Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 10, 2017 / Notices 46963 

1See Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 

78778 (November 9, 2016). 

2See Memorandum, ‘‘Decision Memorandum for 

the Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review: Certain Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea; 2015– 

2016,’’ dated October 2, 2017 (Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum). 

3See Letter from Hyundai RB, ‘‘Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea: No 

Shipment Letter,’’ dated December 9, 2016; Letter 

from Samsung and Samsung C&T, ‘‘Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea: No 

Shipment Letter,’’ dated December 9, 2016; and 

Letter from SeAH Besteel, ‘‘Administrative Review 

of the Antidumping Order on Oil Country Tubular 

Goods from Korea for the 2015–16 Review Period— 

No Shipments Letter,’’ dated December 7, 2016. 

Dated: October 3, 2017. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix 

Summary 

Background 

Scope of the Order 

Determination of No Shipments for Pacific 

Pipe 

Discussion of the Issues 

1. Whether to Disregard Saha Thai’s 

Reported Pipe Specification/Grade 

Designations 

2. Whether to Adjust Saha Thai’s Reported 

Coil Costs 

3. Whether to Grant a Duty Drawback 

Adjustment to Saha Thai 

4. Whether to Revise the Date Range for 

Saha Thai’s Home Market and U.S. Sales 

[FR Doc. 2017–21747 Filed 10–6–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–870] 

Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods 

From the Republic of Korea: 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review; 2015– 

2016 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) is conducting an 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on certain oil 

country tubular goods (OCTG) from the 

Republic of Korea (Korea). The period of 

review (POR) is September 1, 2015 

through August 31, 2016. This review 

covers 31 producers/exporters of the 

subject merchandise. The Department 

preliminarily determines that NEXTEEL 

Co., Ltd. (NEXTEEL) and SeAH Steel 

Corporation (SeAH), the two companies 

selected for individual examination, 

sold subject merchandise in the United 

States at prices below normal value 

during the POR. We invite interested 

parties to comment on these preliminary 

results. 

DATES: Applicable October 10, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Victoria Cho or Deborah Scott, 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) 482–5075 or (202) 482–2657, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Department initiated this 

administrative review on November 9, 

2016.1 We selected two mandatory 

respondents in this review, NEXTEEL 

and SeAH. For a detailed description of 

the events that followed the initiation of 

this review, see the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum, dated 

concurrently with these preliminary 

results and hereby adopted by this 

notice.2

The Preliminary 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 to ACCESS is available to 

registered users at http://

access.trade.gov and is available to all 

parties in the Central Records Unit, 

Room B8024 of the main Department of 

Commerce building. In addition, a 

complete version of the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum can be accessed 

directly on the Internet at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. 

A list of the topics discussed in the 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum is 

attached to this notice as Appendix 1. 

The signed Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum and the electronic 

versions of the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum are identical in content. 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise covered by the order 

is certain OCTG, which are hollow steel 

products of circular cross-section, 

including oil well casing and tubing, of 

iron (other than cast iron) or steel (both 

carbon and alloy), whether seamless or 

welded, regardless of end finish (e.g., 

whether or not plain end, threaded, or 

threaded and coupled) whether or not 

conforming to American Petroleum 

Institute (API) or non-API 

specifications, whether finished 

(including limited service OCTG 

products) or unfinished (including 

green tubes and limited service OCTG 

products), whether or not thread 

protectors are attached. The scope of the 

order also covers OCTG coupling stock. 

For the full text of the scope of the 

order, see the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum. 

Methodology 

The Department is conducting this 

administrative review in accordance 

with section 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (the Act). Export 

price and constructed export price are 

calculated in accordance with section 

772 of the Act. Normal value is 

calculated in accordance with section 

773 of the Act. 

For a full description of the 

methodology underlying our 

conclusions, see the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum. 

