Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 122 / Monday, June 27, 2022 / Notices 38061 

6See 19 CFR 351.309; see also 19 CFR 351.303 

(for general filing requirements). 

7See Synthos’ Letter, ‘‘Emulsion StyreneButadiene Rubber from the Czech Republic: Request 

to Postpone Deadline for Issuing the Final 

Determination’’ dated June 10, 2022. 

verification report is issued in this 

investigation.6 Rebuttal briefs may be 

submitted seven days after the date that 

case briefs are due. Pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who 

submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in 

this investigation are encouraged to 

submit with each argument: (1) a 

statement of the issue; (2) a brief 

summary of the argument; and (3) a 

table of authorities. 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), 

interested parties who wish to request a 

hearing, limited to issues raised in the 

case and rebuttal briefs, must submit a 

written request to the Assistant 

Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, within 30 days after the date 

of publication of this notice. Requests 

should contain the party’s name, 

address, and telephone number, the 

number of participants, whether any 

participant is a foreign national, and a 

list of the issues to be discussed. If a 

request for a hearing is made, Commerce 

intends to hold the hearing at a time and 

date to be determined. Parties should 

confirm by telephone the date, time, and 

location of the hearing two days before 

the scheduled date. 

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 petitioner. 

Section 351.210(e)(2) of Commerce’s 

regulations requires that a request by 

exporters for postponement of the final 

determination be accompanied by a 

request for extension of provisional 

measures from a four-month period to a 

period not more than six months in 

duration. 

On June 10, 2022, pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.210(e), Synthos requested that 

Commerce postpone the final 

determination and that provisional 

measures be extended to a period not to 

exceed six months.7 In accordance with 

section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because: (1) the 

preliminary determination is 

affirmative; (2) the requesting exporter 

accounts for a significant proportion of 

exports of the subject merchandise; and 

(3) no compelling reasons for denial 

exist, Commerce is postponing the final 

determination and extending the 

provisional measures from a four-month 

period to a period not greater than six 

months. Accordingly, Commerce will 

make its final determination no later 

than 135 days after the date of 

publication of this preliminary 

determination. 

International Trade Commission 

Notification 

In accordance with section 733(f) of 

the Act, Commerce will notify the U.S. 

International Trade Commission (ITC) of 

its preliminary determination. If the 

final determination is affirmative, the 

ITC will determine before the later of 

120 days after the date of this 

preliminary determination or 45 days 

after the final determination whether 

imports of ESBR from the Czech 

Republic are materially injuring, or 

threaten material injury to, the U.S. 

industry. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This determination is issued and 

published in accordance with sections 

733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.205(c) and 19 CFR 351.210(g). 

Dated: June 14, 2022. 

Lisa W. Wang, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation 

The products covered by this investigation 

are cold-polymerized emulsion styrenebutadiene rubber (ESB rubber). The scope of 

the investigation includes, but is not limited 

to, ESB rubber in primary forms, bales, 

granules, crumbs, pellets, powders, plates, 

sheets, strip, etc. ESB rubber consists of nonpigmented rubbers and oil-extended nonpigmented rubbers, both of which contain at 

least one percent of organic acids from the 

emulsion polymerization process. 

ESB rubber is produced and sold in 

accordance with a generally accepted set of 

product specifications issued by the 

International Institute of Synthetic Rubber 

Producers (IISRP). The scope of the 

investigation covers grades of ESB rubber 

included in the IISRP 1500 and 1700 series 

of synthetic rubbers. The 1500 grades are 

light in color and are often described as 

‘‘Clear’’ or ‘‘White Rubber.’’ The 1700 grades 

are oil-extended and thus darker in color, 

and are often called ‘‘Brown Rubber.’’ 

Specifically excluded from the scope of 

this investigation are products which are 

manufactured by blending ESB rubber with 

other polymers, high styrene resin master 

batch, carbon black master batch (i.e., IISRP 

1600 series and 1800 series) and latex (an 

intermediate product). 

