Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2017 / Notices 49179 

1See Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from the 

People’s Republic of China, India, the Republic of 

Korea, Taiwan, and the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value 

Investigations, 82 FR 29023 (June 27, 2017). The 

fine denier PSF from the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam investigation was terminated; see Fine 

Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from the Socialist 

Republic of Vietnam: Termination of Less-ThanFair-Value Investigation, 82 FR 33480 (July 20, 

2017). 

2 In these investigations, the petitioners are DAK 

Americas LLC, Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, 

America, and Auriga Polymers Inc. 

3See the petitioner’s letter, ‘‘Fine Denier 

Polyester Staple Fiber from India, the People’s 

Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and 

Taiwan—Petitioners’ Request to Postpone the 

Antidumping Duty Preliminary Determinations,’’ 

dated October 13, 2017, requesting postponement of 

the preliminary determination. 

4 Id. 

1See Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and 

Tube Products from Turkey: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, and 

Partial Rescission of Review; 2015–2016, 82 FR 

26053 (June 6, 2017) (Preliminary Results), and 

accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 

2As explained in the Preliminary Results, the 

Department treated Borusan Mannesmann Boru 

Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. and Borusan Istikbal Ticaret 

T.A.S. as a single entity in this administrative 

review. See Preliminary Decision Memorandum, at 

1 n.1. 

and Taiwan.1 Currently, the preliminary 

determinations in these investigations 

are due no later than November 7, 2017. 

Postponement of Preliminary 

Determination 

Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (Act), requires the 

Department to issue the preliminary 

determination in a less-than-fair-value 

investigation within 140 days after the 

date on which the Department initiated 

the investigation. However, section 

733(c)(1) of the Act permits the 

Department to postpone the preliminary 

determination until no later than 190 

days after the date on which the 

Department initiated the investigation 

if: (A) The petitioner makes a timely 

request for a postponement; or (B) the 

Department concludes that the parties 

concerned are cooperating, that the 

investigation is extraordinarily 

complicated, and that additional time is 

necessary to make a preliminary 

determination. Under 19 CFR 

351.205(e), the petitioner must submit a 

request for postponement 25 days or 

more before the scheduled date of the 

preliminary determination and must 

state the reasons for the request. The 

Department will grant the request unless 

it finds compelling reasons to deny the 

request. See CFR 351.205(e). 

On October 13, 2017, the petitioners 2

submitted a timely request, pursuant to 

section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, that the 

Department postpone the preliminary 

determinations in these less-than-fairvalue investigations.3 In accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.205(e), the petitioners 

stated the reasons for their request. 

Specifically, the petitioners state that 

additional time is necessary for the 

Department to issue supplemental 

questionnaires and clarfy the initial 

questionnaire responses to accurately 

determine whether and what magnitude 

of dumping occurred during the period 

of investigation.4

For the reasons stated above and 

because there is no compelling reason to 

deny the request, the Department, 

pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the 

Act, is postponing the deadline for these 

preliminary determinations to no later 

than 181 days after the date on which 

these investigations were initiated, i.e., 

to December 18, 2017. Pursuant to 

section 735(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final 

determinations will continue to be 75 

days after the date of the preliminary 

determination, unless postponed at a 

later date. 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to section 733(c)(2) of the Act 

and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1). 

Dated: October 18, 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. 

[FR Doc. 2017–23021 Filed 10–23–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–489–501] 

Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe 

and Tube Products From Turkey: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and Final 

Determination of No Shipments; 2015– 

2016 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On June 6, 2017, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published the preliminary 

results of the administrative review of 

the antidumping duty order on welded 

carbon steel standard pipe and tube 

products (welded pipe and tube) from 

Turkey. The period of review (POR) is 

May 1, 2015 through April 30, 2016. 

The review covers the following 

producers/exporters of the subject 

merchandise: Borusan Istikbal Ticaret 

T.A.S. (Borusan Istikbal) and Borusan 

Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret 

A.S. (Borusan Mannesmann) 

(collectively, Borusan); Toscelik Profil 

ve Sac Endustrisi A.S., Tosyali Dis 

Ticaret A.S., and Toscelik Metal Ticaret 

A.S. (Toscelik Metal) (collectively, 

Toscelik); Borusan Birlesik Boru 

Fabrikalari San ve Tic (Borusan 

Birlesik); Borusan Gemlik Boru Tesisleri 

A.S. (Borusan Gemlik); Borusan Ihracat 

Ithalat ve Dagitim A.S. (Borusan 

Ihracat); Borusan Ithicat ve Dagitim A.S. 

(Borusan Ithicat); Tubeco Pipe and Steel 

Corporation (Tubeco); Erbosan Erciyas 

Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (Erbosan); 

and Yucel Boru ve Profil Endustrisi 

A.S., Yucelboru Ihracat Ithalat ve 

Pazarlama A.S., and Cayirova Boru 

Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (collectively, the 

Yucel Group). Based on our analysis of 

the comments received, we have made 

certain changes in the margin 

calculations. The final weighted-average 

dumping margins for the reviewed firms 

are listed below in the section entitled, 

‘‘Final Results of the Review.’’ Further, 

we continue to find that Erbosan, 

Borusan Birlesik, Borusan Gemlik, 

Borusan Ihracat, Borusan Ithicat, and 

Tubeco had no reviewable shipments of 

subject merchandise during the POR. 

DATES: Effective October 24, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred 

Baker or Chelsey Simonovich, 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) 482–2924 or (202) 482–1979, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 6, 2017, the Department 

published the Preliminary Results of 

this review in the Federal Register.1 We 

invited parties to comment on the 

Preliminary Results. On July 20, 2017, 

we received a case brief from petitioner 

Wheatland Tube Company (Wheatland 

Tube). On July 28, 2017, we received a 

rebuttal brief from Borusan.2 The 

Department conducted this review in 

accordance with section 751(a)(2) of the 

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

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to the order 

is welded pipe and tube. The welded 

pipe and tube subject to the order is 

currently classifiable under subheading 

7306.30.1000, 7306.30.5025, 

7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040, 

7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5085, and 

7306.30.5090 of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). 

The HTSUS subheadings are provided 

for convenience and customs purposes 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
49180 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2017 / Notices 

3A full written description of the scope of the 

order is contained in the memorandum to Gary 

Taverman, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for 

the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review: Welded Carbon Steel 

Standard Pipe and Tube Products from Turkey; 

2015–2016,’’ (IDM), dated concurrently with this 

notice and incorporated herein by reference. 

4See Preliminary Results, 82 FR at 26054, and 

accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum, 

at 3–4. 

5See, e.g., Magnesium Metal from the Russian 

Federation: Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 26922, 26923 

(May 13, 2010), unchanged in Magnesium Metal 

from the Russian Federation: Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 

56989 (September 17, 2010). 

6See Preliminary Decision Memorandum, at 4. 

7 In prior segments of this proceeding, we treated 

Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S., Tosyali Dis 

Ticaret A.S., and Toscelik Metal as a single entity. 

See, e.g., Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and 

Tube Products from Turkey: Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012– 

2013, 79 FR 71087, 71088 n.8 (December 1, 2014). 

However, in a prior review, we found that Toscelik 

Metal has ceased to exist. Id. There is no record 

evidence that warrants altering this treatment. 

Therefore, for these final results, we are treating 

Toscelik and Tosyali as a single entity, and 

continue to find that Toscelik Metal no longer 

exists. 

only. The written description is 

dispositive.3

Final Determination of No Shipments 

In the Preliminary Results, the 

Department determined that Erbosan, 

Borusan Birlesik, Borusan Gemlik, 

Borusan Ihracat, Borusan Ithicat, and 

Tubeco had no shipments during the 

POR.4 Following publication of the 

Preliminary Results, we received no 

comments from interested parties 

regarding these companies. As a result, 

and because the record contains no 

evidence to the contrary, we continue to 

find that Erbosan, Borusan Birlesik, 

Borusan Gemlik, Borusan Ihracat, 

Borusan Ithicat, and Tubeco made no 

shipments during the POR. Accordingly, 

consistent with the Department’s 

practice, we intend to instruct U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to 

liquidate any existing entries of 

merchandise produced by Erbosan, 

Borusan Birlesik, Borusan Gemlik, 

Borusan Ihracat, Borusan Ithicat, and 

Tubeco, but exported by other parties 

without their own rate, at the all-others 

rate.5

Further, while Borusan Istikbal 

submitted a no-shipment certification, 

we continue to treat it as a single entity 

with Borusan Mannesmann, as there is 

no record evidence that warrants 

altering this treatment. Because we 

continue to find that Borusan had 

shipments during this POR, we do not 

make a final determination of no 

shipments with respect to Borusan 

Istikbal.6

Analysis of the Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs submitted in this review 

are addressed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum, which is hereby adopted 

with this notice. A list of the issues 

raised is attached as an appendix to this 

notice. 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 http://access.trade.gov and it 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 

Issues and Decision Memorandum can 

be accessed directly at http://

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

The signed Issues and Decision 

Memorandum and the electronic 

versions of the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum are identical in content. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on our analysis of the 

comments received, we made certain 

changes to the Preliminary Results. For 

a full discussion of these changes, see 

Issues and Decision Memorandum. 

Final 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 

investigation, for guidance when 

calculating the rate for companies 

which were not selected for individual 

review 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 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}.’’ 

In this review, we have a calculated 

a weighted-average dumping margin for 

Borusan that is not zero, de minimis, or 

determined entirely on the basis of facts 

available. Accordingly, the Department 

assigns to the companies not 

individually examined the 1.55 percent 

weighted-average dumping margin 

calculated for Borusan. 

Final Results of the Review 

As a result of this review, we 

determine that the following weightedaverage dumping margins exist for the 

period May 1, 2015 through April 30, 

2016: 

Producer or exporter 

Weighted-average 

dumping margin 

(percent) 

Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S./Borusan Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S ................................................................. 1.55 

Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S./Tosyali Dis Ticaret A.S./Toscelik Metal Ticaret A.S.7 .................................................... 0.00 

Yucel Boru ve Profil Endustrisi A.S ............................................................................................................................................. 1.55 

Yucelboru Ihracat Ithalat ve Pazarlama A.S ............................................................................................................................... 1.55 

Cayirova Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S .......................................................................................................................................... 1.55 

Disclosure 

We intend to disclose the calculations 

performed for these final results of 

review within five days of the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.224(b). 

Assessment 

The Department shall determine, and 

CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on 

all appropriate entries covered by this 

review pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) 

of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 

For Borusan, because its weightedaverage dumping margin is not zero or 

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

the Department has calculated importerspecific antidumping duty assessment 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2017 / Notices 49181 

8See Antidumping Proceeding: Calculation of the 

Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and 

Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty 

Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8103, 8103 

(February 14, 2012). 

9For a full discussion of this practice, see 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 

(May 6, 2003). 

10See Antidumping Duty Order; Welded Carbon 

Steel Standard Pipe and Tube Products from 

Turkey, 51 FR 17784 (May 15, 1986). 

11See 19 CFR 351.402(f)(3). 

rates. We calculated importer-specific 

ad valorem antidumping duty 

assessment rates by aggregating the total 

amount of dumping calculated for the 

examined sales of each importer and 

dividing each of these amounts by the 

total entered value associated with those 

sales. We will instruct CBP to assess 

antidumping duties on all appropriate 

entries covered by this review where an 

importer-specific assessment rate is not 

zero or de minimis. Pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate without regard to antidumping 

duties any entries for which the 

importer-specific assessment rate is zero 

or de minimis. 

For Toscelik, we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate its entries during the POR 

imported by the importers identified in 

its questionnaire responses without 

regard to antidumping duties because its 

weighted-average dumping margin in 

these final results is zero.8

For companies that were not selected 

for individual examination, we will 

instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed 

entries based on the methodology 

described in the ‘‘Final Rates for NonExamined Companies’’ section, above. 

Consistent with the Department’s 

assessment practice, for entries of 

subject merchandise during the POR 

produced by any company upon which 

we initiated an administrative review, 

for which they did not know that the 

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.9

We intend to issue instructions to 

CBP 15 days after publication of the 

final results of this review. 

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 

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

The cash deposit rates will be equal to 

the weighted-average dumping margins 

established in the final results of this 

review; (2) for previously reviewed or 

investigated companies not 

participating in this review, 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 was 

reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a firm 

covered in this review, a previous 

review, or the original less-than-fairvalue (LTFV) investigation, but the 

manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate 

will be the rate established for the most 

recently completed segment of this 

proceeding for the manufacturer of 

subject merchandise; and (4) the cash 

deposit rate for all other manufacturers 

or exporters will continue to be 14.74 

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 the presumption that 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping duties.11

Administrative Protective Orders 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

written 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. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.213(h) and 351.221(b)(5) of the 

Department’s regulations. 

Dated: October 18, 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 

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum 

Summary 

Background 

Scope of the Order 

Discussion of the Issues 

Toscelik 

1. Toscelik’s U.S. Sale that is Outside the 

Period of Review 

Borusan 

2. Reallocation of Zinc Costs 

3. ‘‘Match Production’’ Language in the SAS 

Program 

4. Home Market Sales Intended for Export 

5. Sample Sales in the Home Market Database 

6. Ministerial Error 

7. Distortions Caused by Currency Issues 

Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2017–23020 Filed 10–23–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

The Department of Commerce will 

submit to the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) for clearance the 

following proposal for collection of 

information under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35). 

Agency: National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 

Title: Dr. Nancy Foster Scholarship 

Program. 

OMB Control Number: 0648–0432. 

Form Number(s): None. 

Type of Request: Regular (revision 

and extension of a currently approved 

information collection). 

Number of Respondents: 600. 

Average Hours per Response: Dr. 

Nancy Foster application form: 8 hours; 

Letter of Recommendation: 45 minutes; 

Bio/Photograph Submission: 1 hour; 

Annual Report: 1 hour, 30 minutes; and 

Evaluation: 15 minutes. 

Burden Hours: 1,917. 

Needs and Uses: This request is for a 

revision and extension of a current 

information collection. The evaluation 

form has been completely redesigned. 

The National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 

Office of National Marine Sanctuaries 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES