Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2022 / Notices 20815 

1See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the 

Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and 

Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2019– 

2020, 86 FR 54928 (October 5, 2021) (Preliminary 

Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum. 

2See SeAH Steel Corporation (SeAH)’s Letter, 

‘‘Administrative Review of the Antidumping Order 

on Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea—Case 

Brief of SeAH Steel Corporation,’’ dated November 

9, 2021; see also Husteel Co., Ltd. (Husteel)’s Letter, 

‘‘Oil Country Tubular Goods from Republic of 

Korea, Case No. A–580–870: Letter in Lieu of Case 

Brief,:’’ dated November 9, 2021; AJU Besteel Co., 

Ltd., (AJU Besteel)’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea—Letter 

in Support of Case Briefs,’’ dated November 9, 2021; 

ILJIN Steel Corporation (ILJIN)’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Oil 

Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of 

Korea—Letter in Support of Case Brief,’’ dated 

November 9, 2021; Hyundai Steel Company 

(Hyundai Steel)’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea—Case 

Brief,’’ dated November 9, 2021; United States Steel 

Corporation, Vallourec Star L.P., and Welded Tube 

USA (collectively, Domestic Interested Parties)’ 

Letter, ‘‘Oil Country Tubular Goods from the 

Republic of Korea: Case Brief of Domestic Interested 

Parties,’’ dated November 9, 2021; SeAH’s Letter, 

‘‘Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty 

Order on Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea— 

Rebuttal Brief of SeAH Steel Corporation,’’ dated 

November 22, 2021; Husteel’s Letter, ‘‘Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea, Case 

No. A–580–870: Husteel’s Case Brief,’’ dated 

November 22, 2021; see AJU Besteel’s Letter, 

‘‘Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the 

Republic of Korea—Letter in Support of Rebuttal 

Briefs,’’ dated November 22, 2021; ILJIN’s Letter, 

‘‘Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the 

Republic of Korea—Letter in Support of Rebuttal 

Briefs,’’ dated November 22, 2021; NEXTEEL Co., 

Ltd. (NEXTEEL)’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea: 

NEXTEEL’s Letter in Support of Respondents’ 

Rebuttal Briefs,’’ dated November 22, 2021; 

Hyundai Steel’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea— 

Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated November 22, 2021; and 

Domestic Interested Parties’ Letter, ‘‘Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea: Rebuttal 

Brief of Domestic Interested Parties,’’ dated 

November 22, 2021. 

3See Memorandum, ‘‘Oil Country Tubular Goods 

from the Republic of Korea: Extension of Time 

Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 2019–2020,’’ dated 

December 29, 2021. 

4See Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 85 FR 

68840 (October 30, 2020). The 33 companies consist 

of two mandatory respondents, 30 companies not 

individually examined, and one company that had 

no shipments. 

5See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2019– 

2020 Administrative Review of the Antidumping 

Duty Order on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods 

from the Republic of Korea,’’ dated concurrently 

with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and 

Decision Memorandum). 

6See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from 

India, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, the Republic 

of Turkey, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: 

Antidumping Duty Orders; and Certain Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam: Amended Final Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value, 79 FR 53691 (September 10, 

2014) (Order). 

7See, e.g., Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel 

Products from Taiwan: Final Results of the 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and 

Final Determination of No Shipments; 2018–2019, 

86 FR 28554 (May 27, 2021). 

8See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the 

Republic of Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not in 

Harmony with Final Determination, 81 FR 59603 

(August 30, 2016). 

For more information contact Yvette 

Springer via email. 

Yvette Springer, 

Committee Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07474 Filed 4–7–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–JT–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–870] 

Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods 

From the Republic of Korea: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and Final 

Determination of No Shipments; 2019– 

2020 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) determines that certain 

producers/exporters subject to this 

review made sales of oil country tubular 

goods (OCTG) from the Republic of 

Korea (Korea) at less than normal value 

during the period of review (POR), 

September 1, 2019, through August 31, 

2020, and that HiSteel Co., Ltd. 

(HiSteel) had no shipments of subject 

merchandise to the United States during 

the POR. 

DATES: Applicable April 8, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark Flessner or Frank Schmitt, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement 

and Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–6312, or (202) 482–4880, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On October 5, 2021, Commerce 

published the Preliminary Results of 

this administrative review.1 We invited 

interested parties to comment on the 

Preliminary Results. Between November 

9, 2021, and November 22, 2021, 

Commerce received timely filed case 

briefs and rebuttal briefs from various 

interested parties.2 On December 29, 

2021, we extended the deadline for the 

final results until April 1, 2022.3 The 

final results cover 33 companies.4

Commerce conducted this review in 

accordance with section 751(a) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 

For a complete description of the 

events that followed the Preliminary 

Results of this administrative review, 

see the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum.5 The Issues and Decision 

Memorandum is a public document and 

is on file electronically via Enforcement 

and Compliance’s Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Centralized 

Electronic Service System (ACCESS). 