The products subject to this investigation 

are currently classifiable under subheadings 

4002.19.0015 and 4002.19.0019 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 

States (HTSUS). ESB rubber is described by 

Chemical Abstracts Services (CAS) Registry 

No. 9003–55–8. This CAS number also refers 

to other types of styrene butadiene rubber. 

Although the HTSUS subheadings and CAS 

registry number are provided for convenience 

and customs purposes, the written 

description of the scope of this investigation 

is dispositive. 

Appendix II—List of Topics Discussed 

in the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Period of Investigation 

IV. Scope of the Investigation 

V. Postponement of Final Determination and 

Extension of Provisional Measures 

VI. Affiliation 

VII. Discussion of the Methodology 

VIII. Product Comparisons 

IX. Date of Sale 

X. Export Price 

XI. Normal Value 

XII. Calculation of Normal Value Based on 

Comparison-Market Prices 

XIII. Currency Conversion 

XIV. Verification 

XV. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2022–13542 Filed 6–24–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–876] 

Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of 

Korea: Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review; 2019– 

2020 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Commerce (Commerce) finds that 

certain producers/exporters subject to 

this administrative review made sales of 

subject merchandise at less than normal 

value (NV) during the period of review 

(POR) December 1, 2019, through 

November 30, 2020. 

DATES: Applicable June 27, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adam Simons, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–6172. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

This review covers 31 producers/ 

exporters of the subject merchandise. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
38062 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 122 / Monday, June 27, 2022 / Notices 

1See Memorandum, ‘‘Respondent Selection,’’ 

dated February 17, 2021. 

2See Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of 

Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; 2019–2020, 87 FR 928 

(January 7, 2022) (Preliminary Results), and 

accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum 

(PDM). 

3See Memorandum, ‘‘Welded Line Pipe from the 

Republic of Korea: Extension of Deadline for Final 

Results of 2019–2020 Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review,’’ dated April 11, 2022. 

4See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2019– 

2020 Administrative Review of the Antidumping 

Duty Order on Welded Line Pipe from Korea,’’ 

dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, 

this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 

5See Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of 

Korea and the Republic of Turkey: Antidumping 

Duty Orders, 80 FR 75056, 75057 (December 1, 

2015) (Order). 

6For a complete description of the scope of the 

order, see Preliminary Results PDM at 3. 

7See Preliminary Results. 

8See Appendix II for a full list of these 

companies. 9See section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act. 

Commerce selected two companies, 

Hyundai Steel Company/Hyundai 

HYSCO (Hyundai Steel) and SeAH Steel 

Corporation (SeAH), for individual 

examination.1 The producers/exporters 

not selected for individual examination 

are listed in Appendix II. 

On January 7, 2022, Commerce 

published the Preliminary Results and 

invited interested parties to comment.2

On March 2, 2022, we received case 

briefs from Hyundai Steel and SeAH. 

On April 11, 2022, we postponed the 

final results to no later than June 17, 

2022.3 For a complete description of the 

events that occurred since the 

Preliminary Results, see the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum.4

Scope of the Order 5

The merchandise subject to the Order 

is welded line pipe.6 The product is 

currently classified under the following 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS) item numbers: 

7305.11.1030, 7305.11.1060, 

7305.11.5000, 7305.12.1030, 

7305.12.1060, 7305.12.5000, 

7305.19.1030, 7305.19.5000, 

7306.19.1010, 7306.19.1050, 

7306.19.5110, and 7306.19.5150. 

Although the HTSUS numbers are 

provided for convenience and for 

customs purposes, the written product 

description remains dispositive. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs are listed in Appendix I 

to this notice and addressed in the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum. 

