Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 24 / Friday, February 4, 2000 / Notices 5599

1The petitioners in this investigation are Gulf

States Tube, a Division of Vision Metals, Inc.;

Koppel Steel Corporation; Sharon Tube

Corporation; USS/Kobe Steel Corporation; U.S.

Steel Group, a unit of USX Corporation; and the

United Steelworkers of America.

2Both versions of the questionnaire were issued

because Nova Hut had requested that the NME

status of the Czech Republic be revoked.

Verification

As provided in section 782(i) of the

Act, we will 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 the Customs

Service to suspend liquidation of all

imports of subject merchandise from

Romania entered, or withdrawn from

warehouse, for consumption on or after

the date of publication of this notice in

the Federal Register. We will instruct

the Customs Service to require a cash

deposit or the posting of a bond equal

to the weighted-average amount by

which the NV exceeds the EP, as

indicated in the chart below. These

suspension of liquidation instructions

will remain in effect until further notice.

Exporter/manufacturer

Weightedaverage

margin

percentage

Sota Communication Company 13.75

Metal Business International

S.R.L. .................................... 10.99

Romania-wide rate ................... 12.34

The Romania-wide rate applies to all

entries of the subject merchandise

except for entries from exporters/

producers that are identified

individually above.

ITC Notification

In accordance with section 733(f) of

the Act, we have notified the ITC of our

determination. If our final

determination is affirmative, the ITC

will determine by the later of 120 days

after the date of this preliminary

determination or 45 days after our final

determination whether these imports

are materially injuring, or threaten

material injury to, the U.S. industry.

Public Comment

Case briefs in six copies must be

submitted to the Assistant Secretary for

Import Administration no later than

March 20, 2000, and rebuttal briefs no

later than March 27, 2000. A list of

authorities used and an executive

summary of issues should accompany

any briefs submitted to the Department.

Such summary should be limited to five

pages total, including footnotes. In

accordance with section 774 of the Act,

we will hold a public hearing, if

requested, to afford interested parties an

opportunity to comment on arguments

raised in case or rebuttal briefs.

Tentatively, the hearing will be held on

March 23, 2000, 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 to the Assistant Secretary for

Import Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, Room 1870, within 30

days of the publication of this notice.

Requests should contain: (1) The party’s

name, address, and telephone number;

(2) the number of participants; and (3)

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 not later then 135

days after the publication of this notice

in the Federal Register.

This determination is issued and

published in accordance with sections

733(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Dated: January 28, 2000.

Holly A. Kuga,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–2577 Filed 2–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–851–802]

Notice of Preliminary Determination of

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and

Postponement of Final Determination:

Certain Small Diameter Carbon and

Alloy Seamless Standard, Line, and

Pressure Pipe From the Czech

Republic

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 4, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dennis McClure or John Brinkmann, at

(202) 482–0984 or (202) 482–4126,

respectively; AD/CVD Enforcement,

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 small diameter carbon and alloy

seamless standard, line, and pressure

pipe (seamless pipe) from the Czech

Republic 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 have occurred:

As of the date of initiation of this

investigation, the Czech Republic was

still considered a non-market economy

(NME) country. On July 23, 1999, the

Department received a letter from the

Czech Ambassador, on behalf of the

Government of the Czech Republic,

requesting revocation of the Czech

Republic’s NME status, under section

771(18)(A) of the Act, in the context of

this investigation. On August 5, 1999,

the Department initiated a formal

inquiry into the Czech Republic’s status

as a NME. On August 12, 1999, the

Department selected Nova Hut, a.s.

(Nova Hut), the sole producer of the

subject merchandise in the Czech

Republic, as a mandatory respondent,

and issued section A of the NME and

market economy 2 antidumping

questionnaires to Nova Hut. On August

16, 1999, the Department received

comments from the Czech Government

and petitioners addressing the criteria

necessary to revoke the Czech

Republic’s NME status.

5600 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 24 / Friday, February 4, 2000 / Notices

3 Given that the Department did not revoke the

Czech Republic’s NME status until December 10,

1999, Nova Hut did not respond to the

Department’s December 22, 1999 supplemental

section D questionnaire until January 6, 2000. As

a result, the petitioners did not submit their

comments regarding this response until January 18,

2000.

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 this antidumping

investigation 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).

On August 17, 1999, we issued the

remainder of the NME and market

economy questionnaires to Nova Hut.

While Nova Hut responded to section

A of the Department’s NME

questionnaire on September 9, 1999, no

further NME responses were received.

