Oil Country Tubular Goods From Japan; Notice of Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary Results of Antidumping Administrative Review

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-588-835]

Oil Country Tubular Goods From Japan; Notice of Partial

Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary

Results of Antidumping Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of partial rescission and preliminary results of

antidumping duty administrative review.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an

administrative review of the antidumping duty order on oil country

tubular goods from Japan. This review was initiated in response to

requests by importers, Helmerich & Payne, Inc. (H&P) and Caprock Pipe

and Supply (Caprock), for a review of NKK Corporation of Japan (NKK)

and HEBRA AS (HEBRA), respectively. Although we initiated a review of

both NKK and HEBRA, we are rescinding the review with respect to HEBRA

because Caprock timely withdrew its request for review. This review

covers one producer/exporter and entries of drill pipe during the

period August 11, 1995 through July 31, 1996, and entries of oil

country tubular goods (OCTG) other than drill pipe during the period

February 2, 1995 through July 31, 1996.

Because NKK did not submit a complete response to our

questionnaire, we have preliminarily determined that facts available

will be used. Interested parties who submit comments are requested to

submit with each comment a statement of the issue and a brief summary

of the comment.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 12, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Bezirganian or John Kugelman,

AD/CVD Enforcement Group III--Office 8, Import Administration,

International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone

(202) 482-1395 or 482-0649, respectively.

Applicable Statute

Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute refer 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. In addition, unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the Department's regulations are to the current

regulations, as amended by the intermim regulations published in the

Federal Register on May 11, 1995 (60 FR 25130).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Scope of the Review

The merchandise covered by this order is oil country tubular goods

(OCTG), hollow steel products of circular cross-section, including only

oil well casing, tubing and drill pipe, of iron (other than cast iron)

or steel (both carbon and alloy), whether seamless or welded, whether

or not conforming to American Petroleum Institute (API) or non-API

specifications, whether finished or unfinished (including green tubes

and limited service OCTG products). This scope does not cover casing,

tubing, or drill pipe containing 10.5 percent or more of chromium. The

OCTG subject to this order are currently classified in the Harmonized

Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers:

7304.29.10.10, 7304.29.10.20, 7304.29.10.30, 7304.29.10.40,

7304.29.10.50, 7304.29.10.60, 7304.29.10.80, 7304.29.20.10,

7304.29.20.20, 7304.29.20.30, 7304.29.20.40, 7304.29.20.50,

7304.29.20.60, 7304.29.20.80, 7304.29.30.10, 7304.29.30.20,

7304.29.30.30, 7304.29.30.40, 7304.29.30.50, 7304.29.30.60,

7304.29.30.80, 7304.29.40.10, 7304.29.40.20, 7304.29.40.30,

7304.29.40.40, 7304.29.40.50, 7304.29.40.60, 7304.29.40.80,

7304.29.50.15, 7304.29.50.30, 7304.29.50.45, 7304.29.50.60,

7304.29.50.75, 7304.29.60.15, 7304.29.60.30, 7304.29.60.45,

7304.29.60.60, 7304.29.60.75, 7304.21.30.00, 7304.21.60.30,

7304.21.60.45, 7304.21.60.60, 7305.20.20.00, 7305.20.40.00,

7305.20.60.00, 7305.20.80.00, 7306.20.10.30, 7306.20.10.90,

7306.20.20.00, 7306.20.30.00, 7306.20.40.00, 7306.20.60.10,

7306.20.60.50, 7306.20.80.10, and 7306.20.80.50.

Please note that many of these HTS numbers have changed since the

less-than-fair value (LTFV) investigation. Although the Harmonized

Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings are provided

for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the

scope of this proceeding is dispositive.

Background

In its final determination of sales at LTFV on OCTG from Japan, 60

FR 33560 (June 28, 1995), the Department determined that the two

respondents, Nippon Steel Corp. and Sumitomo Metal Industries, Ltd.,

refused to cooperate by failing to respond to the Department's

questionnaire. Therefore, in accordance with Sec. 776(b) of the Act and

its standard practice, the Department assigned the highest margin in

the petition, 44.20 percent, to both respondents, and assigned the same

rate to all others.

On August 2, 1995, in accordance with section 735(d) of the Act,

the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) notified the Department

of its final determination in this investigation. In its determination

the ITC found two like products, (1) drill pipe, and (2) OCTG other

than drill pipe (i.e., casing and tubing). The ITC determined that

imports of drill pipe from Japan threatened material injury to a U.S.

industry. However, the ITC did not determine that, but for the

suspension of liquidation of entries of drill pipe from Japan, the

domestic industry would have been materially injured, pursuant to

section 735(b)(4)(B) of the Act.

When the ITC finds threat of material injury, and makes a negative

``but for'' finding, the ``Special Rule'' provision of section

736(b)(2) of the Act applies. Therefore, all unliquidated entries of

drill pipe from Japan, entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for

consumption, on or after the date on which the ITC published its notice

of final determination of threat of material injury in the Federal

Register, are liable for the assessment of antidumping duties.

On August 11, 1995, we published an antidumping duty order on the

subject merchandise (60 FR 41058). Pursuant to section 736(b)(2) of the

Act, the Department directed the U.S. Customs Service to terminate the

suspension of liquidation for entries of drill pipe imported from Japan

and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for

[[Page 25890]]

consumption, before August 10, 1995, the date on which the ITC

published its notice of final determination of threat of material

injury in the Federal Register, and to release any bond or other

security, and to refund any cash deposit, posted to secure the payment

of estimated antidumping duties with respect to entries of the

merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption,

before that date. The Department also directed the U.S. Customs Service

to suspend liquidation for drill pipe from Japan with respect to

shipments entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or

after August 10, 1995. Regarding OCTG other than drill pipe, because

the ITC determined that imports of such merchandise were materially

injuring a U.S. industry, in accordance with section 736(a) of the Act,

the Department directed the U.S. Customs Service to continue to suspend

liquidation of such shipments entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for

consumption on or after February 2, 1995, the date on which the

Department published its LTFV preliminary determination notice in the

Federal Register (60 FR 6506). The Department also directed the U.S.

Customs Service to require for all entries of OCTG from Japan falling

under the scope of the order, effective August 11, 1995, a cash deposit

equal to the margin rate determined in the investigation.

On August 12, 1996, we published a notice of opportunity to request

an administrative review (61 FR 41768), covering the period February 2,

1995 through July 31, 1996 for OCTG other than drill pipe, and the

period August 11, 1995 through July 31, 1996 for drill pipe. On August

28, 1996, H&P, an importer of drill pipe, requested an administrative

review of sales of subject merchandise produced by NKK and imported, or

withdrawn from a foreign trade zone, by H&P during the review period

for drill pipe (August 11, 1995, through July 31, 1996). On August 29,

1996, Caprock, an importer of used OCTG, requested an administrative

review of OCTG produced by all Japanese manufacturers. On September 4,

1996, Caprock clarified that the company to be reviewed was actually

HEBRA (which Caprock identified as a Norwegian export company), rather

than all Japanese manufacturers.

The Department published a notice of initiation of an

administrative review covering HEBRA and NKK on September 17, 1996 (61

FR 48882).

On September 19, 1996, we sent a questionnaire to NKK and HEBRA. On

November 14, 1996, HEBRA submitted a letter stating that it would not

submit a response to the Department's questionnaire, and Caprock

submitted a letter withdrawing its request for a review.

Use of Facts Otherwise Available

NKK indicated that it did not sell or ship subject merchandise to

the United States during the period of review (POR). Information on the

record of this review, however, indicates that there were entries

during the POR of subject merchandise produced by NKK. Pursuant to

Sec. 751(a)(2) of the Act, these entries are subject to review,

regardless of NKK's assertions regarding sale and shipment dates. NKK

twice failed to answer the questions in the Department's questionnaire,

so the Department must base the margin upon facts available.

Where the Department must base the entire dumping margin for a

respondent in an administrative review on facts otherwise available

because that respondent failed to cooperate, section 776(b) of the Act

authorizes the use of an inference adverse to the interests of that

respondent in choosing the facts available. Section 776(b) of the Act

also authorizes the Department to use as adverse facts available

information derived from the petition, the final determination, a

previous administrative review, or other information placed on the

record. Section 776(c) of the Act provides that the Department shall,

to the extent practicable, corroborate secondary information from

independent sources reasonably at its disposal. The Statement of

Administrative Action (SAA) provides that ``corroborate'' means simply

that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information

to be used has probative value. (See H.R. Doc. 316, Vol. 1, 103d Cong.,

2d sess. 870 (1994).)

Consistent with Section 776(b) of the Act, we have assigned to NKK

a rate equal to the highest rate for any company for the same class or

kind of merchandise from the same country from this or any prior

segment of the proceeding, or from the petition. In this instance, we

have used the highest rate in the petition, the rate adopted by the

Department in the investigation underlying this order.

In accordance with section 776(c) of the Act, to corroborate

secondary information the Department will, to the extent practicable,

examine the reliability and relevance of the information to be used--in

this case, the highest rate from the petition. That rate was based upon

the difference between U.S. price of a representative OCTG product sold

by one Japanese company and constructed value for that product. Our

review of the information in the original petition pertaining to the

price of the product and to the major inputs (e.g., iron ore, coke,

scrap) and processes (ironmaking, steelmaking, and bloom and pipe

production) used for the production of the final merchandise did not

indicate that the analysis of the OCTG market in the petition is no

longer appropriate to use as a basis for facts available. Furthermore,

nothing on the record of this review supports a determination that the

highest margin rate from the petition in the underlying investigation

does not represent reliable and relevant information for purposes of

adverse facts available. Therefore, in this proceeding, the highest

margin from the petition is the most appropriate information on which

to base a margin for this uncooperative respondent.

Preliminary Results of the Review

As a result of the review, we preliminarily determine that the

following weighted-average dumping margin exists:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Weighted-

average

Manufacturer/producer/exporter margin

percentage

------------------------------------------------------------------------

NKK........................................................ 44.20

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parties to this proceeding may request disclosure within five days

of publication of this notice and any interested party may request a

hearing within 10 days of publication. Any hearing, if requested, will

be held 44 days after the date of publication, or the first working day

thereafter. Interested parties may submit case briefs and/or written

comments no later than 30 days after the date of publication. Rebuttal

briefs and rebuttals to written comments, limited to issues raised in

such briefs or comments, may be filed no later than 37 days after the

date of publication of this notice. The Department will publish a

notice of the final results of the administrative review, including its

analysis of issues raised in any written comments or at a hearing, not

later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice.

Cash Deposit

The following deposit requirements will be effective upon

completion of the final results of this administrative review for all

shipments of OCTG from Japan 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)(1) of the Act

and 19 CFR 353.22: (1) the cash deposit

[[Page 25891]]

rate for NKK will be the rate established in the final results of this

administrative review; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated

companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be

the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if

the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or

the original LTFV investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash

deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period

for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate

for all other manufacturers or exporters will be 44.20 percent, the

``all others'' rate established in the LTFV investigation. These

deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until

publication of the final results of the next administrative review.

This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their

responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 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 Secretary's presumption that

reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent

assessment of double antidumping duties.

These administrative reviews and notice are in accordance with

section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR 353.22.

Dated: May 5, 1997.

Robert S. LaRussa,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 97-12388 Filed 5-9-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P