ACCESS is available to registered users 

at https://access.trade.gov. 

Additionally, a complete version of the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum can 

be accessed at https://access.trade.gov/ 

public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx. 

Scope of the Order 6

The merchandise covered by the 

Order is certain OCTG. For a complete 

description of the scope of the Order, 

see the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs that were submitted by 

parties in this review are addressed in 

the Issues and Decision Memorandum 

and listed in the appendix to this notice. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on our analysis of the 

comments received, we made certain 

changes to the margin calculations for 

Hyundai Steel. For a discussion of these 

changes, see the ‘‘Margin Calculations’’ 

section of the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. We did not make 

changes to the margin calculations for 

SeAH. 

Determination of No Shipments 

In the Preliminary Results, Commerce 

found that HiSteel did not have 

shipments of subject merchandise to the 

United States during the POR. No 

parties commented on this 

determination. Accordingly, for the final 

results of review, we continue to find 

that Histeel made no shipments of 

subject merchandise to the United 

States during the POR. Consistent with 

Commerce’s practice,7 we intend to 

instruct U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) to liquidate any 

existing entries of subject merchandise 

produced by HiSteel, but exported by 

other parties, at the rate for the 

intermediate reseller, if available, or at 

the all-others rate of 5.24 percent.8

Final Results of Administrative Review 

For these final results, Commerce 

determines that the following weightedaverage dumping margins exist for the 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
20816 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2022 / Notices 

9See Appendix II for a full list of these 

companies. 

10Commerce was unable to compare a simple 

average to a weighted-average relative to publicly 

available data because public data for volume of 

U.S. sales were not available for both respondents. 

11See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 

12 Id. 

13 Id. 

14See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). 

15For a full discussion of this practice, see 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 

(May 6, 2003). 

16See Notice of Discontinuation Policy to Issue 

Liquidation Instructions After 15 Days in 

Applicable Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Administrative Proceedings, 86 FR 3995 (January 

15, 2021). 

17See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from 

the Republic of Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not 

in Harmony with Final Determination, 81 FR 59603 

(August 30, 2016). 

period September 1, 2019, through 

August 31, 2020: 

Producer/exporter 

Weightedaverage 

dumping 

margins 

(percent) 

Hyundai Steel Company ............. 19.54 

SeAH Steel Corporation ............. 3.85 

Non-examined companies 9 ........ 11.70 

Rate for Non-Examined Companies 

For the rate for non-selected 

respondents in an administrative 

review, generally, Commerce looks to 

section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which 

provides instructions for calculating the 

all-others rate in a market economy 

investigation, for guidance. Under 

section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the allothers rate is normally ‘‘an amount 

equal to the weighted-average of the 

estimated weighted-average dumping 

margins established for exporters and 

producers individually investigated, 

excluding any zero or de minimis 

margins, and any margins determined 

entirely {on the basis of facts 

available}.’’ For these final results, we 

calculated dumping margins for the two 

mandatory respondents, Hyundai Steel 

and SeAH, of 19.54 and 3.85 percent, 

respectively. Therefore, we have 

assigned to the non-selected companies 

a rate of 11.70 percent, which is the 

simple average of Hyundai Steel’s and 

SeAH’s margins.10

Disclosure 

Commerce intends to disclose the 

calculations performed for these final 

results of review for Hyundai Steel 

within five days of the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.224(b). Because no changes were 

made to SeAH’s margins since the 

Preliminary Results, no disclosure of 

SeAH’s calculations is necessary for 

these final results. 

Assessment 

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), Commerce 

shall determine, CBP shall assess, 

antidumping duties on all appropriate 

entries of subject merchandise in 

accordance with the final results of this 

review. 

Where the respondent reported 

reliable entered values, we calculated 

importer- (or customer-) specific ad 

valorem rates by aggregating the 

dumping margins calculated for all U.S. 

sales to each importer (or customer) and 

dividing this amount by the total 

entered value of the sales to each 

importer (or customer).11 Where 

Commerce calculated a weightedaverage dumping margin by dividing the 

total amount of dumping for reviewed 

sales to that party by the total sales 

quantity associated with those 

transactions, Commerce will direct CBP 

to assess importer- (or customer-) 

specific assessment rates based on the 

resulting per-unit rates.12 Where an 

importer- (or customer-) specific ad 

valorem or per-unit rate is greater than 

de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent), 

Commerce will instruct CBP to collect 

the appropriate duties at the time of 

liquidation.13 Where an importer- (or 

customer-) specific ad valorem or perunit rate is zero or de minimis, 

Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate 

appropriate entries without regard to 

antidumping duties.14

For the companies which were not 

selected for individual review, we will 

assign an assessment rate based on the 

methodology described in the ‘‘Rates for 

Non-Examined Companies’’ section, 

above. 