Nova Hut submitted its responses to

Department’s market economy

questionnaire on September 9 and

October 14, 1999.

On November 2, 1999, the petitioners

requested that the Department initiate a

below-cost sales investigation. After

examining the petitioners’ request, on

November 5, 1999, the Department

initiated a below-cost sales investigation

and requested that Nova Hut respond to

the Department’s cost of production

questionnaire. See Memorandum from

John Brinkmann to David Mueller,

Allegation of Sales Below the Cost of

Production for Nova Hut, a.s. (Cost

Memo), dated November 5, 1999, on file

in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room

B–099 of the Main Commerce

Department Building. Nova Hut

submitted its response to the

Department’s cost of production

questionnaire on December 13, 1999.

We issued supplemental

questionnaires where appropriate.

Responses to those supplemental

questionnaires were timely filed

between November 12, 1999 and

January 6, 2000 and we have

incorporated the information provided

in those responses into this preliminary

determination.

On November 10, 1999, the

petitioners made a timely request that

the Department postpone the

preliminary determination in this

investigation and the companion

investigations from Romania and

Mexico on the grounds that these

investigations are extraordinarily

complicated. On November 17, 1999, in

accordance with section 733(c)(1) of the

Act we extended the deadline for the

preliminary determination to January

28, 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).

On December 10, 1999, the

Department revoked the Czech

Republic’s NME status. See

Memorandum to Robert S. LaRussa,

Antidumping Investigation of Certain

Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy

Seamless Standard Line and Pressure

Pipe from the Czech Republic: NonMarket Economy (‘‘NME’’) Country

Status (Czech Republic: NME Status),

dated November 29, 1999, on file in the

CRU and the section on Revocation of

the Czech Republic’s Non-Market

Economy Status, below. Thereafter, this

investigation continued under the

Department’s market economy

procedures.

On January 18, 2000, the petitioners

submitted comments regarding Nova

Hut’s response to the Department’s

section D questionnaire. We note that

the petitioners’ submission was not

received in sufficient time to be

considered for purposes of the

Department’s preliminary

determination.3 However, we intend to

examine these comments in detail and,

if necessary, we will issue an additional

questionnaire to clarify or supplement

information previously submitted by

Nova Hut.

On January 19 and 20, 2000, in

response to the Department’s section D

supplemental questionnaire, Nova Hut

provided additional information from

its affiliated suppliers. On January 21,

2000, Nova Hut responded to the

petitioners’ January 18, 2000,

comments. As explained above, we will

take these comments into consideration

for the final determination.

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 October 29, 1999, Nova Hut

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 an affirmative

preliminary determination in the

Federal Register. Nova Hut 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

preliminary 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.

Period of Investigation

The period of this investigation (POI)

comprises Nova Hut’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

For purposes of this investigation, the

products covered are small diameter

seamless carbon and alloy (other than

stainless) steel standard, line, and

pressure pipes and redraw hollows

produced, or equivalent, to the ASTM

A–53, ASTM A–106, ASTM A–333,

ASTM A–334, ASTM A–335, 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 and redraw hollows,

less than or equal to 4.5 inches (114.3

mm) in outside diameter, regardless of

wall-thickness, manufacturing process

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 24 / Friday, February 4, 2000 / Notices 5601

(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 7304.10.10.20,

7304.10.50.20, 7304.31.30.00,

7304.31.60.50, 7304.39.00.16,

7304.39.00.20, 7304.39.00.24,

7304.39.00.28, 7304.39.00.32,

7304.51.50.05, 7304.51.50.60,

7304.59.60.00, 7304.59.80.10,

7304.59.80.15, 7304.59.80.20, and

7304.59.80.25 of the HTSUS.

Specifications, Characteristics, and

Uses: 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 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 is in pressure

piping systems by refineries,

petrochemical plants, and chemical

plants. Other applications are in power

generation plants (electrical-fossil fuel

or nuclear), and in some oil field uses

(on shore and off shore) such as for

separator lines, gathering lines and

metering runs. A minor application of

this product is for use as oil and gas

distribution lines for commercial

applications. 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.

Redraw hollows are any unfinished

pipe or ‘‘hollow profiles’’ of carbon or

alloy steel transformed by hot rolling or

cold drawing/hydrostatic testing or

other methods to enable the material to

be sold under ASTM A–53, ASTM A–

106, ASTM A–333, ASTM A–334,

ASTM A–335, ASTM A–589, ASTM A–

795, and API 5L specifications.

