Notice of Initiation and Preliminary Results of Changed-Circumstances Antidumping Duty Review: Certain Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings From Thailand, 2048-2049 [E9-632]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
2048
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 9 / Wednesday, January 14, 2009 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–549–807]
Notice of Initiation and Preliminary
Results of Changed-Circumstances
Antidumping Duty Review: Certain
Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings
From Thailand
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) received a request
from Awaji Materia (Thailand) Co., Ltd.
(AMT), for initiation of a changedcircumstances review of the
antidumping duty order on certain
carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings
(pipe fittings) from Thailand. After
reviewing this request, we preliminarily
determine that AMT is the successor-ininterest to Awaji Sangyo (Thailand) Co.,
Ltd. (AST), and, as a result, should be
accorded the same treatment previously
accorded to AST with respect to the
antidumping duty order on pipe fittings
from Thailand. Interested parties are
invited to comment on these
preliminary results.
DATES: Effective Date: January 14, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edythe Artman or Minoo Hatten, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 5, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3931 and (202)
482–1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Background
On July 6, 1992, the Department
published an antidumping duty order
on pipe fittings from Thailand in which
it stated that AST was excluded from
the order due to its de minimis margin
in the less-than-fair-value investigation.
See Antidumping Duty Order; Certain
Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings
From Thailand, 57 FR 29702 (July 6,
1992); see also Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain
Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings
from Thailand, 57 FR 21065 (May 18,
1992).1 On November 18, 2008, the
1 As observed in the November 18, 2008 request
from AMT, exports of subject merchandise of AST
were also the subject of a subsequent investigation
in which the International Trade Commission
concluded that the exports did not result in the
material injury or threat of material injury to the
U.S. industry or in material retardation of the
establishment of an industry in the United States.
See Certain Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings
From France, India, Israel, Malaysia, The Republic
VerDate Nov<24>2008
21:01 Jan 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
Department received a request for a
changed-circumstances review of this
order from AMT to determine if, for
purposes of the antidumping law, AMT
is the successor-in-interest to AST. On
December 4, 2008, we received a letter
from Weldbend Corporation, a domestic
producer of pipe fittings, in which it
expressed support for AMT’s request.
Scope of the Order
The scope of the order covers certain
pipe fittings from Thailand. They are
defined as carbon steel butt-weld pipe
fittings, having an inside diameter of
less than 14 inches, imported in either
finished or unfinished form. These
formed or forged pipe fittings are used
to join sections in piping systems where
conditions require permanent, welded
connections, as distinguished from
fittings based on other fastening
methods (e.g., threaded, grooved, or
bolted fittings). These imports are
currently classifiable under subheading
7307.93.30 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).
Although the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description
remains dispositive as to the scope of
the order.
Initiation and Preliminary Results of
Changed-Circumstances Review
Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
and 19 CFR 351.216, the Department
will conduct a changed-circumstances
review upon receipt of information
concerning, or a request from an
interested party for review of, an
antidumping duty order which shows
changed circumstances sufficient to
warrant a review of the order. The
Department finds that the
documentation that AMT submitted
with its November 18, 2008 request
constitutes sufficient evidence of
changed circumstances to warrant such
a review. Thus, in accordance with
section 751(b) of the Act, the
Department is initiating a changedcircumstances review to determine
whether AMT is the successor-ininterest to AST for purposes of
determining antidumping duty liability
with respect to imports of pipe fittings
from Thailand.
Furthermore, 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii)
permits the Department to combine the
notice of initiation of a changedcircumstances review and the notice of
preliminary results for the review in a
single notice if the Department
concludes that expedited action is
of Korea, Thailand, The United Kingdom, and
Venezuela, 60 FR 18611 (April 12, 1995).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
warranted. As explained below, we find
that the evidence provided by AMT is
sufficient to preliminarily determine
that this company is the successor-ininterest to AST.
In making a successor-in-interest
determination, the Department
examines several factors including but
not limited to changes in the following:
(1) Management; (2) production
facilities; (3) supplier relationships; and
(4) customer base. See, e.g., Notice of
Final Results of Changed Circumstances
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From
Japan, 67 FR 58 (January 2, 2002), and
Brass Sheet and Strip from Canada:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460,
20461 (May 13, 1992). While no single
factor or combination of factors will
necessarily provide a dispositive
indication of a successor-in-interest
relationship, generally the Department
will consider the new company to be
the successor to the previous company
if the new company’s resulting
operation is not materially dissimilar to
that of its predecessor. See, e.g., Fresh
and Chilled Atlantic Salmon from
Norway; Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 64 FR 9979
(March 1, 1999) (Salmon from Norway),
and Industrial Phosphoric Acid from
Israel; Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Review, 59 FR 6944,
6945 (February 14, 1994). Thus, if the
record evidence demonstrates that, with
respect to the production and sale of the
subject merchandise, the new company
operates as the same business entity as
the predecessor company, the
Department may assign the new
company the cash-deposit rate of its
predecessor. See, e.g., Salmon from
Norway, 64 FR at 9980.
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.221(3), we preliminarily determine
that AMT is the successor-in-interest to
AST. In its November 18, 2008 filing,
AMT provided evidence supporting its
claim to be the successor-in-interest to
AST. Specifically, it provided the
following documentation:
(1) A declaration of the executive vice
president of AMT in which the official
states that the name change of the
company from AST to AMT did not
result in changes in management,
production, facilities, supplier
relationships or changes to the customer
base;
(2) Certifications of incorporation of
both AST and AMT filed with the Thai
Ministry of Commerce;
(3) Copies of tax identification cards
for AST and AMT that show the
E:\FR\FM\14JAN1.SGM
14JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 9 / Wednesday, January 14, 2009 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
companies were assigned the same
taxpayer identification numbers;
(4) A statement from a Thai bank
confirming the change of the company
account name from AST to AMT in
August 2006;
(5) Company outlines dated before
and after the name change that
demonstrate no changes in management
or facilities between the two points in
time;
(6) A notice published by the
European Union Commission
recognizing the name change from AST
to AMT for antidumping-duty purposes;
and
(7) Copies of letters AST sent to
customers announcing the name change.
In summary, AMT has presented
evidence to establish a prima facie case
of its successorship status. AST’s name
change to AMT has not changed the
operations of the company in a
meaningful way. AMT’s management,
production facilities, supplier
relationships, and customer base are
substantially unchanged from those of
AST. The record evidence demonstrates
that the new entity essentially operates
in the same manner as the predecessor
company. Consequently, we
preliminarily determine that AMT
should be assigned the same
antidumping-duty treatment as AST,
i.e., exclusion from the order. See
Antidumping Duty Order; Certain
Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings
From Thailand, 57 FR 29702 (July 6,
1992).
Public Comment
Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
Written comments may be submitted no
later than 14 days after the date of
publication of these preliminary results.
Rebuttals to written comments, limited
to issues raised in such comments, may
be filed no later than 21 days after the
date of publication. The Department
will issue the final results of this
changed-circumstances review, which
will include the results of its analysis
raised in any such written comments,
no later than 270 days after the date on
which this review was initiated or
within 45 days if all parties agree to our
preliminary results. See 19 CFR
351.216(e).
This notice is published in
accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and
777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216
and 351.221.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–632 Filed 1–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
21:01 Jan 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A–552–801)
Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam:
Extension of Time Limit for Final
Results of Changed Circumstances
Review
EFFECTIVE DATE:
January 14, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Javier Barrientos, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 9, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–2243.
Extension of Time Limit for Final
Results
On August 10, 2007, the Department
of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) issued its
preliminary results for the changed
circumstances review of the
antidumping duty order of certain
frozen fish fillets from the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam (‘‘Vietnam’’). See
Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from
Vietnam: Notice of Initiation and
Preliminary Results of Changed
Circumstances Review, 72 FR 46604
(August 21, 2007) (Preliminary Results).
In it, we stated we would issue the final
results within 270 days after the date on
which the changed circumstances
review was initiated. We subsequently
postponed that deadline until December
5, 2008. See Certain Frozen Fish Fillets
from Vietnam: Extension of Time Limit
for Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Review, 73 FR 60240
(October 10, 2008). However, the
Department now finds that it is not
practicable to complete this review by
December 5, 2008. Subsequent to the
Preliminary Results and receipt of Vinh
Hoan Co., Ltd./Corporation’s and
Petitioners’ (the Catfish Farmers of
America and individual U.S. catfish
processors) case briefs, the Department
requested and received new information
from Vinh Hoan. Moreover, Vinh Hoan
requested an extension to the time limit
for submission of this new information.
As a result, additional time is needed to
review the information and prepare the
results. Consequently, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.302(b), the Department
is extending the time period for issuing
the final results until February 18, 2009.
This notice is published in
accordance with section 771(i) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2049
Dated: December 5, 2008.
Gary Taverman,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Operations.
[FR Doc. E9–623 Filed 1–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–929]
Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Affirmative
Determination of Critical
Circumstances: Small Diameter
Graphite Electrodes from the People’s
Republic of China
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 14, 2009.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) has determined that
small diameter graphite electrodes from
the People’s Republic of China (PRC) are
being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value
(LTFV) as provided in section 735 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
The final dumping margins for this
investigation are listed in the ‘‘Final
Determination Margins’’ section below.
The period covered by the investigation
is July 1, 2007, through December 31,
2007 (the POI).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Magd Zalok or Drew Jackson, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 4, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–4162 and 482–
4406, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published its
preliminary determination of sales at
LTFV on August 21, 2008. See Small
Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the
People’s Republic of China: Preliminary
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value, Postponement of Final
Determination, and Affirmative
Preliminary Determination of Critical
Circumstances, in Part, 73 FR 49408
(August 21, 2008) (Preliminary
Determination). On August 25, 2008, the
Department received ministerial error
allegations from petitioners1 and one
1 The petitioners in this investigation are SGL
Carbon LLC and Superior Graphite Co.
E:\FR\FM\14JAN1.SGM
14JAN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 14, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2048-2049]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-632]
[[Page 2048]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-549-807]
Notice of Initiation and Preliminary Results of Changed-
Circumstances Antidumping Duty Review: Certain Carbon Steel Butt-Weld
Pipe Fittings From Thailand
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) received a request
from Awaji Materia (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (AMT), for initiation of a
changed-circumstances review of the antidumping duty order on certain
carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings (pipe fittings) from Thailand.
After reviewing this request, we preliminarily determine that AMT is
the successor-in-interest to Awaji Sangyo (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (AST),
and, as a result, should be accorded the same treatment previously
accorded to AST with respect to the antidumping duty order on pipe
fittings from Thailand. Interested parties are invited to comment on
these preliminary results.
DATES: Effective Date: January 14, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edythe Artman or Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
3931 and (202) 482-1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 6, 1992, the Department published an antidumping duty order
on pipe fittings from Thailand in which it stated that AST was excluded
from the order due to its de minimis margin in the less-than-fair-value
investigation. See Antidumping Duty Order; Certain Carbon Steel Butt-
Weld Pipe Fittings From Thailand, 57 FR 29702 (July 6, 1992); see also
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Carbon
Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Thailand, 57 FR 21065 (May 18,
1992).\1\ On November 18, 2008, the Department received a request for a
changed-circumstances review of this order from AMT to determine if,
for purposes of the antidumping law, AMT is the successor-in-interest
to AST. On December 4, 2008, we received a letter from Weldbend
Corporation, a domestic producer of pipe fittings, in which it
expressed support for AMT's request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As observed in the November 18, 2008 request from AMT,
exports of subject merchandise of AST were also the subject of a
subsequent investigation in which the International Trade Commission
concluded that the exports did not result in the material injury or
threat of material injury to the U.S. industry or in material
retardation of the establishment of an industry in the United
States. See Certain Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings From
France, India, Israel, Malaysia, The Republic of Korea, Thailand,
The United Kingdom, and Venezuela, 60 FR 18611 (April 12, 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The scope of the order covers certain pipe fittings from Thailand.
They are defined as carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings, having an
inside diameter of less than 14 inches, imported in either finished or
unfinished form. These formed or forged pipe fittings are used to join
sections in piping systems where conditions require permanent, welded
connections, as distinguished from fittings based on other fastening
methods (e.g., threaded, grooved, or bolted fittings). These imports
are currently classifiable under subheading 7307.93.30 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes,
the written description remains dispositive as to the scope of the
order.
