Skip to Content


Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipes From the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

Document Details

Information about this document as published in the Federal Register.

Published Document

This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

Start Preamble


Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.


On January 7, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain welded stainless steel pipes (WSSP) from the Republic of Korea (Korea). This review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise to the United States, SeAH Steel Corporation (SeAH). The period of review (POR) is December 1, 2007, through November 30, 2008. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made certain changes Start Printed Page 27988in the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margin for the reviewed firm is listed below in the section entitled “Final Results of Review.”


Effective Date: May 19, 2010.

Start Further Info


Holly Phelps, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-0656.

End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information



On January 7, 2010, the Department published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on WSSP from Korea. See Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipes from the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 973 (Jan. 7, 2010) (Preliminary Results).

We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results. In February 2010, we received a case brief from SeAH. We did not receive a case brief or rebuttal brief from the petitioners.[1] The Department has conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

Scope of the Order

The merchandise subject to the antidumping duty order is welded austenitic stainless steel pipe that meets the standards and specifications set forth by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) for the welded form of chromium-nickel pipe designated ASTM A-312. The merchandise covered by the scope of the order also includes austenitic welded stainless steel pipes made according to the standards of other nations which are comparable to ASTM A-312.

WSSP is produced by forming stainless steel flat-rolled products into a tubular configuration and welding along the seam. WSSP is a commodity product generally used as a conduit to transmit liquids or gases. Major applications for steel pipe include, but are not limited to, digester lines, blow lines, pharmaceutical lines, petrochemical stock lines, brewery process and transport lines, general food processing lines, automotive paint lines, and paper process machines. Imports of WSSP are currently classifiable under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 7306.40.5005, 7306.40.5015, 7306.40.5040, 7306.40.5065, and 7306.40.5085. Although these subheadings include both pipes and tubes, the scope of the antidumping duty order is limited to welded austenitic stainless steel pipes. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. However, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

Period of Review

The POR is December 1, 2007, through November 30, 2008.

Cost of Production

As discussed in the preliminary results, we conducted an investigation to determine whether SeAH made home market sales of the foreign like product during the POR at prices below their costs of production (COP) within the meaning of section 773(b) of the Act. See Preliminary Results, 75 FR at 976. For these final results, we performed the cost test following the same methodology as in the Preliminary Results.

We found that 20 percent or more of SeAH's sales of a given product during the reporting period were at prices less than the weighted-average COP for this period. Thus, we determined that these below-cost sales were made in “substantial quantities” within an extended period of time and at prices which did not permit the recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time in the normal course of trade. See sections 773(b)(1)-(2) of the Act.

Therefore, for purposes of these final results, we found that SeAH made below-cost sales not in the ordinary course of trade. Consequently, we disregarded these sales for SeAH and used the remaining sales as the basis for determining normal value pursuant to section 773(b)(1) of the Act.

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the case brief by SeAH are listed in the Appendix to this notice and addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum (the Decision Memo), which is adopted by this notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room 1117, of the main Department building.

In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at​frn/​. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made certain changes to the margin calculations. These changes are discussed in the relevant sections of the Decision Memo.

Final Results of Review

We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentage exists for the period December 1, 2007 through November 30, 2008:

Manufacturer/Producer/ExporterPercent margin
SeAH Steel Corporation2.92


The Department shall determine, and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates for SeAH based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of those sales. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to antidumping duties any entries for which the assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent).

The Department clarified its “automatic assessment” regulation on May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by SeAH for which SeAH did not know its merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate established in the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.

Cash Deposit Requirements

Further, the following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of WSSP from Korea entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this Start Printed Page 27989administrative review, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for the reviewed company will be the rate shown above, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), the cash deposit will be zero; (2) for previously investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period of review; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, or the 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 continue to be 7.00 percent, the all-others rate made effective by the LTFV investigation. See Antidumping Duty Order and Clarification of Final Determination: Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipes From Korea, 57 FR 62301 (Dec. 30, 1992), as amended in Notice of Amended Final Determination and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipe From the Republic of Korea, 60 FR 10064, 10065 (Feb. 23, 1995). 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 Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

Notification to Interested Parties

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). 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.

We are issuing and publishing these results of review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Start Signature

Dated: May 13, 2010.

Ronald K. Lorentzen,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

End Signature

Appendix—Issues in Decision Memorandum

General Issues

1. Offsetting of Negative Margins.

2. Inclusion of Inventory Valuation Allowances in Cost of Production.

3. Application of the Major Input Rule.

End Supplemental Information


1.  The petitioners are Bristol Metals, LLC, Felker Brothers Corporation, Marcegaglia USA, Inc., and Outokumpu Stainless Pipe, Inc.

Back to Citation

[FR Doc. 2010-11985 Filed 5-18-10; 8:45 am]