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, 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, ASTM A–589, ASTM A–

795, and API 5L specifications and are

not used in standard, line, or pressure

pipe applications. In addition, 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 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, FR 64 69721

(December 14, 1999).

Product Comparisons

In accordance with section 771(16) of

the Act, all products produced by Nova

Hut covered by the description in the

Scope of Investigation section, above,

and sold in the Czech Republic 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

5602 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 24 / Friday, February 4, 2000 / Notices

4Sections 773(f)(2) and (3) of the Act prescribe

how the Department is to treat affiliated-partly

transactions in the calculation of cost of production

and constructed value. With respect to major inputs

purchased from affiliated suppliers, the

Department’s practice is that such imports will

normally be valued at the higher of the affiliated

party’s transfer price, the market price of the inputs,

or the actual costs incurred by the affiliated

supplier in producing the input. (See, e.g. Fresh

Atlantic Salmon From Chile: Final Determination of

Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 63 FR 31426, 31427

June 9, 1998); Notice of Final Results and Partial

Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review: Certain Pasta from Italy, 64 FR 6615, 6621–

6623 (February 10, 1999). However, Nova Hut was

unable to provide the suppliers’ cost information in

time for consideration in this preliminary

determination (this information was provided on

January 19 and 20, 2000). Therefore, for this

preliminary determination, we used the transfer

prices or market prices, as appropriate. We will

consider the respondent’s suppliers’ cost data for

the final determination.

of subject merchandise to comparisonmarket 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.

Revocation of the Czech Republic’s NonMarket Economy Status

In determining whether to revoke

NME-country status under section

771(18)(A) of the Act, the Department

must take into account the following

factors under section 771(18)(B): (1) The

extent to which the currency of the

foreign country is convertible into the

currency of other countries; (2) the

extent to which wage rates in the foreign

country are determined by free

bargaining between labor and

management; (3) the extent to which

joint ventures or other investments by

firms of other foreign countries are

permitted in the foreign country; (4) the

extent of government ownership or

control of the means of production; (5)

the extent of government control over

the allocation of resources and over the

price and output decisions of

enterprises; and (6) such other factors as

the administering authority considers

appropriate.

Since its emergence as an

independent, democratic state, the

Czech Republic has made significant

progress in its transformation into a

market economy country. The Czech

currency is now fully convertible.

Wages in the Czech Republic are largely

determined by free bargaining between

labor and management. Trade has been

liberalized and tariffs reduced, and the

Czech government is actively promoting

foreign investment and business

ventures. Industry, agriculture and

services have all been privatized, and

the power to make decisions related to

the allocation of resources, and over

pricing and output decisions, now rests

with the private sector. Based on the

preponderance of evidence related to

economic reforms in the Czech Republic

required under section 771(18)(B) of the

Act, the Department revoked the Czech

Republic’s NME country status, effective

January 1, 1998. See Czech Republic:

NME Status.

Fair Value Comparisons

To determine whether sales of

seamless pipe products from the Czech

Republic were made in the United

States at LTFV, we compared the export

price (EP) to the normal value (NV), as

described in the 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 EPs for

comparison to weighted-average NVs.

Export Price

We used EP methodology in

accordance with section 772 of the Act,

because Nova Hut sold the subject

merchandise directly to an unaffiliated

purchaser in the United States or to an

unaffiliated purchaser for exportation to

the United States prior to the date of

importation, and CEP methodology was

not otherwise, appropriate.

We calculated EP based on documents

alongside freight (DAF Polish border)

packed prices charged to the first

unaffiliated customer in the United

States. In accordance with section

772(c)(2) of the Act, we made

deductions from the starting price,

where appropriate, for movement

expenses, including foreign inland

freight and export license fees for

shipment.

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 EP. The

statute contemplates that quantities will

normally be considered insufficient if

they are less than five percent of the

aggregate quantity of sales of the subject

merchandise to the United States.

Nova Hut 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. Cost of Production Analysis

As noted above, on November 2, 1999,

petitioners filed a below-cost sales

allegation against Nova Hut. Based on

our analysis of the allegation, and in

accordance with section 773(b)(2)(A)(i)

of the Act, we found reasonable grounds

to believe or suspect that sales of

seamless pipe, manufactured in the

Czech Republic, were made at prices

below the cost of production (COP). See

Cost Memo. As a result, the Department

conducted an investigation to determine

whether Nova Hut made home market

sales during the POI at prices below

their respective COPs, within the

meaning of section 773(b) of the Act.

1. Calculation of COP

In accordance with section 773(b)(3)

of the Act, we calculated a weightedaverage COP based on the sum of Nova

Hut’s costs of materials and fabrication

for the foreign like product, plus

amounts for selling, general, and

administrative expenses (SG&A) and

packing.

For the COP calculation, we relied on

Nova Hut’s COP information from the

company’s December 13, 1999, and

January 6, 2000 submissions, except in

the following instances:

(1) Nova Hut obtained iron, a major

input, from an affiliate. For reporting

purposes, Nova Hut valued this input at

the weighted-average transfer price.4

Based on the transfer price and market

price information in Nova Hut’s

December 12, 1999, and January 6, 2000,

cost of production responses, for the

preliminary determination, we

compared the transfer price of iron to

the market price of iron. Because the

market price was higher than the

transfer price, we increased the transfer

price to reflect the market price;

(2) For the minor inputs purchased

from affiliated parties (i.e., oxygen and

iron ore), we increased the reported

transfer prices to reflect the higher

market prices;

(3) We revised Nova Hut’s general and

administrative (G&A) expense rate

calculation; and

(4) We revised the financial expense

ratio.

See Cost of Production and

Constructed Value Calculation

Adjustments for the Preliminary

Determination for Nova Hut, dated

January 28, 2000, on file in the CRU.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 24 / Friday, February 4, 2000 / Notices 5603

5 In accordance with section 773(b)(2)(C)(i) of the

Act, we determined that sales made below the COP

were made in substantial quantities if the volume

of such sales represented 20 percent or more of the

volume of sales under consideration for the

determination of NV.

2. Test of Home-Market Sales Prices

We compared the weighted-average

COP for Nova Hut to home market sales

of the foreign like product, as required

under section 773(b) of the Act, in order

to determine whether these sales had

been made at prices below the COP

within an extended period of time (i.e.,

a period of one year) in substantial

quantities 5 and whether such prices

were sufficient to permit the recovery of

all costs within a reasonable period of

time.

We used the revised COP data from

the December 13, 1999, and January 6,

2000, submissions, to compare to the

home market prices, less any applicable

billing adjustments, discounts, rebates,

and indirect selling expenses, on a

model-specific basis.

3. Results of the COP Test

Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(B) of the

Act, since we found 20 percent or more

of Nova Hut’s sales of certain products

during the POI were at prices less than

the weighted-average COP for the POI,

we preliminary determine such sales to

have been made in ‘‘substantial

quantities’’ within an extended period

of time. We also preliminary determine

these sales below cost were not made at

prices that would permit recovery of all

costs within a reasonable period of time,

in accordance with section 773(b)(2)(D)

of the Act. Therefore, for purposes of

these preliminary results, we have

disregarded these below-cost sales and

used the remaining above-cost sales as

the basis for determining NV, in

accordance with section 773(b)(1) of the

Act. Although, some products had no

above-cost sales, we did not need to use

constructed value (CV) as a basis for NV

in our comparisons to EP, because all EP

sales were matched to similar models of

above-cost sales from the home market.

C. Arms-Length Test

Sales to affiliated customers for

consumption in the home market which

were determined not to be at arm’slength 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 those sales to

affiliated customers that passed the

arm’s-length test in our analysis. (see 19

CFR 351.403).

D. 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. 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.

We examined information on the

selling activities associated with each

channel of trade in each of Nova Hut’s

markets. Nova Hut’s home market sales

were all exworks and its U.S. sales were

DAF Polish border. The EP LOT did not

differ considerably from the home

market LOT with respect to selling

activities, although there were slight

differences with respect to advertising

and warehousing. Therefore, we

determine that there was a single LOT

in each market and that these LOTs

were comparable. For a detailed

description of our level-of-trade

methodology and findings for this

preliminary determination, see the

January 28, 2000, Antidumping

Investigation of Certain Small Diameter

Seamless Pipe from the Czech Republic:

Preliminary Level of Trade Findings

Memorandum on file in the CRU.

E. Calculation of Normal Value Based

on Home-Market Prices

We performed price-to-price

comparisons using sales of comparable

merchandise in the home market that

did not fail the cost test. We calculated

NV based on ‘‘exworks’’ prices. 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 and

billing adjustments. We made no

adjustments for discounts or rebates

since the invoice price is already net of

these discounts and rebates. 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.

