon and 
alloy seamless standard, line, and pressure pipe (seamless pipe) from 
Mexico are being sold, or are likely to be sold, in the United States 
at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 733 of the Act. 
The estimated margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the Suspension of 
Liquidation section of this notice.

Case History

    This investigation was initiated on July 20, 1999.\1\ See 
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Certain Large Diameter 
Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe from Japan 
and Mexico and Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless 
Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe from the Czech Republic, Japan, the 
Republic of South Africa and Romania, 64 FR 40825 (July 28, 1999) 
(Initiation Notice). Since the initiation of the investigation, the 
following events occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The petitioners in this investigation are Gulf States Tube, 
a division of Vision Metals, Inc.; Koppel Steel Corporation; Sharon 
Tube Corporation; USS/Kobe Steel Corporation; United Steel Workers 
of America; and U.S. Steel Group, a unit of USX Corporation, 
hereinafter referred to as Petitioners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 12, 1999, the Department issued its antidumping 
questionnaire to Tubos de Acero de Mexico, S.A. (TAMSA), the sole 
Mexican producer of the subject merchandise.
    On August 23, 1999, the United States International Trade 
Commission (ITC) preliminarily determined that there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of the products subject to each of these 
antidumping investigations are materially injuring the U.S. industry. 
See Certain Seamless Carbon and Alloy Steel Standard, Line, and 
Pressure Pipe from the Czech Republic, Japan, Mexico, Romania, and 
South Africa, 64 FR 46953 (August 27, 1999).
    We issued supplemental questionnaires where appropriate. Responses 
to those supplemental questionnaires were timely filed between November 
1, 1999 and November 16, 1999, and we have incorporated the information 
provided in those responses into this preliminary determination.
    On November 17, 1999, the Department concluded, consistent with 
section 733(c)(1)(B) of the Act, that the Mexican investigation of 
large diameter pipe is extraordinarily complicated, and that additional 
time was necessary to issue the preliminary determination. 
Consequently, we extended the deadline for the preliminary 
determination to January 26, 2000. See Notice of Postponement of 
Preliminary Antidumping Duty Determinations: Certain Small and Large 
Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe 
From the Czech Republic, Romania and Mexico, 64 FR 66168 (November 24, 
1999).
    Although the deadline for this determination was originally January 
26, 2000, due to the Federal Government shutdown on January 25 and 26, 
2000, resulting from inclement weather, the time frame for issuing this 
determination has been extended by two days.

Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional 
Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination 
may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the 
publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an 
affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement 
is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of 
exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative 
preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by 
the petitioners. The Department's regulations, at 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2), 
require that requests by respondents for postponement of a final 
determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional 
measures from a four-month period to not more than six months.
    On January 14, 2000, TAMSA requested that, in the event of an 
affirmative preliminary determination in this investigation, the 
Department postpone its final determination until not later than 135 
days after the date of the publication of the affirmative

[[Page 5588]]

preliminary determination in the Federal Register. TAMSA also included 
a request to extend the provisional measures to not more than six 
months. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.210(b), because (1) 
our determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporter accounts 
for a significant portion of exports of the subject merchandise; and 
(3) no compelling reason for denial exists, we are granting the 
respondent's request and are postponing the final determination until 
not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the 
preliminary determination. Suspension of liquidation will be extended 
accordingly.

Period of Investigation

    The period of this investigation (POI) comprises TAMSA's four most 
recent fiscal quarters prior to the filing of the petition, (i.e., 
April 1, 1998, through March 31, 1999).