Interested parties can find a complete 

discussion of these issues and the 

corresponding recommendations in this 

public memorandum, which 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. In addition, a 

complete version of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum can be accessed 

directly at https://access.trade.gov/ 

public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on a review of the record and 

comments received from interested 

parties regarding our Preliminary 

Results, we made certain changes to the 

calculation of the preliminary weightedaverage dumping margins for Hyundai 

Steel and SeAH. 

Determination of No Shipments 

As noted in the Preliminary Results, 

we received a no shipment claim from 

HISTEEL Co., Ltd. (HISTEEL) and 

preliminarily determined that HISTEEL 

had no shipments during the POR.7 We 

received no comments from interested 

parties with respect to this claim. 

Therefore, because the record indicates 

that HISTEEL had no entries of subject 

merchandise to the United States during 

the POR, we continue to find that 

HISTEEL had no shipments during the 

POR. 

Final Results of the Review 

As a result of this review, we 

determine the following weightedaverage dumping margins for the period 

December 1, 2019, through November 

30, 2020: 

Producer or exporter 

Weightedaverage 

dumping 

margin 

(percent) 

Hyundai Steel Company/Hyundai 

HYSCO ................................... 1.73 

SeAH Steel Corporation ............. 0.00 

Companies Not Selected for Individual Review 8 ..................... 1.73 

Disclosure of Calculations 

We intend to disclose the calculations 

performed for Hyundai Steel and SeAH 

in connection with these final results to 

interested parties within five days of the 

date of publication of this notice, in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). 

Assessment Rates 

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

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

and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce 

has determined, and U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, 

antidumping duties on all appropriate 

entries of subject merchandise in 

accordance with the final results of this 

review. 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), 

Hyundai Steel reported the entered 

value of its U.S. sales such that we 

calculated importer-specific ad valorem 

duty assessment rates based on the ratio 

of the total amount of dumping 

calculated for the examined sales to the 

total entered value of the sales for which 

entered value was reported. SeAH did 

not report the actual entered value for 

all of its U.S. sales; in such instances, 

we calculated importer-specific per-unit 

duty assessment rates by aggregating the 

total amount of antidumping duties 

calculated for the examined sales and 

dividing this amount by the total 

quantity of those sales. Where either the 

respondent’s weighted-average dumping 

margin is zero or de minimis within the 

meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), or an 

importer-specific assessment rate is zero 

or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate the appropriate entries 

without regard to antidumping duties. 

For the companies not selected for 

individual review, we used as the 

assessment rate the cash deposit rate 

calculated for Hyundai Steel because 

this is the only rate which is not zero, 

de minimis, or determined entirely on 

adverse facts available. The final results 

of this review shall be the basis for the 

assessment of antidumping duties on 

entries of merchandise covered by the 

final results of this review and for the 

future deposits of estimated duties 

where applicable.9

Commerce’s ‘‘automatic assessment’’ 

practice will apply to entries of subject 

merchandise during the POR produced 

by Hyundai Steel or SeAH for which the 

reviewed companies did not know that 

the merchandise they sold to the 

intermediary (e.g., a reseller, trading 

company, or exporter) was destined for 

the United States. In such instances, we 

will instruct CBP to liquidate 

unreviewed entries at the all-others rate 

if there is no rate for the intermediate 

company(ies) involved in the 

transaction. 

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. 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). 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 122 / Monday, June 27, 2022 / Notices 38063 

10See Order. 

1See Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from 

the Republic of Korea: Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2017– 

2018, 85 FR 71055 (November 6, 2020) (Final 

Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum (IDM). 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective for all 

shipments of the 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 

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

cash deposit rate for the companies 

covered in this review will be equal to 

the weighted-average dumping margin 

that is established in the final results of 

this review, except if the rate is less 

than 0.50 percent and, therefore, de 

minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 

351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash 

deposit rate will be zero; (2) for 

previously investigated or reviewed 

companies not listed above, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be the 

company-specific rate published for the 

most recently completed segment of this 

proceeding in which the company 

participated; (3) if the exporter is not a 

firm covered in this review, or the 

original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) 

investigation, but the manufacturer is, 

the cash deposit rate will be the cash 

deposit rate established for the most 

recently completed segment for the 

producer of the subject merchandise; 

and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other 

producers or exporters will continue to 

be 4.38 percent, the all-others rate 

established in the LTFV investigation.10

These 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 review period. 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. 

Administrative Protective Order 

This notice 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 

notification of return/destruction of 

APO materials or conversion to judicial 

protective order is hereby requested. 

Failure to comply with the regulations 

and the terms of an APO is a 

sanctionable violation. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 

777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: June 17, 2022. 

Lisa W. Wang, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

Appendix I 

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Margin Calculations 

IV. Discussion of the Issues 

Comment 1: Differential Pricing 

Methodology 

Comment 2: Hyundai Steel’s Constructed 

Export Price (CEP) Offset Claim 

Comment 3: Hyundai Steel’s U.S. Dollar 

Short-Term Interest Rate 

Comment 4: SeAH’s Ministerial Error 

Allegations 

Comment 5: Other SeAH Issues 

V. Recommendation 

Appendix II 

List of Companies Not Selected for 

Individual Review Receiving the ReviewSpecific Rate 

1. AJU BESTEEL Co., Ltd. 

2. BDP International, Inc. 

3. Daewoo International Corporation 

4. Dong Yang Steel Pipe 

5. Dongbu Incheon Steel Co. 

6. Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd. 

7. Dongkuk Steel Mill 

8. EEW Korea Co., Ltd. 

9. Husteel Co., Ltd. 

10. Hyundai RB Co. Ltd. 

11. Kelly Pipe Co., LLC 

12. Keonwoo Metals Co., Ltd. 

13. Kolon Global Corp. 

14. Korea Cast Iron Pipe Ind. Co., Ltd. 

15. Kurvers Piping Italy S.R.L. 

16. Miju Steel MFG Co., Ltd. 

17. MSTEEL Co., Ltd. 

18. NEXTEEL Co., Ltd. 

19. Poongsan Valinox (Valtimet Division) 

20. POSCO 

21. POSCO Daewoo 

22. R&R Trading Co. Ltd. 

23. Sam Kang M&T Co., Ltd. 

24. Sin Sung Metal Co., Ltd. 

25. SK Networks 

26. Soon-Hong Trading Company 

27. Steel Flower Co., Ltd. 

28. TGS Pipe 

29. Tokyo Engineering Korea Ltd. 

[FR Doc. 2022–13664 Filed 6–24–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–809] 

Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe 

From the Republic of Korea: Notice of 

Court Decision Not in Harmony With 

the Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; Notice of 

Amended Final Results 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On June 16, 2022, the U.S. 

Court of International Trade (CIT) 

issued its final judgment in Nexteel Co., 

Ltd., et al. v. United States, Consol. 

Court no. 20–03868, sustaining the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (Commerce)’s 

first remand results pertaining to the 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty (AD) order on 

circular welded non-alloy steel pipe 

(CWP) from the Republic of Korea 

(Korea) covering the period November 1, 

2017, through October 31, 2018. 

Commerce is notifying the public that 

the CIT’s final judgment is not in 

harmony with Commerce’s final results 

of the administrative review, and that 

Commerce is amending the final results 

with respect to the dumping margin 

assigned to Nexteel Co., Ltd., SeAh Steel 

Corporation, and Hyundai Steel 

Company. 

DATES: Applicable June 27, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dusten Hom, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482- 5075. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On November 6, 2020, Commerce 

published its Final Results in the 2017– 

2018 AD administrative review of CWP 

from Korea.1 Commerce determined in 

the Final Results that a particular 

market situation (PMS) existed with 

respect to the respondents’ purchases of 

hot-rolled coil (HRC), the primary input 

for the production of subject 

merchandise, and, accordingly, we 

made an adjustment to the cost of 

production for the purposes calculating 

normal value when based upon home 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1