Consistent with Commerce’s 

assessment practice, for entries of 

subject merchandise during the POR 

produced by SeAH, Hyundai Steel, or 

the non-examined companies for which 

the producer did not know that its 

merchandise was destined for the 

United States, we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate unreviewed entries at the allothers rate if there is no rate for the 

intermediate company(ies) involved in 

the transaction.15

Commerce intends to issue 

assessment instructions to CBP no 

earlier than 35 days after the date of 

publication of the final results of this 

review in the Federal Register.16 If a 

timely summons is filed at the U.S. 

Court of International Trade, the 

assessment instructions will direct CBP 

not to liquidate relevant entries until the 

time for parties to file a request for a 

statutory injunction has expired (i.e., 

within 90 days of publication). 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective for all 

shipments of subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date of the final results of 

this administrative review, as provided 

for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) 

The cash deposit rates for the 

companies listed in these final results 

will be equal to the weighted-average 

dumping margins established in the 

final results of this review; (2) for 

merchandise exported by producers or 

exporters not covered in this review but 

covered in a prior segment of this 

proceeding, the cash deposit rate will 

continue to be the company-specific rate 

published for the most recently 

completed segment in which the 

company was reviewed; (3) if the 

exporter is not a firm covered in this 

review, a prior review, or the original 

less-than-fair-value (LTFV) 

investigation, but the producer is, the 

cash deposit rate will be the rate 

established for the most recently 

completed segment of this proceeding 

for the producer of the subject 

merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit 

rate for all other producers or exporters 

will continue to be 5.24 percent,17 the 

all-others rate established in the LTFV 

investigation. These cash deposit 

requirements, when imposed, shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice serves as a final reminder 

to importers of their responsibility 

under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a 

certificate regarding the reimbursement 

of antidumping duties prior to 

liquidation of the relevant entries 

during this POR. Failure to comply with 

this requirement could result in 

Commerce’s presumption that 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping duties. 

Notification Regarding Administrative 

Protective Order 

This notice also serves as the only 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective order (APO) of 

their responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which 

continues to govern business 

proprietary information in this segment 

of the proceeding. Timely written 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2022 / Notices 20817 

1See Certain Steel Racks and Parts Thereof from 

the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results 

of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review 

and Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 

2019–2020, 86 FR 55575 (October 6, 2021) 

(Preliminary Results), and accompanying 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM). 

2See Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Case Brief,’’ dated 

November 5, 2021; see also Dongsheng’s Letter, 

‘‘Steel Racks from the People’s Republic of China— 

Case Brief,’’ dated November 5, 2021; Nanjing 

Kingmore’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Steel Racks and Parts 

Thereof from the People’s Republic of China, Case 

No. A–570–088: Case Brief,’’ dated November 5, 

2021; Jiangsu Nova’s Letter, ‘‘Steel Racks and Parts 

Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Letter 

in Lieu of Brief,’’ dated November 5, 2021; 

Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated 

November 12, 2021; Dongsheng’s Letter, ‘‘Steel 

Racks from the People’s Republic of China— 

Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated November 12, 2021; and 

Nanjing Kingmore’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Steel Racks and 

Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of China, 

Case No. A–570–088: Nanjing Kingmore’s Rebuttal 

Brief,’’ dated November 12, 2021. 

3See Commerce Letter, ‘‘Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review of Steel Racks and Parts 

Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: 

Hearing Schedule,’’ dated January 7, 2022. 

4See Memoranda, ‘‘Extension of Deadline for 

Final Results,’’ dated January 28, 2022; and 

‘‘Extension of Deadline for Final Results,’’ dated 

March 1, 2022. 

5See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2019– 

2020 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of 

Certain Steel Racks and Parts Thereof from the 

People’s Republic of China,’’ dated concurrently 

with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and 

Decision Memorandum). 

6See Certain Steel Racks and Parts Thereof from 

the People’s Republic of China: Amended Final 

Affirmative Antidumping Duty Determination and 

Antidumping Duty Order; and Countervailing Duty 

Order, 84 FR 48584 (September 16, 2019) (Order). 

notification of the return or destruction 

of APO materials or conversion to 

judicial protective order is hereby 

requested. Failure to comply with the 

regulations and terms of an APO is a 

sanctionable violation. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This administrative review and notice 

are issued and published in accordance 

with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of 

the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(h) and 19 

CFR 351.221(b)(5). 