Scope of Investigation \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ On September 3, 1999, the petitioners requested that the 
scope of the investigations be amended to exclude certain products 
made to the A-335 specification. This change is reflected in the 
current scope.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For purposes of this investigation, the products covered are large 
diameter seamless carbon and alloy (other than stainless) steel 
standard, line, and pressure pipes produced, or equivalent, to the 
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) A-53, ASTM A-106, 
ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-335 (grades P1, P2, P11, P12, P21 and 
P22 only), ASTM A-589, ASTM A-795, and the American Petroleum Institute 
(API) 5L specifications and meeting the physical parameters described 
below, regardless of application. The scope of this investigation also 
includes all products used in standard, line, or pressure pipe 
applications and meeting the physical parameters described below, 
regardless of specification. Specifically included within the scope of 
this investigation are seamless pipes greater than 4.5 inches (114.3 
mm) up to and including 16 inches (406.4 mm) in outside diameter, 
regardless of wall-thickness, manufacturing process (hot finished or 
cold-drawn), end finish (plain end, beveled end, upset end, threaded, 
or threaded and coupled), or surface finish.
    The seamless pipes subject to this investigation are currently 
classifiable under the subheadings 7304.10.10.30, 7304.10.10.45, 
7304.10.10.60, 7304.10.50.50, 7304.31.60.50, 7304.39.00.36, 
7304.39.00.40, 7304.39.00.44, 7304.39.00.48, 7304.39.00.52, 
7304.39.00.56, 7304.39.00.62, 7304.39.00.68, 7304.39.00.72, 
7304.51.50.60, 7304.59.60.00, 7304.59.80.30, 7304.59.80.35, 
7304.59.80.40, 7304.59.80.45, 7304.59.80.50, 7304.59.80.55, 
7304.59.80.60, 7304.59.80.65, and 7304.59.80.70 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).
    Specifications, Characteristics, and Uses: Large diameter seamless 
pipe is used primarily for line applications such as oil, gas, or water 
pipeline, or utility distribution systems. Seamless pressure pipes are 
intended for the conveyance of water, steam, petrochemicals, chemicals, 
oil products, natural gas and other liquids and gasses in industrial 
piping systems. They may carry these substances at elevated pressures 
and temperatures and may be subject to the application of external 
heat. Seamless carbon steel pressure pipe meeting the ASTM A-106 
standard may be used in temperatures of up to 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, 
at various American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) code stress 
levels. Alloy pipes made to ASTM A-335 standard must be used if 
temperatures and stress levels exceed those allowed for ASTM A-106. 
Seamless pressure pipes sold in the United States are commonly produced 
to the ASTM A-106 standard.
    Seamless standard pipes are most commonly produced to the ASTM A-53 
specification and generally are not intended for high temperature 
service. They are intended for the low temperature and pressure 
conveyance of water, steam, natural gas, air and other liquids and 
gasses in plumbing and heating systems, air conditioning units, 
automatic sprinkler systems, and other related uses. Standard pipes 
(depending on type and code) may carry liquids at elevated temperatures 
but must not exceed relevant ASME code requirements. If exceptionally 
low temperature uses or conditions are anticipated, standard pipe may 
be manufactured to ASTM A-333 or ASTM A-334 specifications.
    Seamless line pipes are intended for the conveyance of oil and 
natural gas or other fluids in pipe lines. Seamless line pipes are 
produced to the API 5L specification.
    Seamless water well pipe (ASTM A-589) and seamless galvanized pipe 
for fire protection uses (ASTM A-795) are used for the conveyance of 
water.
    Seamless pipes are commonly produced and certified to meet ASTM A-
106, ASTM A-53, API 5L-B, and API 5L-X42 specifications. To avoid 
maintaining separate production runs and separate inventories, 
manufacturers typically triple or quadruple certify the pipes by 
meeting the metallurgical requirements and performing the required 
tests pursuant to the respective specifications. Since distributors 
sell the vast majority of this product, they can thereby maintain a 
single inventory to service all customers.
    The primary application of ASTM A-106 pressure pipes and triple or 
quadruple certified pipes in large diameters is for use as oil and gas 
distribution lines for commercial applications. A more minor 
application for large diameter seamless pipes is for use in pressure 
piping systems by refineries, petrochemical plants, and chemical 
plants, as well as in power generation plants and in some oil field 
uses (on shore and off shore) such as for separator lines, gathering 
lines and metering runs. These applications constitute the majority of 
the market for the subject seamless pipes. However, ASTM A-106 pipes 
may be used in some boiler applications.
    The scope of this investigation includes all seamless pipe meeting 
the physical parameters described above and produced to one of the 
specifications listed above, regardless of application, and whether or 
not also certified to a non-covered specification. Standard, line, and 
pressure applications and the above-listed specifications are defining 
characteristics of the scope of this investigation. Therefore, seamless 
pipes meeting the physical description above, but not produced to the 
ASTM A-53, ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-335 (grades P1, 
P2, P11, P12, P21 and P22 only), ASTM A-589, ASTM A-795, and API 5L 
specifications shall be covered if used in a standard, line, or 
pressure application.
    For example, there are certain other ASTM specifications of pipe 
which, because of overlapping characteristics, could potentially be 
used in ASTM A-106 applications. These specifications generally include 
ASTM A-161, ASTM A-192, ASTM A-210, ASTM A-252, ASTM A-501, ASTM A-523, 
ASTM A-524, and ASTM A-618. When such pipes are used in a standard, 
line, or pressure pipe application, such products are covered by the 
scope of this investigation.
    Specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation are 
boiler tubing and mechanical tubing, if such products are not produced 
to ASTM A-53, ASTM A-106, ASTM A-333, ASTM A-334, ASTM A-335 (grades 
P1, P2, P11, P12, P21 and P22 only), ASTM A-589, ASTM A-795, and API 5L 
specifications and are not used in standard, line, or pressure pipe 
applications. In addition,

[[Page 5589]]

finished and unfinished oil country tubular goods (OCTG) are excluded 
from the scope of this investigation, if covered by the scope of 
another antidumping duty order from the same country. If not covered by 
such an OCTG order, finished and unfinished OCTG are included in this 
scope when used in standard, line or pressure applications.
    Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes, our written description of the merchandise under 
investigation is dispositive.

Class or Kind

    From August through November 1999, the Department received 
submissions from importers, respondents, and consumers in the companion 
investigations involving small and large diameter seamless pipe from 
Japan, requesting that the subject merchandise be considered more than 
one class or kind. Specifically, those parties requested that the 
Department subdivide each of these investigations into the following 
separate classes or kinds of merchandise: (1) Commodity grade carbon 
seamless standard, line and pressure pipe; (2) alloy seamless pipe; and 
(3) high-strength seamless line pipe. On November 8, 1999, the 
petitioners rebutted these arguments. We have preliminarily determined 
that there is a single class or kind of merchandise for small diameter 
pipe and another distinct single class or kind of merchandise for large 
diameter pipe. For further discussion on this topic, including the 
comments received, see the Notice of Preliminary Determinations of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Large Diameter Carbon and Alloy 
Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe from Japan and Certain Small 
Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe 
from Japan and the Republic of South Africa, 64 FR 69721 (December 14, 
1999).

Product Comparisons

    In accordance with section 771(16) of the Act, all products 
produced by TAMSA covered by the description in the Scope of 
Investigation section, above, and sold in Mexico during the POI, are 
considered to be foreign like products for purposes of determining 
appropriate product comparisons to U.S. sales. We have relied on six 
criteria to match U.S. sales of subject merchandise to comparison-
market sales of the foreign like product: specification/grade, 
manufacturing process, outside diameter, wall thickness, surface 
finish, and end-finish. These characteristics have been weighted by the 
Department, where appropriate. Where there were no sales of identical 
merchandise in the home market to compare to U.S. sales, we compared 
U.S. sales to the next most similar foreign like product on the basis 
of the characteristics as listed above.

Fair Value Comparisons

    To determine whether sales of seamless pipe products from Mexico 
were made in the United States at LTFV, we compared the constructed 
export price (CEP) to the normal value (NV), as described in the 
Constructed Export Price and Normal Value sections of this notice, 
below. In accordance with section 777A(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, we 
calculated weighted-average CEPs for comparison to weighted-average 
NVs.

