[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33558-33560]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-15618]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[A-475-816]
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Oil Country
Tubular Goods from Italy
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 28, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Crow or Stuart Schaag, Office of
Antidumping Investigations, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-
0116 or (202) 482-0192, respectively.
Final Determination
The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that oil
country tubular goods (OCTG) from Italy are being, or are likely to be,
sold in the United States at less than fair value, as provided in
section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) (19 U.S.C.
1673d). The estimated margins are shown in the Suspension of
Liquidation section of this notice.
Scope of the Investigation
For purposes of this investigation, OCTG are hollow steel products
of circular cross-section, including 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
investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers:
7304.20.10.10, 7304.20.10.20, 7304.20.10.30, 7304.20.10.40,
7304.20.10.50, 7304.20.10.60, 7304.20.10.80, 7304.20.20.10,
7304.20.20.20, 7304.20.20.30, 7304.20.20.40, 7304.20.20.50,
7304.20.20.60, 7304.20.20.80, 7304.20.30.10, 7304.20.30.20,
7304.20.30.30, 7304.20.30.40, 7304.20.30.50, 7304.20.30.60,
7304.20.30.80, 7304.20.40.10, 7304.20.40.20, 7304.20.40.30,
7304.20.40.40, 7304.20.40.50, 7304.20.40.60, 7304.20.40.80,
7304.20.50.15, 7304.20.50.30, 7304.20.50.45, 7304.20.50.60,
7304.20.50.75, 7304.20.60.15, 7304.20.60.30, 7304.20.60.45,
7304.20.60.60, 7304.20.60.75, 7304.20.70.00, 7304.20.80.30,
7304.20.80.45, 7304.20.80.60, 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.
After the publication of the preliminary determination, we found
that HTSUS item numbers 7304.20.10.00, 7304.20.20.00, 7304.20.30.00,
7304.20.40.00, 7304.20.50.10, 7304.20.50.50, 7304.20.60.10,
7304.20.60.50, and 7304.20.80.00 were no longer valid HTSUS item
numbers. Accordingly, [[Page 33559]] these numbers have been deleted
from the scope of this investigation.
Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and
customs purposes, our written description of the scope of this
investigation is dispositive.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 1994, through June
30, 1994.
Case History
Since our preliminary determination (60 FR 6515, February 2, 1995)
the following events have occurred. On February 3, 1995, one of the
respondents, Dalmine S.p.A. (Dalmine), requested a postponement of the
final determination. This request was granted (60 FR 8632, February 15,
1995), and the final was postponed by the Department until no later
than June 19, 1995. On May 2, 1995, Dalmine submitted its case brief.
On May 3, 1995, petitioner submitted its case brief and on May 10,
1995, petitioner submitted its rebuttal.
Applicable Statute and Regulations
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Statute and to the
Department's regulations are in reference to the provisions as they
existed on December 31, 1994.
Best Information Available
In accordance with section 776(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1677e(c)),
we have determined that the use of best information available (BIA) is
appropriate for all companies. Given that none of the three named
companies responded fully to the Department's questionnaire, we find
that no respondents have cooperated in this investigation.
In determining what to use as BIA, the Department follows a two-
tiered methodology, whereby the Department normally assigns lower
margins to those respondents who cooperate in an investigation, and
margins based on more adverse assumptions for those respondents who do
not cooperate in an investigation. If the Department deems a respondent
to be non-cooperative, that respondent's final margin for the relevant
class or kind of merchandise is the higher of either (1) the highest
margin in the petition, or (2) the highest calculated margin of any
respondent (see Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller
Bearings) and Parts Thereof From the Federal Republic of Germany: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value (54 FR 18992, 19033, May
3, 1989)). The Department's two-tier methodology for assigning BIA
based on the degree of respondents' cooperation has been upheld by the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. (See Allied Signal
Aerospace Co. v. United States, 996 F.2d 1185 (Fed. Cir. 1993); see
also Krupp Stahl, AG et al. v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 789 (CIT
1993).)
In this investigation, the mandatory respondents have refused to
cooperate by failing to respond, either entirely, or in large part, to
the Department's questionnaire. Therefore, in accordance with our
standard practice, the Department has assigned the highest margin in
the petition to all respondents. The assigned BIA margin is the same
margin that was assigned for the preliminary determination.
Fair Value Comparisons
To determine whether sales of subject merchandise from Italy to the
United States were made at less than fair value, we compared United
States price (USP) to foreign market value (FMV) as reported in the
petition. See Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation of Oil
Country Tubular Goods Pipe from Argentina, Austria, Italy, Japan,
Korea, Mexico, and Spain (59 FR 37962, July 26, 1994).
Comment 1--Comments Regarding Dalmine S.p.A.
Dalmine urges the Department to reverse its November 4, 1994,
decision that Dalmine's home market is viable (see November 4, 1995,
Memorandum from Richard W. Moreland to Barbara R. Stafford). As a basis
for this reversal, Dalmine refers to arguments made in its November 14,
1994, submission. In this submission, Dalmine challenged the legality
of the Department's determination that Dalmine's home market is viable.
Dalmine asserted that the Department's standing policy is not to use
related party sales in its home market viability calculation. Dalmine
also requests that the Department take into account its December 1994
announcement concerning the Department's reconsideration of its policy
regarding downstream related party sales (see December 27, 1994 Letter
from Roland L. MacDonald, Director, Office of Agreements Compliance, to
Dofasco Inc.). In the event that the Department reverses its November 4
viability determination, Dalmine urges the Department to request,
review, and verify Dalmine's third country sales data. Although such a
task would extend past the Department's deadline for the final
determination in this investigation, Dalmine argues that the
Department's deadlines are hortatory and not mandatory and, therefore,
the Department may take the time that is needed to receive and verify
new responses.
Petitioner argues that Dalmine's case brief merely refers to
previous submissions that have already been rejected by the Department.
Additionally, petitioner argues that downstream sales are not an issue
in this investigation and, therefore, Dalmine's request that the
Department reconsider its home market viability decision based on the
Department's review of its policy regarding the reporting of downstream
customers is irrelevant. Petitioner maintains that Dalmine's refusal to
comply with the Department's explicit instructions to report home
market sales can only be characterized as noncooperative and that the
Department has no option but to use the highest margin alleged in the
petition as BIA.
DOC Position
We re-affirm our previous decision that Dalmine's home market is
viable and that Dalmine's refusal to comply with the Department's
request for home market sales information constitutes uncooperative
behavior.
In its November 4 determination, the Department decided that the
nature of the relationship between Dalmine, its home market customers,
and the Government of Italy, was not pertinent to the Department's home
market viability analysis. The record contains no information that
would cause the Department to change this decision. Additionally, the
Department's announcement that it was reviewing its present policy
regarding sales to downstream customers has no bearing on its policy to
use sales to both related and unrelated parties in its viability
analysis.
Comment 2
In order to preserve the viability issue in the event that Dalmine
decides to appeal the Department's determination, Dalmine urges the
Department to clarify in this notice the extent of Dalmine's
cooperation in this investigation and the reasons for Dalmine's
decision not to report home market sales data. Specifically, Dalmine
requests the Department to acknowledge that Dalmine informed the
Department that its home market was not viable and that the Department
rejected Dalmine's proposal because it considered Dalmine's home market
to be viable. Additionally, Dalmine asks that the Department respond to
the legal arguments addressed in Dalmine's November 14 submission and
that the Department's analysis take into account the policy
announcement that the [[Page 33560]] Department made on December 27,
1994, regarding the Department's requirement to report downstream
related party sales.
Petitioner argues that there is no need for the Department to
revisit its decision regarding the viability of Dalmine's home market.
DOC Position
The information regarding the extent of Dalmine's participation in
this investigation is already a matter of public record. In the event
that Dalmine appeals the Department's actions, the Department's
previous decision to request home market information, Dalmine's
subsequent arguments concerning the Department's decision, and
Dalmine's refusal to supply the Department with requested information
are all on record in the official file in the Central Records Unit of
the Department.
Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 733(d)(1) of the Act (19 USC
1673b(d)(1)), we directed the Customs Service to suspend liquidation of
all entries of OCTG from Italy, as defined in the ``Scope of
Investigation'' section of this notice, that are entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or after February 2, 1995.
Pursuant to the results of this final determination, we will
instruct the Customs Service to require a cash deposit or posting of a
bond equal to the estimated final dumping margin, as shown below, for
entries of OCTG from Italy that are entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption from the date of publication of this notice
in the Federal Register. The suspension of liquidation will remain in
effect until further notice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Manufacturer/producer/exporter margin
percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dalmine S.p.A............................................... 49.78
Acciaierie Tubificio Arvedi S.p.A........................... 49.78
General Sider Europa S.p.A.................................. 49.78
All Others.................................................. 49.78
------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Trade Commission (ITC) Notification
In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the
ITC of our determination. The ITC will make its determination whether
these imports materially injure, or threaten injury to, a U.S. industry
within 45 days of the publication of this notice. If the ITC determines
that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, the
proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted as a result of
the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or cancelled. However,
if the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will
issue an antidumping duty order.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) in this investigation of their
responsibility covering the return or destruction of proprietary
information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 353.34(d).
Failure to comply is a violation of the APO.
This determination is published pursuant to section 735(d) of the
Act (19 U.S.C. 1673d(d)) and 19 CFR 353.20(a)(4).
Dated: June 18, 1995.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 95-15618 Filed 6-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