We made the following adjustments to

Nova Hut’s reported home market sales

data: (1) We recalculated the imputed

credit expenses by adding back to the

gross price, on-invoice billing

adjustments made for orders that did

not meet a minimum quantity

requirement; (2) for sales with missing

payment dates, the Department set the

date of payment as the projected

preliminary results date; (3) we deleted

seamless pipe products that were sold

as an overrun or non-prime product

since overrun and non-prime seamless

pipe were not sold in the U.S. market;

and (4) we used the revised variable cost

of manufacturing and total cost of

manufacturing reported in the COP

database and CV database to calculate

our difference in merchandise

adjustment, as noted above in the Cost

of Production Analysis section. See

Preliminary Calculation Memorandum

for Nova Hut, a.s., dated January 28,

2000, on file in the CRU.

Currency Conversions

We made currency conversions into

United States dollars in accordance with

section 773A(a) of the Act based on

exchange rates in effect on the dates of

the United States sales, as provided by

the Dow Jones Business Information

Services.

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

seamless pipe products from the Czech

Republic, 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 EP, 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.

Manufacturer/exporter Margin

(percent)

Nova Hut ................................... 12.55

All Others .................................. 12.55

ITC Notification

In accordance with section 733(f) of

the Act, we have notified the ITC of our

5604 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 24 / Friday, February 4, 2000 / Notices

determination. If our final antidumping

determination is affirmative, the ITC

will determine whether these imports

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 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, D.C. 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(d)

and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Dated: January 28, 2000.

Holly A. Kuga,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–2583 Filed 2–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–588–702, A–580–813, and A–583–816]

Final Results of Expedited Sunset

Reviews: Certain Stainless Steel ButtWeld Pipe and Tube Fittings From

Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Final Results of

Expedited Sunset Reviews: Certain

Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe and Tube

Fittings from Japan, South Korea and

Taiwan.

SUMMARY: On July 1, 1999, the

Department of Commerce (‘‘the

Department’’) initiated sunset reviews of

the antidumping duty orders on certain

stainless steel butt-weld pipe and tube

fittings (‘‘pipe and tube fittings’’) from

Japan, South Korea (‘‘Korea’’), and

Taiwan (64 FR 35588) pursuant to

section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930,

as amended (‘‘the Act’’). On the basis of

a notice of intent to participate and an

adequate response filed on behalf of a

domestic interested party and

inadequate response (in these cases, no

response) from respondent interested

parties in each of these reviews, the

Department decided to conduct

expedited reviews. As a result of these

reviews, the Department finds that

revocation of the antidumping duty

orders would be likely to lead to the

continuation or recurrence of dumping

at the levels indicated in the Final

Results of Reviews section of this

notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark D. Young or Melissa G. Skinner,

Office of Policy for Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;

telephone: (202) 482–6397 or (202) 482–

1560, respectively.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 4, 2000.

Statute and Regulations

These reviews were conducted

pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752 of

the Act. The Department’s procedures

for conducting sunset reviews are set

forth in Procedures for Conducting Fiveyear (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews of

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty

Orders, 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 1998)

(‘‘Sunset Regulations’’), and 19 CFR part

351 (1999) in general. Guidance on

methodological or analytical issues

relevant to the Department’s conduct of

sunset reviews is set forth in the

Department’s Policy Bulletin 98:3—

Policies Regarding the Conduct of Fiveyear (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews of

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty

Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871

(April 16, 1998) (‘‘Sunset Policy

Bulletin’’).

Scope

The products covered by these

reviews include certain stainless steel

butt-weld pipe and tube fittings. These

fittings are used in piping systems for

chemical plants, pharmaceutical plants,

food processing facilities, waste

treatment facilities, semiconductor

equipment applications, nuclear power

plants and other areas. The subject

merchandise are currently classifiable

under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule

of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) item

number 7307.23.00.00. The HTSUS item

number is provided for convenience and

customs purposes. The written

description remains dispositive.

With respect to the order on subject

imports from Japan and Taiwan, the

Department has made several scope

rulings. The following products were

determined to be within the scope of the

order:

Product within scope Importer Citation

Superclean or ultraclean pipe fittings from Japan ... Benkan Corporation ............................ 56 FR 1801 (January 17, 1991).

A774 type stainless steel pipe fittings from Taiwan Tachia Yung Ho .................................. 58 FR 28556 (May 14, 1993).

Cast butt-weld pipe fittings from Taiwan .................. Eckstrom Industries ............................ Eckstrom Ind. v. United States, Court No. 97–10–

01913, Slip. Op., 99–99 (Ct. Int’l Trade Sept.

20, 1999).

The following products were determined to be outside the scope of the order: