Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review, 4529-4531 [2010-1783]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 18 / Thursday, January 28, 2010 / Notices mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: NMFS is required by the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), to develop plans for the conservation and survival of federally listed species, i.e., recovery plans. NMFS is announcing its intent to prepare a recovery plan for the Cook Inlet beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) and requests information from the public. DATES: All information must be received no later than 5 p.m. Alaska Time by March 29, 2010. ADDRESSES: Submit materials by any of the following methods: • E-mail: The mailbox address for submitting e-mail information for recovery planning is CIBRP@noaa.gov. Please include ‘‘Cook Inlet Beluga Recovery Plan Information’’ in the subject line of the e-mail. • Mail: Submit written comments and information to National Marine Fisheries Service, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802, ATTN: Ellen Sebastian. • Hand Delivery/Courier: National Marine Fisheries Service, 709 West 9th Street, Room 420, Juneau, AK 99802. Business hours are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. • Fax: (907) 586–7557. Please identify the fax comments as ‘‘Cook Inlet Beluga Recovery Plan Information.’’ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mandy Migura, Marine Mammal Specialist, Anchorage Field Office, (907) 271–1332. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Management responsibility for beluga whales in Alaska lies with the Secretary of Commerce and has been delegated to NMFS. As such, NMFS is charged with the recovery of Cook Inlet belugas, which are listed as endangered under the ESA. The recovery planning process is guided by the statutory language of section 4(f) of the ESA and NMFS policies. Recovery is the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to the ESA are no longer necessary. The ESA specifies that recovery plans must include: (1) a description of management actions as may be necessary to achieve the plan’s goals for the conservation and survival of the species; (2) objective, measurable criteria which, when met, would result in the species being removed from the list; and (3) estimates of time and costs required to achieve the plan’s goal and the intermediate steps towards that goal. VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:16 Jan 27, 2010 Jkt 220001 In an effort to expedite the recovery plan process, NMFS will work towards incorporating relevant portions of the final Conservation Plan for the Cook Inlet Beluga Whale into the draft Recovery Plan. Section 4(f) of the ESA, as amended in 1988, requires that public notice— and an opportunity for public review and comment—be provided during recovery plan development. NMFS is hereby soliciting relevant information on Cook Inlet beluga whales and their habitats. Upon completion, the draft Recovery Plan will be available for public review and comment through the publication of a Federal Register Notice. NMFS requests relevant information from the public during preparation of the draft Recovery Plan. Such information should address: (a) criteria for removing the Cook Inlet beluga whales from the list of threatened and endangered species; (b) factors that are presently limiting, or threaten to limit, the survival of the belugas; (c) actions to address limiting factors and threats; (d) estimates of time and cost to implement recovery actions; and (e) research, monitoring, and evaluation needs. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. Dated: January 22, 2010. Therese Conant, Deputy Chief, Division of Endangered Species, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2010–1769 Filed 1–27–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–549–502] Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 31, 2009, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of a semiannual new shipper review under the antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes (pipes and tubes) from Thailand. See Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review, 74 FR 44825 (August 31, 2009) (Preliminary Results). This new shipper review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise to the United States, PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 4529 Pacific Pipe Public Company Limited (Pacific Pipe). The period of review (POR) is March 1, 2008 through September 30, 2008. Subsequent to the Preliminary Results, we conducted verification and provided parties with an opportunity to comment. We received timely case and rebuttal briefs, and have made changes to our calculation as a result of verification and based on our analysis of the comments. Therefore, the final results differ from those published in the Department’s Preliminary Results. The final weighted-average dumping margin for the reviewed firm is listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of the Review.’’ DATES: Effective Date: January 28, 2010. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myrna Lobo, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2371. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On August 31, 2009, the Department published the preliminary results of a semiannual new shipper review under the antidumping duty order covering pipes and tubes from Thailand. See Preliminary Results. The domestic interested parties for this proceeding are Allied Tube & Conduit Corporation and Wheatland Tube Company (petitioners). On September 17, 2009, the Department issued a third supplemental questionnaire to Pacific Pipe in order to evaluate further the bona fide nature of Pacific Pipe’s U.S. sale and to seek clarification on sales information previously submitted. Pacific Pipe timely responded on September 29, 2009. The Department conducted a verification of Pacific Pipe in Bangkok, Thailand in October 2009 and issued a verification report. See Memorandum to File from Myrna Lobo, International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 6, Verification of the Sales Response of Pacific Pipe Public Company, Limited in the Antidumping New Shipper Review of Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand, dated November 5, 2009 (Verification Report). We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results and Verification Report. We received a timely filed case brief from Pacific Pipe and a timely filed rebuttal brief from petitioners. The Department did not receive a request for a hearing. On November 19, 2009, the Department published a notice E:\FR\FM\28JAN1.SGM 28JAN1 4530 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 18 / Thursday, January 28, 2010 / Notices extending the deadline for the final results to January 21, 2009. See Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review, 74 FR 59961 (November 19, 2009). mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Scope of the Order The products covered by this antidumping order are certain welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand. The subject merchandise has an outside diameter of 0.375 inches or more, but not exceeding 16 inches. These products, which are commonly referred to in the industry as ‘‘standard pipe’’ or ‘‘structural tubing,’’ are hereinafter designated as ‘‘pipes and tubes.’’ The merchandise is classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers 7306.30.1000, 7306.30.5025, 7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040, 7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5085, and 7306.30.5090. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and purposes of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), our written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. Bona Fides Analysis of U.S. Sale In the Preliminary Results, we determined that Pacific Pipe’s U.S. sale was a bona fide transaction. See Memorandum to Dana Mermelstein, Program Manager, from Myrna Lobo, Case Analyst, regarding Bona Fide Nature of the Sale in the Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Pacific Pipe Public Company, Limited, dated August 24, 2009 (Bona Fides Preliminary Memorandum). The Department also stated it would continue to examine, through the remainder of the review, all factors relating to the bona fides of the sale. We have further examined the bona fides of Pacific Pipe’s U.S. sale, and for these final results we continue to find the sale to be a bona fide transaction. For further details, see Memorandum to Dana Mermelstein, Program Manager, from Myrna Lobo, Case Analyst, Bona Fide Analysis of Pacific Pipe’s U.S. Sale for the Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Pacific Pipe Public Company, Limited, dated concurrently with this notice (Bona Fides Final Memorandum). Verification As provided in 19 CFR 351.307(b)(1)(iv), the Department conducted verification of Pacific Pipe’s VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:16 Jan 27, 2010 Jkt 220001 questionnaire responses at the company’s offices in Bangkok, Thailand from October 5 through 8, 2009. Our verification results are detailed in the Verification Report. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in Pacific Pipe’s case brief and petitioners’ rebuttal brief are addressed in the Memorandum to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from John M. Andersen, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand—Pacific Pipe Public Company, Limited: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results, dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum), which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues raised, all of which are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is appended to this notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 1117 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at http:// www.trade.gov/ia/. The paper copy and electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on the results of verification and our analysis of the comments received from the interested parties, we have made changes where appropriate, to the margin calculation for Pacific Pipe. Specifically, we have excluded certain sales from the margin calculation which we consider to be scrap sales; we have included expenses incurred on U.S. packing and other U.S. direct selling expenses (such as certain bank charges) identified at verification; and finally, we have combined ASTM A53 Grade A and Grade B sales in the home market, consistent with the product matching criteria. For a complete discussion of the changes which the Department has made to the margin calculation for Pacific Pipe, see Memorandum to Dana Mermelstein, Program Manager, from Myrna Lobo, Case Analyst, Analysis of Pacific Pipe Public Company, Limited, for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Circular Welded PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand for the period 03/01/2008 through 09/30/2008, dated January 21, 2010 (Final Analysis Memorandum). A public version of this memorandum is on file in the CRU. Final Results of the Review We determine the following percentage weighted-average margin exists for the period March 1, 2008 through September 30, 2008: Manufacturer/exporter Margin (percent) Pacific Pipe Public Co., Ltd ...... 5.14 Disclosure We will disclose the calculations used in our analysis to parties to these proceedings within five days of the date of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.224(b). Assessment The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), the Department normally calculates an assessment rate for each importer of the subject merchandise covered by the review. Pacific Pipe reported the entered value of its sale of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated importer-specific duty assessments rates by dividing the dumping margin found on the subject merchandise examined by the entered value of such merchandise for normal customs duty purposes. Where the assessment rate is above de minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess duties on all entries of subject merchandise by that importer. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of these final results of review. Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of this notice of final results of new shipper review for all shipments of circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For subject merchandise produced and exported by Pacific Pipe, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in the final results of this new shipper review; (2) if the exporter is not a firm E:\FR\FM\28JAN1.SGM 28JAN1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 18 / Thursday, January 28, 2010 / Notices covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair value 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 (3) the cash-deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be the allothers rate of 15.67 percent, which is the all-others rate established in the less than fair value investigation. See Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 51 FR 3384 (January 27, 1986). These cash deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further notice. Notification to Importers This notice also 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 doubled antidumping duties. mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation that is subject to sanction. The final results of this new shipper review are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214. Dated: January 21, 2010. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix Comments in the Issues and Decision Memorandum Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Use Invoice Date as the Date of Sale for the U.S. Sale in the Final Results. VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:16 Jan 27, 2010 Jkt 220001 Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Continue to Treat Home Market Pre-Sale Freight and Warehousing Expenses as Movement Expenses. Comment 3: Whether Pacific Pipe Has Established that Transportation Rates Paid to its Affiliated Carrier Are at Arm’s Length. [FR Doc. 2010–1783 Filed 1–27–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–965] Drill Pipe from the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations EFFECTIVE DATE: January 28, 2010. Toni Dach or Scot T. Fullerton, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, (202) 482–1655 or (202) 482–1386, respectively; Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 31, 20091, the Department of Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’) received a petition concerning imports of drill pipe from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) filed in proper form by VAM Drilling USA, Inc., Texas Steel Conversion, Inc., Rotary Drilling Tools, TMK IPSCO, and the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL–CIO-CLC (‘‘Petitioners’’). See ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Drill Pipe from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated December 31, 2009 (‘‘Petition’’). On January 6, 2010, the Department issued additional requests for information and clarification of certain areas of the Petition. Petitioners timely filed additional information on January 11, 2010. See ‘‘Drill Pipe from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated January 11, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1 The Petitioners filed the Petition at the International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’) after 12:00 noon on December 30, 2009, therefore, pursuant to 19 CFR 207.10(a), the ITC deemed the Petition to have been filed on the next business day, December 31, 2009. Section 732(b)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’) requires simultaneous filings of antidumping duty petitions with the Department and the ITC, therefore, we deem the Petition to have been filed with the Department on December 31, 2009. This file date will change the initiation date from January 19, 2009, to January 20, 2009. See Memorandum to Ronald K. Lorentzen, entitled ‘‘Decision Memorandum Concerning Petitions Filing Date,’’ dated concurrently with this checklist. PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 4531 2010 (‘‘Supplement to the PRC AD Petition’’). In addition, Petitioners further timely filed additional information pertaining to general issues in the Petition on January 11, 2010. See ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Drill Pipe from the PRC: Response to Department’s Letter of January 6, 2010,’’ dated January 11, 2010 (‘‘Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions’’). On January 14, 2010, the Department issued a second request for information and clarification of certain areas of the Petition. Petitioners timely filed additional information on January 15, 2010. See ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Response to the Department’s Letter of January 14, 2010,’’ dated January 15, 2010 (‘‘Second Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions’’); see also ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Drill Pipe from the PRC: Response to Department’s Letter of January 14, 2010: Additional Affidavit, dated January 15, 2010 (‘‘Third Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions’’). On January 19, 2010, Petitioners filed further clarifications related to general issues. See ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Drill Pipe from the PRC: Response to the Department’s letter of January 14, 2010: Additional Affidavit,’’ dated January 19, 2010 (‘‘Fourth Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions’’). In addition, on both January 15, and January 19, 2010, we received comments filed by Lehnardt & Lehnardt, LLC, on behalf of Downhole Pipe & Equipment, LP (‘‘Downhole Pipe’’) and Command Energy Services International (‘‘Command Energy’’), U.S. importers of drill pipe from China. Downhole Pipe and Command Energy are interested parties as defined by section 771(9)(A) of the Act. The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is April 1, 2009, through September 30, 2009. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1). In accordance with section 732(b) of the Act, Petitioners allege that imports of drill pipe from the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value, within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States. The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because Petitioners are an interested party, as defined in section 771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act, and have demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping duty investigation that Petitioners are requesting the Department to initiate E:\FR\FM\28JAN1.SGM 28JAN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 18 (Thursday, January 28, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4529-4531]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-1783]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-549-502]


Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand: Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On August 31, 2009, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the preliminary results of a semiannual new 
shipper review under the antidumping duty order on circular welded 
carbon steel pipes and tubes (pipes and tubes) from Thailand. See 
Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Preliminary 
Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review, 74 FR 44825 (August 31, 
2009) (Preliminary Results). This new shipper review covers one 
producer/exporter of the subject merchandise to the United States, 
Pacific Pipe Public Company Limited (Pacific Pipe). The period of 
review (POR) is March 1, 2008 through September 30, 2008. Subsequent to 
the Preliminary Results, we conducted verification and provided parties 
with an opportunity to comment. We received timely case and rebuttal 
briefs, and have made changes to our calculation as a result of 
verification and based on our analysis of the comments. Therefore, the 
final results differ from those published in the Department's 
Preliminary Results. The final weighted-average dumping margin for the 
reviewed firm is listed below in the section entitled ``Final Results 
of the Review.''

DATES: Effective Date: January 28, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myrna Lobo, AD/CVD Operations, Office 
6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2371.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 31, 2009, the Department published the preliminary 
results of a semiannual new shipper review under the antidumping duty 
order covering pipes and tubes from Thailand. See Preliminary Results. 
The domestic interested parties for this proceeding are Allied Tube & 
Conduit Corporation and Wheatland Tube Company (petitioners).
    On September 17, 2009, the Department issued a third supplemental 
questionnaire to Pacific Pipe in order to evaluate further the bona 
fide nature of Pacific Pipe's U.S. sale and to seek clarification on 
sales information previously submitted. Pacific Pipe timely responded 
on September 29, 2009. The Department conducted a verification of 
Pacific Pipe in Bangkok, Thailand in October 2009 and issued a 
verification report. See Memorandum to File from Myrna Lobo, 
International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 6, Verification of the 
Sales Response of Pacific Pipe Public Company, Limited in the 
Antidumping New Shipper Review of Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes 
and Tubes from Thailand, dated November 5, 2009 (Verification Report). 
We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results and 
Verification Report. We received a timely filed case brief from Pacific 
Pipe and a timely filed rebuttal brief from petitioners. The Department 
did not receive a request for a hearing.
    On November 19, 2009, the Department published a notice