Initiation and Preliminary Results of Changed-Circumstances Review
Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act), and 19 CFR 351.216, the Department will conduct a changed-
circumstances review upon receipt of information concerning, or a
request from an interested party for review of, an antidumping duty
order which shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review
of the order. The Department finds that the documentation that AMT
submitted with its November 18, 2008 request constitutes sufficient
evidence of changed circumstances to warrant such a review. Thus, in
accordance with section 751(b) of the Act, the Department is initiating
a changed-circumstances review to determine whether AMT is the
successor-in-interest to AST for purposes of determining antidumping
duty liability with respect to imports of pipe fittings from Thailand.
Furthermore, 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii) permits the Department to
combine the notice of initiation of a changed-circumstances review and
the notice of preliminary results for the review in a single notice if
the Department concludes that expedited action is warranted. As
explained below, we find that the evidence provided by AMT is
sufficient to preliminarily determine that this company is the
successor-in-interest to AST.
In making a successor-in-interest determination, the Department
examines several factors including but not limited to changes in the
following: (1) Management; (2) production facilities; (3) supplier
relationships; and (4) customer base. See, e.g., Notice of Final
Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan, 67 FR 58 (January 2, 2002),
and Brass Sheet and Strip from Canada: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460, 20461 (May 13, 1992). While no
single factor or combination of factors will necessarily provide a
dispositive indication of a successor-in-interest relationship,
generally the Department will consider the new company to be the
successor to the previous company if the new company's resulting
operation is not materially dissimilar to that of its predecessor. See,
e.g., Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon from Norway; Final Results of
Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 64 FR
9979 (March 1, 1999) (Salmon from Norway), and Industrial Phosphoric
Acid from Israel; Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR
6944, 6945 (February 14, 1994). Thus, if the record evidence
demonstrates that, with respect to the production and sale of the
subject merchandise, the new company operates as the same business
entity as the predecessor company, the Department may assign the new
company the cash-deposit rate of its predecessor. See, e.g., Salmon
from Norway, 64 FR at 9980.
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(3), we preliminarily determine
that AMT is the successor-in-interest to AST. In its November 18, 2008
filing, AMT provided evidence supporting its claim to be the successor-
in-interest to AST. Specifically, it provided the following
documentation:
(1) A declaration of the executive vice president of AMT in which
the official states that the name change of the company from AST to AMT
did not result in changes in management, production, facilities,
supplier relationships or changes to the customer base;
(2) Certifications of incorporation of both AST and AMT filed with
the Thai Ministry of Commerce;
(3) Copies of tax identification cards for AST and AMT that show
the
[[Page 2049]]
companies were assigned the same taxpayer identification numbers;
(4) A statement from a Thai bank confirming the change of the
company account name from AST to AMT in August 2006;
(5) Company outlines dated before and after the name change that
demonstrate no changes in management or facilities between the two
points in time;
(6) A notice published by the European Union Commission recognizing
the name change from AST to AMT for antidumping-duty purposes; and
(7) Copies of letters AST sent to customers announcing the name
change.
In summary, AMT has presented evidence to establish a prima facie
case of its successorship status. AST's name change to AMT has not
changed the operations of the company in a meaningful way. AMT's
management, production facilities, supplier relationships, and customer
base are substantially unchanged from those of AST. The record evidence
demonstrates that the new entity essentially operates in the same
manner as the predecessor company. Consequently, we preliminarily
determine that AMT should be assigned the same antidumping-duty
treatment as AST, i.e., exclusion from the order. See Antidumping Duty
Order; Certain Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings From Thailand, 57
FR 29702 (July 6, 1992).
Public Comment
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary
results. Written comments may be submitted no later than 14 days after
the date of publication of these preliminary results. Rebuttals to
written comments, limited to issues raised in such comments, may be
filed no later than 21 days after the date of publication. The
Department will issue the final results of this changed-circumstances
review, which will include the results of its analysis raised in any
such written comments, no later than 270 days after the date on which
this review was initiated or within 45 days if all parties agree to our
preliminary results. See 19 CFR 351.216(e).
This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and
777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216 and 351.221.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-632 Filed 1-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