Constructed Export Price

    In accordance with section 772 of the Act, we calculated a CEP for 
each sale. Section 772(b) of the Act defines CEP as the price at which 
the subject merchandise is first sold (or agreed to be sold) in the 
United States before or after the date of importation by or for the 
account of the producer or exporter of such merchandise or by a seller 
affiliated with the producer or exporter, to a purchaser not affiliated 
with the producer or exporter, as adjusted.
    When sales are made prior to importation through an affiliated U.S. 
sales agent to an unaffiliated customer in the United States, it is the 
Department's practice to examine several criteria in order to determine 
whether or not the sales are CEP or export price (EP) sales. Those 
criteria are: (1) Whether the merchandise was shipped directly from the 
manufacturer to the unaffiliated U.S. customer; (2) whether this was 
the customary commercial channel between the parties involved; and (3) 
whether the function of the U.S. selling agent was limited to that of a 
``processor of sales-related documentation'' and a ``communications 
link'' between the exporter and the unaffiliated U.S. buyer. See, e.g., 
Porcelain-on-Steel Cookware from Mexico: Final Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review, 64 FR 26934, 26941 (May 18, 1999); and 
Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products and Certain Cut-
to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From Canada: Final Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Reviews (Canadian Steel), 63 FR 12725, 12738 (March 
16, 1998). In the Canadian Steel case, the Department clarified its 
interpretation of the third prong of this test, as follows:

    Where the factors indicate that the activities of the U.S. 
affiliate are ancillary to the sale (e.g., arranging transportation 
or customs clearance, invoicing), we treat the transactions as EP 
sales. Where the U.S. affiliate has more than an incidental 
involvement in making sales (e.g., solicits sales, negotiates 
contracts or prices) or providing customer support, we treat the 
transactions as CEP sales.
Canadian Steel, 63 FR at 12738.

    For sales of seamless pipe products during the POI, TAMSA utilizes 
the services of two affiliated selling agents in the United States, 
Siderca Corporation (Siderca) and another affiliate, hereinafter 
referred to as Company A (the name of Company A is business proprietary 
information). TAMSA reported, as EP transactions, its seamless pipe 
sales for which Siderca and Company A served as the importers of record 
and which were shipped directly from Mexico to the unaffiliated U.S. 
customer. Conversely, TAMSA reported as CEP transactions the subject 
merchandise that was stored in Company A's warehouse and later sold out 
of Company A's inventory. After careful examination of the record, the 
Department has preliminarily determined that both selling agents, 
Siderca and Company A, act as more than simply a ``processor of sales-
related documentation'' or ``a communication link.'' As a result of our 
analysis, we are reclassifying TAMSA's reported EP sales as CEP sales, 
as defined in section 772(b) of the Act. Specifically, both Siderca and 
Company A solicit sales, negotiate the price, obtain customer approval, 
prepare sales documentation (i.e., invoices), receive payment and 
forward payment to TAMSA. For a further discussion, see Memorandum 
Whether to Reclassify Certain EP Sales by Tubos de Acero de Mexico, S.A 
in the U.S. Market as CEP Sales, dated January 28, 2000, public 
version, on file in the Central Record Unit (CRU), Room B-099, of the 
Main Commerce Building.
    We based CEP on the packed, cost-insurance-freight (CIF), ex-
factory, free-on-board (FOB), or delivered prices to the first 
unaffiliated customer in the United States, as appropriate. We reduced 
these prices for discounts and rebates, where appropriate.
    In accordance with section 772(c)(2) of the Act, we made 
deductions, where appropriate, for movement expenses including inland 
freight from the plant or warehouse to the port of exportation, foreign 
brokerage, handling and loading charges, international freight, marine 
insurance, U.S. duties and U.S. inland freight expenses (from port to 
the customer).
    In accordance with section 772(d)(1) of the Act, where appropriate, 
we deducted from the starting price those

[[Page 5590]]

selling expenses that related to economic activity in the United 
States, including direct selling expenses (credit costs, warehousing, 
and warranties), indirect selling expenses and indirect selling 
expenses of the affiliated selling agents. We also deducted from CEP an 
amount for profit in accordance with sections 772(d)(3) and (f) of the 
Act. See Preliminary Calculation Memorandum, dated January 28, 2000, 
public version on file in the CRU.

Normal Value

A. Selection of Comparison Markets
    Section 773(a)(1) of the Act directs that NV be based on the price 
at which the foreign like product is sold in the home market, provided 
that the merchandise is sold in sufficient quantities, and that there 
is no particular market situation that prevents a proper comparison 
with the U.S. price. The statute contemplates that quantities normally 
will be considered insufficient if they are less than five percent of 
the aggregate quantity of sales of the subject merchandise to the 
United States.
    TAMSA had a viable home market for seamless pipe products, and 
reported home market sales data for purposes of the calculation of NV.
    In deriving NV, we made certain adjustments to price as detailed in 
the Calculation of Normal Value Based on Home-Market Prices section of 
this notice, below.
B. Arm's Length Test
    Sales to affiliated customers for consumption in the home market 
which were determined not to be at arm's length were excluded from our 
analysis. To test whether these sales were made at arm's length, we 
compared the prices of sales of comparison products to affiliated and 
unaffiliated customers, net of all movement charges, direct selling 
expenses, discounts, and packing. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.403 and in 
accordance with our practice, where the prices to the affiliated party 
were on average less than 99.5 percent of the prices to unaffiliated 
parties, we determined that the sales made to the affiliated party were 
not at arm's length. See Notice of Final Results and Partial Recission 
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Roller Chain, Other Than 
Bicycle, From Japan, 62 FR 60472, 60478 (November 10, 1997) and 
Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties: Final Rule (Antidumping 
Duties), 62 FR 27295, 27355-56 (May 19, 1997). We included in our NV 
calculations those sales to affiliated customers that passed the arm's-
length test in our analysis. See 19 CFR 351.403; Antidumping Duties, 62 
FR at 27355-56.
C. Level of Trade
    As set forth in section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act and in the 
Statement of Administrative Action (SAA) accompanying the Uruguay Round 
Agreements Act, H.R. Doc. No. 103-316, at 829-831 (1994), to the extent 
practicable, the Department will calculate NV based on sales at the 
same level of trade (LOT) as the U.S. sales.
    To determine whether comparison market sales were at different LOTs 
we examined stages in the marketing process and selling functions along 
the chain of distribution between the producer and the unaffiliated (or 
arm's length) customers. If the comparison-market sales were at a 
different LOT and the differences affected price comparability, as 
manifested in a pattern of consistent price differences between the 
sales on which NV is based and comparison-market sales at the LOT of 
the export transaction, we made a LOT adjustment under section 
773(a)(7)(A) of the Act, where appropriate.
    In accordance with the Act, we examined the chain of distribution 
and the selling activities associated with sales reported by TAMSA to 
its two customer categories in the home market. TAMSA reported three 
distinct channels of distribution in the home market: (1) Sales to end 
users; (2) sales to distributors; and (3) sales to one specific end 
user which received additional services pursuant to a just-in-time 
agreement. We found that the channels of distribution through the 
distributors and the first referenced end users differed significantly 
from the channel to the end user that received additional services as 
enumerated in the just-in-time agreement. Based on our overall 
analysis, we found that the home market sales constituted two LOTs: (1) 
Distributors and end users (LOT 1), and (2) the end user that received 
additional services pursuant to the just-in-time agreement (LOT 2).
    We examined the sales from TAMSA to the two affiliated resellers 
(i.e., at the constructed, or CEP LOT) and found only one LOT in the 
U.S. market. This CEP LOT was comparable to the home market LOT 1. For 
the vast majority of comparisons, we were able to determine NV based on 
sales of identical merchandise made at the same LOT as the U.S. CEP 
sales. Accordingly, because we compared U.S. to home market sales at 
the same LOT, no LOT adjustment was warranted under section 
773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. Where there were no identical comparison 
market sales at the same LOT as the U.S. CEP sales, we compared U.S. 
sales to identical merchandise sold at the other LOT in the home market 
and made a LOT adjustment under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. For a 
detailed description of our LOT analysis and adjustment methodology for 
these preliminary results, see the January 28, 2000, Antidumping 
Investigation of Certain Large Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless 
Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe from Mexico: Preliminary Level of 
Trade Findings Memorandum, on file in the CRU.
    We note that the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) has held 
that the Department's practice of determining LOTs for CEP transactions 
after CEP deductions is an impermissible interpretation of section 
772(d) of the Act. See Borden, Inc., v. United States, 4 F. Supp. 2d 
1221, 1241-42 (CIT 1998) (Borden). The Department believes, however, 
that its practice is in full compliance with the statute. On June 4, 
1999, the CIT entered final judgment in Borden on the LOT issue. See 
Borden, Inc., v. United States, Court No. 96-08-01970, Slip Op. 99-50 
(CIT June 4, 1999). The government has filed an appeal of Borden which 
is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. 
Consequently, the Department has continued to follow its normal 
practice of adjusting CEP under section 772(d) prior to starting a LOT 
analysis, as articulated in the Department's regulations at 
Sec. 351.412.
D. Calculation of Normal Value Based on Home-Market Prices
    We calculated NV based on ex-factory or delivered prices. Pursuant 
to 19 CFR 351.401(c), we adjusted the gross unit price for discounts 
and rebates to arrive at the ``starting price'' for NV. We made 
deductions from the starting price for inland freight, warehousing, and 
inland insurance. In addition, we made circumstance-of-sale (COS) 
adjustments for direct expenses, where appropriate, in accordance with 
section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act. These included imputed credit 
expenses, warranty expenses, commissions, interest revenue, and 
performance bond fees. In accordance with sections 773(a)(6)(A) and (B) 
of the Act, we deducted home market packing costs and added U.S. 
packing costs. See Preliminary Calculation Memorandum, dated January 
28, 2000, public version on file in the CRU.
    In accordance with Sec. 351.410(e) of the Department's regulations, 
where commissions are incurred in one market