[[Page 4530]]

extending the deadline for the final results to January 21, 2009. See 
Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Extension 
of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review, 
74 FR 59961 (November 19, 2009).

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this antidumping order are certain welded 
carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand. The subject merchandise has 
an outside diameter of 0.375 inches or more, but not exceeding 16 
inches. These products, which are commonly referred to in the industry 
as ``standard pipe'' or ``structural tubing,'' are hereinafter 
designated as ``pipes and tubes.'' The merchandise is classifiable 
under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item 
numbers 7306.30.1000, 7306.30.5025, 7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040, 
7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5085, and 7306.30.5090. Although the HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and purposes of U.S. Customs 
and Border Protection (CBP), our written description of the scope of 
the order is dispositive.

Bona Fides Analysis of U.S. Sale

    In the Preliminary Results, we determined that Pacific Pipe's U.S. 
sale was a bona fide transaction. See Memorandum to Dana Mermelstein, 
Program Manager, from Myrna Lobo, Case Analyst, regarding Bona Fide 
Nature of the Sale in the Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of 
Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Pacific 
Pipe Public Company, Limited, dated August 24, 2009 (Bona Fides 
Preliminary Memorandum). The Department also stated it would continue 
to examine, through the remainder of the review, all factors relating 
to the bona fides of the sale. We have further examined the bona fides 
of Pacific Pipe's U.S. sale, and for these final results we continue to 
find the sale to be a bona fide transaction. For further details, see 
Memorandum to Dana Mermelstein, Program Manager, from Myrna Lobo, Case 
Analyst, Bona Fide Analysis of Pacific Pipe's U.S. Sale for the Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Circular Welded 
Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Pacific Pipe Public 
Company, Limited, dated concurrently with this notice (Bona Fides Final 
Memorandum).

Verification

    As provided in 19 CFR 351.307(b)(1)(iv), the Department conducted 
verification of Pacific Pipe's questionnaire responses at the company's 
offices in Bangkok, Thailand from October 5 through 8, 2009. Our 
verification results are detailed in the Verification Report.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in Pacific Pipe's case brief and petitioners' 
rebuttal brief are addressed in the Memorandum to Ronald K. Lorentzen, 
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from John M. 
Andersen, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Operations, Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of 
Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand--Pacific 
Pipe Public Company, Limited: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 
Final Results, dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision 
Memorandum), which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the 
issues raised, all of which are addressed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum, is appended to this notice. Parties can find a complete 
discussion of all issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs and the 
corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on 
file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 1117 of the main 
Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the 
Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at 
http://www.trade.gov/ia/. The paper copy and electronic version of the 
Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on the results of verification and our analysis of the 
comments received from the interested parties, we have made changes 
where appropriate, to the margin calculation for Pacific Pipe. 
Specifically, we have excluded certain sales from the margin 
calculation which we consider to be scrap sales; we have included 
expenses incurred on U.S. packing and other U.S. direct selling 
expenses (such as certain bank charges) identified at verification; and 
finally, we have combined ASTM A53 Grade A and Grade B sales in the 
home market, consistent with the product matching criteria. For a 
complete discussion of the changes which the Department has made to the 
margin calculation for Pacific Pipe, see Memorandum to Dana 
Mermelstein, Program Manager, from Myrna Lobo, Case Analyst, Analysis 
of Pacific Pipe Public Company, Limited, for the Final Results of the 
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Circular Welded Carbon Steel 
Pipes and Tubes from Thailand for the period 03/01/2008 through 09/30/
2008, dated January 21, 2010 (Final Analysis Memorandum). A public 
version of this memorandum is on file in the CRU.

Final Results of the Review

    We determine the following percentage weighted-average margin 
exists for the period March 1, 2008 through September 30, 2008:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Margin
                   Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific Pipe Public Co., Ltd..............................         5.14
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations used in our analysis to parties 
to these proceedings within five days of the date of publication of 
this notice. See 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Assessment

    The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries. In accordance with 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), the Department normally 
calculates an assessment rate for each importer of the subject 
merchandise covered by the review. Pacific Pipe reported the entered 
value of its sale of subject merchandise to the United States during 
the POR. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have 
calculated importer-specific duty assessments rates by dividing the 
dumping margin found on the subject merchandise examined by the entered 
value of such merchandise for normal customs duty purposes. Where the 
assessment rate is above de minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess 
duties on all entries of subject merchandise by that importer. The 
Department intends to issue assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 
days after publication of these final results of review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of this notice of final results of new shipper review for 
all shipments of circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes entered, 
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of 
publication, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For 
subject merchandise produced and exported by Pacific Pipe, the cash 
deposit rate will be the rate established in the final results of this 
new shipper review; (2) if the exporter is not a firm

[[Page 4531]]

covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair 
value 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 (3) the cash-deposit rate for all 
other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be the all-others 
rate of 15.67 percent, which is the all-others rate established in the 
less than fair value investigation. See Circular Welded Carbon Steel 
Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Final Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value, 51 FR 3384 (January 27, 1986). These cash deposit 
requirements shall remain in effect until further notice.

Notification to Importers

    This notice also 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 doubled antidumping duties.

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues 
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the 
proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of 
APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby 
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO 
is a violation that is subject to sanction.
    The final results of this new shipper review are issued and 
published in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of the 
Act and 19 CFR 351.214.

    Dated: January 21, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix

Comments in the Issues and Decision Memorandum

Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Use Invoice Date as the 
Date of Sale for the U.S. Sale in the Final Results.
Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Continue to Treat Home 
Market Pre-Sale Freight and Warehousing Expenses as Movement 
Expenses.
Comment 3: Whether Pacific Pipe Has Established that Transportation 
Rates Paid to its Affiliated Carrier Are at Arm's Length.
[FR Doc. 2010-1783 Filed 1-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P