Preliminary Determination of No 

Shipments 

Among the companies under review, 

Hyundai RB Co., Ltd. (Hyundai RB), 

Samsung, Samsung C&T Corporation 

(Samsung C&T), and SeAH Besteel 

Corporation (SeAH Besteel) properly 

filed certifications reporting that they 

had no exports, sales, or entries of 

subject merchandise to the United 

States during the POR.3 Based on the 

certifications submitted by these 

companies and our analysis of 

information from U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP), we 

preliminarily determine that Hyundai 

RB, Samsung, Samsung C&T, and SeAH 

Besteel had no shipments during the 

POR. For a full explanation of the 

Department’s analysis, see the 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 

The Department finds that it is not 

appropriate to preliminarily rescind the 

review with respect to these companies 

but, rather, intends to complete the 

review with respect to these companies 

and issue appropriate instructions to 

CBP based on the final results of this 

review. 

Rates for Non-Examined Companies 

The statute and the Department’s 

regulations do not address the 

establishment of a rate to be applied to 

companies not selected for examination 

when the Department limits its 

examination in an administrative review 

pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the 

Act. Generally, the Department looks to 

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

provides instructions for calculating the 

all-others rate in a market economy 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
46964 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 10, 2017 / Notices 

4For more information regarding the calculation 

of this margin, see Memorandum, ‘‘Calculation of 

the Margin for Non-Examined Companies,’’ dated 

October 2, 2017. As the weighting factor, we relied 

on the publicly ranged sales data reported in 

NEXTEEL’s and SeAH’s quantity and value charts. 

5See 19 CFR 351.309(d). 

6See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2). 

7See generally 19 CFR 351.303. 

8See 19 CFR 351.303(f). 

9See 19 CFR 351.310(c). 

10See 19 CFR 351.310(d). 

11See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.213(h). 

12See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of 

the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and 

Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping 

Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101, 8102 

(February 14, 2012) (Final Modification for 

Reviews). 

13See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). 

investigation, for guidance when 

calculating the rate for companies 

which were not selected for individual 

examination in an administrative 

review. Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of 

the Act, the all-others rate is normally 

‘‘an amount equal to the weighted 

average of the estimated weightedaverage 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}.’’ 

In this review, we have preliminarily 

calculated weighted-average dumping 

margins for NEXTEEL and SeAH that 

are not zero, de minimis, or determined 

entirely on the basis of facts available. 

Accordingly, the Department 

preliminarily has assigned to the 

companies not individually examined 

(see Appendix 2 for a full list of these 

companies) a margin of 17.98 percent, 

which is the weighted average of 

NEXTEEL’s and SeAH’s calculated 

weighted-average dumping margins.4

Preliminary Results of Review 

The Department preliminarily 

determines that, for the period 

September 1, 2015 through August 31, 

2016, the following weighted-average 

dumping margins exist: 

Producer or exporter 

Weightedaverage 

dumping 

margin 

(percent) 

NEXTEEL Co., Ltd. .................. 46.37 

SeAH Steel Corporation ........... 6.66 

Non-examined companies ........ 19.68 

Disclosure, Public Comment, and 

Opportunity To Request a Hearing 

We intend to disclose the calculations 

performed for these preliminary results 

of review to interested parties within 

five days of the date of publication of 

this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.224(b). Pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.309(c), interested parties may 

submit case briefs no later than 30 days 

after the date of publication of this 

notice. Rebuttal briefs, the content of 

which is limited to issues raised in the 

case briefs, may be filed no later than 

five days after the date for filing case 

briefs.5 Parties who submit case briefs or 

rebuttal briefs in this proceeding 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.6 Case and 

rebuttal briefs should be filed using 

ACCESS 7 and must be served on 

interested parties.8 Executive 

summaries should be limited to five 

pages total, including footnotes. 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), 

interested parties who wish to request a 

hearing must submit a written request to 

the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance, filed electronically via 

the Department’s electronic records 

system, ACCESS. An electronically filed 

request must be received successfully in 

its entirety by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time 

within 30 days of the date of publication 

of this notice.9 Requests should contain: 

(1) The party’s name, address and 

telephone number; (2) the number of 

participants; and (3) a list of issues 

parties intend to discuss. Issues raised 

in the hearing will be limited to those 

raised in the respective case and 

rebuttal briefs. If a request for a hearing 

is made, the Department intends to hold 

the hearing at the U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a date 

and time to be determined.10 Parties 

should confirm the date, time, and 

location of the hearing two days before 

the scheduled date. 

The Department intends to issue the 

final results of this administrative 

review, including the results of its 

analysis of the issues raised in any case 

or rebuttal briefs, no later than 120 days 

after the date of publication of this 

notice, unless extended.11

Assessment Rates 

Upon completion of this 

administrative review, the Department 

shall determine, and CBP shall assess, 

antidumping duties on all appropriate 

entries. We intend to issue liquidation 

instructions to CBP 15 days after 

publication of the final results of this 

review. 

For any individually examined 

respondent whose weighted-average 

dumping margin is not zero or de 

minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent) in 

the final results of this review, if the 

respondent reported reliable entered 

values, we will calculate importerspecific ad valorem assessment rates for 

the merchandise based on the ratio of 

the total amount of dumping calculated 

for the examined sales made to each 

importer and the total entered value of 

those same sales, in accordance with 19 

CFR 351.212(b)(1). If the respondent has 

not reported reliable entered values, we 

will calculate a per-unit assessment rate 

for each importer by dividing the total 

amount of dumping calculated for the 

examined sales made to that importer by 

the total sales quantity associated with 

those transactions. Where an importerspecific ad valorem assessment rate is 

zero or de minimis in the final results 

of review, we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate the appropriate entries 

without regard to antidumping duties in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). If 

a respodent’s weighted-average 

dumping margin is zero or de minimis 

in the final results of review, we will 

instruct CBP not to assess duties on any 

of its entries in accordance with the 

Final Modification for Reviews, i.e., 

‘‘{w}here the weighted-average margin 

of dumping for the exporter is 

determined to be zero or de minimis, no 

antidumping duties will be assessed.’’ 12

For entries of subject merchandise 

during the POR produced by NEXTEEL 

or SeAH for which the producer did not 

know its merchandise was destined for 

the United States, or for any respondent 

for which we have a final determination 

of no shipments, 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.13

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of the notice of final results 

of this administrative review for all 

shipments of the subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the date of 

publication, as provided by section 

751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit 

rate for the companies listed in the final 

results of review will be equal to the 

weighted-average dumping margin 

established in the final results of this 

administrative review; (2) for 

merchandise exported by producers or 

exporters not covered in this review but 

covered in a prior segment of the 

proceeding, the cash deposit rate will 

continue to be the company-specific rate 

published for the most recently 

completed segment of this proceeding in 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 10, 2017 / Notices 46965 

14See 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). 

15On September 21, 2016, the Department 

published the final results of a changed 

circumstances review with respect to OCTG from 

Korea, finding that Hyundai Steel Corporation is the 

successor-in-interest to Hyundai HYSCO for 

purposes of determining antidumping duty cash 

deposits and liabilities. See Notice of Final Results 

of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances 

Review: Oil Country Tubular Goods From the 

Republic of Korea, 81 FR 64873 (September 21, 

2016). Hyundai Steel Company is also known as 

Hyundai Steel Corporation and Hyundai Steel Co. 

Ltd. 

1The NSR was requested by Carlstar Group LLC 

(formerly dba CTP Transportation Products) 

(Carlstar Group), a U.S. producer of OTR tires, and 

an importer of subject merchandise concerning 

merchandise produced by Carlisle Meizhou, its 

affiliated producer of OTR tires from the PRC, and 

exported by CTP HK, an affiliated trading company 

located in Hong Kong (collectively, Carlstar). 

2See letter from Carlstar, ‘‘New Pneumatic OffThe-Road Tires from the People’s Republic of China 

Entry of Appearance and Request for New Shipper 

Review,’’ dated September 20, 2016 (NSR Request); 

see also Initiation of Antidumping Duty New 

Shipper Review, 81 FR 76560 (November 3, 2016) 

(NSR Initiation). 

3See Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 81 FR 

78778 (November 9, 2016) (Initiation Notice). The 

Department initiated on the following: Cheng Shin 

Rubber Industry Ltd. (Chengshin), Guizhou Tyre 

Co., Ltd., Guizhou Tyre Import and Export Co., Ltd. 

(GTC), Qingdao Milestone Tyres Co. Ltd. 

(Milestone), Qingdao Qihang Tyre Co. Ltd. 

(Qihang), Shandong Zhentai Group Co., Ltd. 

(Zhentai), Trelleborg Wheel Systems (Xingtai) Co., 

Ltd. (TWS), Weihai Zhongwei Rubber Co., Ltd. 

(Zhongwei), Weifang Jintongda Tyre Co., Ltd. 

(Jintongda), and Zhongce Rubber Group Company 

Limited (Zhongce). The Department previously 

collapsed GTC and Guizhou Tyre Import and 

Export Corporation (GTCIE) into a single entity in 

the original investigation, see Certain New 

Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires from the People’s 

Republic of China; Preliminary Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement 

of Final Determination, 73 FR 9278, 9283 (February 

20, 2008), unchanged in Certain New Pneumatic 

Off-The-Road Tires from the People’s Republic of 

China: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative 

Determination of Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 

40485 (July 15, 2008). This decision is 

unchallenged in the instant review; thus, the 

Department continues to treat GTC and GTCIE as 

a single entity (collectively, GTC). 

which they were reviewed; (3) if the 

exporter is not a firm covered in this 

review, a prior review, or the original 

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 merchandise; (4) 

the cash deposit rate for all other 

producers or exporters will continue to 

be 5.24 percent,14 the all-others rate 

established in the less-than-fair-value 

investigation. These cash deposit 

requirements, when imposed, shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice serves as a preliminary 

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 the Department’s 

presumption that reimbursement of 

antidumping duties occurred and the 

subsequent assessment of double 

antidumping duties. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

The Department is issuing and 

publishing these results in accordance 

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

the Act. 

Dated: October 2, 2017. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

Performing the Non-Exclusive Functions and 

Duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix 1 

List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum 

1. Summary 

2. Background 

3. Scope of the Order 

4. Preliminary Determination of No 

Shipments 

5. Rates for Non-Examined Companies 

6. Duty Absorption 

7. Affiliation 

8. Discussion of the Methodology 

9. Currency Conversion 

10. Recommendation 

Appendix 2 

List of Companies Not Individually 

Examined 

BDP International 

Daewoo America 

Daewoo International Corporation 

Dong-A Steel Co. Ltd. 

Dong Yang Steel Pipe 

Dongbu Incheon Steel 

DSEC 

Erndtebruecker Eisenwerk and Company 

Hansol Metal 

Husteel Co., Ltd. 

Hyundai HYSCO 

Hyundai Steel Company 15

ILJIN Steel Corporation 

Jim And Freight Co., Ltd. 

Kia Steel Co. Ltd. 

KSP Steel Company 

Kukje Steel 

Kurvers 

POSCO Daewoo Corporation 

POSCO Daewoo America 

Steel Canada 

Sumitomo Corporation 

TGS Pipe 

Yonghyun Base Materials 

ZEECO Asia 

[FR Doc. 2017–21749 Filed 10–6–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–912] 

Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road 

Tires From the People’s Republic of 

China: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review and Preliminary Rescission of 

New Shipper Review; 2015–2016 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Department) is conducting an 

administrative review (AR) and a new 

shipper review (NSR) of the 

antidumping duty order on certain new 

pneumatic off-the-road tires (OTR tires) 

from the People’s Republic of China 

(PRC). The period of review (POR) for 

the AR and NSR is September 1, 2015, 

through August 31, 2016. The 

administrative review covers six 

exporters of the subject merchandise. 

We preliminarily determine that Weihai 

Zhongwei Rubber Co., Ltd. (Zhongwei), 

one of three companies selected for 

individual examination, made sales of 

subject merchandise in the United 

States at prices below normal value 

(NV) during the POR. We also 

preliminarily determine to rescind the 

new shipper review initiated for Carlisle 

(Meizhou) Rubber Manufacturing Co., 

Ltd. (Carlisle Meizhou), and CTP 

Distribution (HK) Limited (CTP HK) 

(collectively, Carlstar). We invite 

interested parties to comment on these 

preliminary results. 

DATES: Effective October 10, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex 

Rosen, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–7814. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On November 3, 2016, the Department 

initiated a new shipper review of 

exports of subject merchandise made by 

CTP Distribution (HK) Limited (CTP 

HK), produced in the PRC by Carlisle 

(Meizhou) Rubber Manufacturing Co., 

Ltd. (Carlisle Meizhou).1 2 On November 

9, 2016, the Department initiated the 

eighth administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on OTR tires 

from the PRC.3 On March 2, 2017, the 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES