Notice of Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube from Turkey, 3824-3825 [E6-824]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
3824
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 24, 2006 / Notices
antidumping duties occurred, and in the
subsequent assessment of double
antidumping duties.
This notice also is the only reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written
notification of the 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 and notice in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act.
Dated: January 17, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
APPENDIX
I. General Issues
Comment 1: Freight to Unaffiliated
Processors as Further
Manufacturing
II. Company Specific Issues
Issues Specific to Ivaco
Comment 2: Use of Level of Trade
Adjustment for IRM’s and Sivaco’s
U.S. Sales
Comment 3: Level of Trade
Methodology Used for IRM’s and
Sivaco’s U.S. Sales
Comment 4: Ministerial Error
Allegations Specific to Ivaco
Issues Specific to Ispat
Comment 5: Cost Averaging Periods
Comment 6: CEP Profit
Comment 7: Negative Net–Prices for
U.S. Sales
Comment 8: Treatment of Certain
Sales as CEP Sales
Comment 9: Offsetting for Export
Sales that Exceed Normal Value
Comment 10: Ministerial Error
Allegations Specific to Ispat
[FR Doc. E6–823 Filed 1–23–06; 8:45 am]
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:44 Jan 23, 2006
Jkt 208001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A–821–802)
Extension of Time Limit for Sunset
Review of the Agreement Suspending
the Antidumping Investigation on
Uranium from the Russian Federation
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 24, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sally C. Gannon or Aishe Allen, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce. 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
(202) 482–0162 or (202) 482–0172,
respectively.
AGENCY:
Extension of Time Limit for Sunset
Review:
On November 10, 2005, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) extended the time limit
for the sunset review of the agreement
suspending the antidumping
investigation on uranium from the
Russian Federation in accordance with
section 751(c)(5)(B) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). See
Extension of Time Limit for Sunset
Review of the Agreement Suspending
the Antidumping Investigation on
Uranium from the Russian Federation,
70 FR 68397 (November 10, 2005)
(‘‘Notice of Extension’’). The
Department has now determined to
conduct a full sunset review of this
suspended investigation. See
Memorandum from Sally C. Gannon to
Ronald K. Lorentzen; ‘‘Sunset Review of
Uranium from the Russian Federation:
Adequacy of Domestic and Respondent
Interested Party Responses to the Notice
of Initiation and Decision to Conduct
Full Sunset Review,’’ dated January 17,
2006.
Pursuant to section 351.218(f) of the
Department’s regulations, the
Department normally will issue its
preliminary results in a full sunset
review not later that 110 days after the
date of publication in the Federal
Register of the notice of initiation.
However, as determined in Notice of
Extension, the sunset review of the
agreement suspending the antidumping
investigation on uranium from the
Russian Federation is extraordinarily
complicated and requires additional
time for the Department to complete its
analysis. Therefore, the Department is
extending the deadline for the
preliminary results in this proceeding
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
by additional 30 days and, as a result,
intends to issue the preliminary results
of the full sunset review no later than
February 17, 2006. The Department will
issue its final results of the full sunset
review on May 30, 2006, as specified in
the Notice of Extension.
This notice is issued in accordance
with sections 751(c)(5)(B) and (C)(v) of
the Act.
Dated: January 17, 2006.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
DirectorOffice of Policy.
[FR Doc. E6–825 Filed 1–23–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–489–501]
Notice of Amended Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Certain Welded Carbon Steel
Pipe and Tube from Turkey
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 5, 2005, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) issued the final results of
its administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain
welded carbon steel pipe and tube
(‘‘welded pipe and tube’’) from Turkey.1
The period of review is May 1, 2003,
through April 30, 2004. Based on the
correction of certain ministerial errors,
we have changed the margins for the
Borusan Group (‘‘Borusan’’) and for the
Yucel Group, which includes Cayirova
Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. and its
affiliate, Yucel Boru Ithalat–Ihracat ve
Pazarlama A.S. (collectively referred to
as ‘‘Cayirova’’).
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 24, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Hargett, George McMahon,
or Jim Terpstra, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 3, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–4161, (202) 482–1167 or (202) 482–
3965, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On December 12, 2005, the
Department published in the Federal
Register the final results of the
1 See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Certain Welded Carbon
Steel Pipe and Tube from Turkey, 70 FR 73447
(December 12, 2005).
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 24, 2006 / Notices
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on welded pipe
and tube from Turkey. We received
timely allegations of ministerial errors
from Borusan and Cayirova. In its
comments dated December 9, 2005,
Borusan alleged that the Department
erred in that it did not include certain
U.S. sales in the margin program. In its
comments dated December 12, 2005,
Cayirova alleged that the Department
erred in the revised credit calculation in
the home market (CREDITH). Petitioner
did not comment on the ministerial
errors alleged by respondents.2 We agree
with respondents that these errors are
ministerial errors and have amended the
final results to correct the errors
referenced herein. For a full explanation
of changes made by the Department,
please see the Memorandum from
Melissa G. Skinner to Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, Ministerial Error
Allegations Concerning the Notice of
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review on Certain
Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube
from Turkey, available in the Central
Records Unit, room B099 of the main
Department building.
Amended Final Results of Review
As a result of the correction of
ministerial errors, the following
weighted–average percentage margins
exist for the period May 1, 2003,
through April 30, 2004:
Manufacturer/Exporter
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
Borusan ..................
Cayirova ..................
Amended
Margin
(percent)
Margin
(percent)
0.86
3.52
0.74
3.28
The Department shall determine, and
the U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(‘‘CBP’’) shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries. In
accordance with section 351.212(b)(1) of
the Department’s regulations, we have
calculated importer–specific assessment
rates by dividing the dumping margin
found on the subject merchandise
examined by the entered value of such
merchandise. Where the importer–
specific assessment rate is above de
minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess
antidumping duties on that importer’s
entries of subject merchandise. The
Department will issue appropriate
assessment instructions directly to CBP
within 15 days of publication of these
amended final results of review.
Furthermore, the following deposit
requirements will be effective for all
2 Petitioners
are Allied Tube and Conduit
Corporation, and Wheatland Tube Company.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:44 Jan 23, 2006
Jkt 208001
shipments of the subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication date of these amended final
results of administrative review, as
provided by section 751(a) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’): (1)
For the companies named above, the
cash deposit rate will be the rate listed
above; (2) for merchandise exported by
manufacturers or exporters not covered
in this review but covered in a previous
segment of this proceeding, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the
company–specific rate published in the
most recent final results in which that
manufacturer or exporter participated;
(3) if the exporter is not a firm covered
in this review or in any previous
segment of this proceeding, but the
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate
will be that established for the
manufacturer of the merchandise in
these final results of review or in the
most recent segment of the proceeding
in which that manufacturer
participated; and (4) if neither the
exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm
covered in this review or in any
previous segment of this proceeding, the
cash deposit rate will be 14.74 percent,
the ‘‘All–others’’ rate established in the
less–than-fair–value investigation.
These deposit requirements shall
remain in effect until publication of the
final results of the next administrative
review.
We are issuing and publishing this
determination and notice in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of
the Act.
Dated: January 18, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–824 Filed 1–23–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Air Force
Notice of Intent To Perform an
Environmental Assessment for
Increased Depleted Uranium Use at
Nevada Test and Training Range,
Nevada
Department of the Air Force
(AF), Air Combat Command (ACC).
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the
Increased Depleted Uranium (DU) Use
at Nevada Test and Training Range
(NTTR).
AGENCY:
Authority: 42 United States Code §§ 4321–
4347 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
parts 1500–1508.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3825
SUMMARY: The United States Air Force is
issuing this Notice of Intent (NOI) to
announce that it is conducting an
environmental assessment for the
proposed action for increasing the
annual number of depleted uranium
(DU) rounds fired by A–10 aircraft using
the 30-millimeter GAU–8 Gatling gun at
the Nevada Test and Training Range
(NTTR), Range 63, Target 63–10. This
NOI describes the Air Force’s proposed
scoping process and identifies the Air
Force’s point of contact. Target 63–10 is
the Air Force’s only air-to-ground target
for testing and training with DU rounds.
The proposed assessment will be
prepared in compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4347),
the Council on Environmental Quality
NEPA regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–
1508), and Air Force’s Environmental
Impact Analysis Process (EIAP) (Air
Force Instruction 32–7061 as
promulgated at 32 CFR part 989) to
determine the potential environmental
effects of increasing DU rounds at the
NTTR.
As part of the proposal, the Air Force
will analyze three alternatives: A, B, and
C. Alternative A (proposed action)
would increase the annual use of 30-mm
DU rounds in a combat mix (CM) from
an existing 9,500 to 22,800 annually.
CM contains armor-piercing incendiary
(API) DU rounds mixed with high
explosive incendiary (HEI) rounds in a
5 to 1 ratio. Alternative A would
increase the annual use of DU rounds
from 7,900 to 19,000 (and HEI rounds
from 1,600 to 3,800) to provide the 422
Test and Evaluation Squadron (TES)
and the 66 Weapons Squadron (WPS)
graduates with sufficient DU rounds to
accomplish essential testing and
training requirements. Alternative B
would enhance testing by increasing the
use of CM to a total of 31,680 rounds
(26,400 DU and 5,280 HEI) at Target 63–
10. This alternative would meet test and
training requirements and also allow
additional testing by Tactics
Development & Evaluation (TD&E) and
Tactics Improvement Proposals (TIP).
Alternative C (no-action) would reflect
no change in current operations
associated with Target 63–10 whereby
9,500 CM rounds (7,900 DU and 1,600
HEI) are deployed for test and training.
This number (9,500) does not provide
enough rounds for effective TES testing
and WPS training.
DATES: The Air Force will conduct two
scoping meetings to receive public input
on alternatives, concerns, and issues to
be addressed in the EA and to solicit
public input concerning the scope of the
proposed action and alternatives. The
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 15 (Tuesday, January 24, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3824-3825]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-824]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-489-501]
Notice of Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube from
Turkey
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 5, 2005, the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') issued the final results of its administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on certain welded carbon steel pipe and tube
(``welded pipe and tube'') from Turkey.\1\ The period of review is May
1, 2003, through April 30, 2004. Based on the correction of certain
ministerial errors, we have changed the margins for the Borusan Group
(``Borusan'') and for the Yucel Group, which includes Cayirova Boru
Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. and its affiliate, Yucel Boru Ithalat-Ihracat ve
Pazarlama A.S. (collectively referred to as ``Cayirova'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube
from Turkey, 70 FR 73447 (December 12, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 24, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Hargett, George McMahon,
or Jim Terpstra, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-4161, (202) 482-1167 or (202) 482-3965, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 12, 2005, the Department published in the Federal
Register the final results of the
[[Page 3825]]
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on welded pipe and
tube from Turkey. We received timely allegations of ministerial errors
from Borusan and Cayirova. In its comments dated December 9, 2005,
Borusan alleged that the Department erred in that it did not include
certain U.S. sales in the margin program. In its comments dated
December 12, 2005, Cayirova alleged that the Department erred in the
revised credit calculation in the home market (CREDITH). Petitioner did
not comment on the ministerial errors alleged by respondents.\2\ We
agree with respondents that these errors are ministerial errors and
have amended the final results to correct the errors referenced herein.
For a full explanation of changes made by the Department, please see
the Memorandum from Melissa G. Skinner to Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Ministerial Error
Allegations Concerning the Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review on Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube from
Turkey, available in the Central Records Unit, room B099 of the main
Department building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Petitioners are Allied Tube and Conduit Corporation, and
Wheatland Tube Company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results of Review
As a result of the correction of ministerial errors, the following
weighted-average percentage margins exist for the period May 1, 2003,
through April 30, 2004:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended
Manufacturer/Exporter Margin Margin
(percent) (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Borusan.......................................... 0.86 0.74
Cayirova......................................... 3.52 3.28
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department shall determine, and the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries. In accordance with section 351.212(b)(1) of the
Department's regulations, we have calculated importer-specific
assessment rates by dividing the dumping margin found on the subject
merchandise examined by the entered value of such merchandise. Where
the importer-specific assessment rate is above de minimis, we will
instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on that importer's entries of
subject merchandise. The Department will issue appropriate assessment
instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of these
amended final results of review.
Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective
for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these
amended final results of administrative review, as provided by section
751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''): (1) For the
companies named above, the cash deposit rate will be the rate listed
above; (2) for merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not
covered in this review but covered in a previous segment of this
proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-
specific rate published in the most recent final results in which that
manufacturer or exporter participated; (3) if the exporter is not a
firm covered in this review or in any previous segment of this
proceeding, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be that
established for the manufacturer of the merchandise in these final
results of review or in the most recent segment of the proceeding in
which that manufacturer participated; and (4) if neither the exporter
nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this review or in any
previous segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will be
14.74 percent, the ``All-others'' rate established in the less-than-
fair-value investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain in
effect until publication of the final results of the next
administrative review.
We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: January 18, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6-824 Filed 1-23-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
