Notice2023-03793
Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results in the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
February 24, 2023
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentInternational Trade Administration
Abstract
On November 23, 2022, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued its final judgment in HiSteel Co., Ltd., and Kukje Steel Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 20-00146, sustaining the U.S. Department of Commerce's (Commerce) remand results pertaining to the first administrative review of the antidumping duty order on heavy walled rectangular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes (HWR) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) covering the period of review (POR), September 1, 2017, through August 31, 2018. Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT's final judgment is not in harmony with Commerce's final results in the administrative review and that Commerce is amending the final results with respect to the dumping margins assigned to HiSteel Co., Ltd. (HiSteel) and Kukje Steel Co., Ltd. (Kukje).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 37 (Friday, February 24, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 37 (Friday, February 24, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11892-11893]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-03793]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-580-880]
Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From
the Republic of Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the
Final Results in the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Notice of
Amended Final Results
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 23, 2022, the U.S. Court of International Trade
(CIT) issued its final judgment in HiSteel Co., Ltd., and Kukje Steel
Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 20-00146, sustaining the U.S.
Department of Commerce's (Commerce) remand results pertaining to the
first administrative review of the antidumping duty order on heavy
walled rectangular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes (HWR) from the
Republic of Korea (Korea) covering the period of review (POR),
September 1, 2017, through August 31, 2018. Commerce is notifying the
public that the CIT's final judgment is not in harmony with Commerce's
final results in the administrative review and that Commerce is
amending the final results with respect to the dumping margins assigned
to HiSteel Co., Ltd. (HiSteel) and Kukje Steel Co., Ltd. (Kukje).
DATES: Applicable December 3, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alice Maldonado, AD/CVD Operations,
Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4682.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 10, 2020, Commerce published its Final Results in the 2017-
2018 administrative review of HWR from Korea.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and
Tubes from the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2017-2018, 85 FR 41538 (July 10, 2020) (Final
Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HiSteel and Kukje appealed Commerce's Final Results to the CIT. On
September 23, 2021, the CIT remanded the Final Results to Commerce,
rejecting Commerce's particular market situation (PMS) determination,
the resultant application of the PMS adjustment to the cost of
production (COP), and the PMS adjustment.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See HiSteel Co., Ltd., and Kukje Steel Co., Ltd. v. United
States, Slip Op. 21-126, Court No. 20-00146 (CIT 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its remand redetermination, issued in December 2021, Commerce,
under protest, determined that there is no PMS that distorts the COP of
HWR and recalculated the weighted-average dumping margins for HiSteel
and Kukje without the PMS adjustment to the COP for the sales-below-
cost test.\3\ As a result, Commerce calculated revised weighted-average
dumping margin for HiSteel and Kukje of 9.90 and 1.91 percent,
respectively. The CIT sustained Commerce's remand redetermination.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, HiSteel Co., Ltd., and Kukje Steel Co., Ltd. v. United
States, Court No. 20-00146 (CIT 2021), dated December 15, 2021, at
1.
\4\ See HiSteel Co., Ltd., and Kukje Steel Co., Ltd. v. United
States, Slip Op. 22-129, Court No. 20-00146 (CIT 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\5\ as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,\6\
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant
to section 516A(c) and (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), Commerce must publish a notice of a court decision that is not
``in harmony'' with a Commerce determination and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The
CIT's November 23, 2022 judgment in this case constitutes a final
decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with Commerce's Final
Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication
requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341 (Fed.
Cir. 1990) (Timken).
\6\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coal. v. United States, 626 F.3d
1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending
its Final Results with respect to HiSteel and Kukje as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter/producer dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HiSteel Co., Ltd............................................ 9.90
Kukje Steel Co., Ltd........................................ 1.91
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
Because HiSteel and Kukje have a superseding cash deposit rate,
i.e., there have been final results published in a subsequent
administrative review, we will not issue revised cash deposit
instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). This notice
will not affect the current cash deposit rate.
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by CIT order from
liquidating entries that were produced and/or exported by HiSteel Co.,
Ltd. or Kukje Steel Co., Ltd. and were entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption during the period September 1, 2017, through
August 31, 2018. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the
terms of the injunction during the pendency of any appeals process.
In the event that the CIT's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed,
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to
instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of
subject merchandise produced and/or exported by HiSteel or Kukje, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). We will instruct CBP to assess
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review
when the importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is not zero or de
minimis. Where an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero
or de minimis,\7\ we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate
entries without regard to antidumping duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
[[Page 11893]]
Dated: February 16, 2023.
Lisa W. Wang,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2023-03793 Filed 2-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on February 24, 2023.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.