[[Page 5591]]

(in this case the home market), but not in the other, we make an 
allowance for indirect selling expenses in the other market up to the 
amount of the commissions granted. In this case, because commissions 
were paid in the home market, but not in the United States, and thus 
were deducted from the home market price, we made an adjustment for 
U.S. indirect selling expenses incurred in Mexico which were associated 
with sales of the subject merchandise. We made such an adjustment by 
adding the U.S. indirect selling expenses, up to the amount of the home 
market commissions, to home market price rather than subtracting them 
from the CEP.

Currency Conversion

    We made currency conversions into U.S. dollars, in accordance with 
section 773(A) of the Act, based on the exchange rates in effect on the 
dates of the U.S. sales as certified by the Federal Reserve Bank.

Verification

    In accordance with section 782(i) of the Act, we intend to verify 
all information relied upon in making our final determination.

Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d) of the Act, we are directing 
Customs to suspend liquidation of all entries of large diameter 
seamless pipe products from Mexico, that are entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this 
notice in the Federal Register. We are also instructing Customs to 
require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond equal to the weighted-
average amount by which the NV exceeds the CEP, as indicated in the 
chart below. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in 
effect until further notice. The weighted-average dumping margins are 
provided below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                   Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAMSA......................................................         4.60
All others.................................................         4.60
------------------------------------------------------------------------

ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we have notified the 
ITC of our determination. If our final antidumping determination is 
affirmative, the ITC will determine whether the imports covered by this 
determination are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, 
the United States industry. The deadline for that ITC determination 
would be the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary 
determination or 45 days after the date of our final determination.

Public Comment

    Case briefs for this investigation must be submitted no later than 
March 16, 2000. Rebuttal briefs must be filed within five days after 
the deadline for submission of case briefs. A list of authorities used, 
a table of contents, and an executive summary of issues should 
accompany any briefs submitted to the Department. Executive summaries 
should be limited to five pages total, including footnotes.
    Section 774 of the Act provides that the Department will hold a 
hearing to afford interested parties an opportunity to comment on 
arguments raised in case or rebuttal briefs, provided that such a 
hearing is requested by any interested party. If a request for a 
hearing is made in an investigation, the hearing will tentatively be 
held two days after the deadline for submission of the rebuttal briefs, 
at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. Parties should confirm by telephone 
the time, date, and place of the hearing 48 hours before the scheduled 
time.
    Interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or to participate 
if one is requested, must submit a written request within 30 days of 
the publication of this notice. Requests should specify the number of 
participants and provide a list of the issues to be discussed. Oral 
presentations will be limited to issues raised in the briefs.
    If this investigation proceeds normally, we will make our final 
determination no later than 135 days after the date of publication of 
this notice in the Federal Register.
    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 
733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: January 28, 2000.
Holly A. Kuga,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-2580 Filed 2-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P