Dated: April 1, 2022. 

Ryan Majerus, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and 

Negotiations. 

Appendix I 

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Scope of the Order 

IV. Final Determination of No Shipments 

V. Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

VI. Rate for Non-Examined Companies 

VII. Discussion of the Issues 

General Issues 

Comment 1: Particular Market Situation 

Comment 2: Differential Pricing 

Hyundai Steel-Specific Issues 

Comment 3: CV Profit and Selling 

Expenses 

Comment 4: CV Profit Cap 

Comment 5: Source for CEP Profit 

Comment 6: Inland Freight From Port to 

Warehouse 

Comment 7: Adjustment to HSU G&A 

Expense Ratio and Treatment of Scrap 

Comment 8: HSU Financials and AFA 

Comment 9: Reporting of Non-API Grade 

OCTG and AFA 

Comment 10: Further Manufacturing Yield 

Comment 11: Warehousing Expense and 

Facts Available 

Comment 12: Expenses Incurred in the 

United States 

Comment 13: Allocation of Indirect Selling 

Expense Ratio 

Comment 14: Use of Prior POR Cost Data 

Comment 15: Affiliated Ocean Freight 

Costs 

SeAH-Specific Issues 

Comment 16: Constructed Export Price 

(CEP) Offset 

Comment 17: Freight Revenue Cap 

Comment 18: Calculation of General and 

Administrative (G&A) Expenses Incurred 

by SeAH’s U.S. Affiliate 

VII. Recommendation 

Appendix II 

List of Companies Not Individually 

Examined 

1. AJU Besteel Co., Ltd. 

2. DB Inc. 

3. Dong-A Steel Co., Ltd. 

4. FM Oilfield Services Solutions LLC 

5. Hengyang Steel Tube Group International 

Trading Inc. 

6. Husteel Co., Ltd. 

7. Hyundai Corporation 

8. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. 

9. ILJIN Steel Corporation 

10. K Steel Corporation 

11. KASCO 

12. Kenwoo Metals Co., Ltd. 

13. Kukje Steel Co., Ltd. 

14. Kumkang Kind Co., Ltd. 

15. Kumsoo Connecting Co., Ltd. 

16. Master Steel Corporation 

17. NEXTEEL Co., Ltd. 

18. POSCO International Corporation 

19. Pusan Coupling Corporation 

20. Pusan Fitting Corporation 

21. Sang Shin Industrial Co., Ltd. (a.k.a. SIC 

Tube Co., Ltd.) 

22. SeAH Changwon Integrated Special Steel 

Co., Ltd. 

23. Shin Steel Co., Ltd. 

24. Sichuan Y&J Industries Co. Ltd. 

25. Steel-A Co., Ltd. 

26. Sungwon Steel Co., Ltd. 

27. TGS Pipe Co., Ltd. 

28. TJ Glovsteel Co., Ltd. 

29. TPC Co., Ltd. 

30. T-Tube Co., Ltd. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07503 Filed 4–7–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–088] 

Certain Steel Racks and Parts Thereof 

From the People’s Republic of China: 

Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and Final 

Determination of No Shipments; 2019– 

2020 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) has determined that certain 

exporters under review sold certain 

steel racks and parts thereof (steel racks) 

from the People’s Republic of China 

(China) in the United States at prices 

below normal value (NV) during the 

period of review (POR) March 4, 2019, 

through August 31, 2020. Additionally, 

we determined that Hebei Minmetals 

Co., Ltd. (Hebei Minmetals) and 

Guangdong Wireking Housewares and 

Hardware Co., Ltd., (Guangdong 

Wireking) made no shipments of subject 

merchandise to the United States during 

the POR. 

DATES: Applicable April 8, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elizabeth Bremer or Jonathan Hill, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement 

and Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–4987 and (202) 482–3518, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On October 6, 2021, Commerce 

published the Preliminary Results for 

this review in the Federal Register and 

invited interested parties to comment on 

those results.1 In November 2021, 

Commerce received comments and 

rebuttal comments from interested 

parties regarding the Preliminary 

Results.2 On January 12, 2022, 

Commerce held a public hearing 

regarding issues in this administrative 

review.3 On January 28, 2022, and again 

on March 1, 2022, Commerce extended 

the deadline for issuing the final results 

of this review.4 The current deadline for 

issuing the final results of this review is 

April 1, 2022. For further details 

regarding the events that occurred 

subsequent to issuing the Preliminary 

Results, see the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum.5 Commerce conducted 

this administrative review in 

accordance with section 751 of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 

Scope of the Order 6

The merchandise covered by this 

Order is steel racks and parts thereof, 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1