Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 64696-64699 [2010-26424]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
64696
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2010 / Notices
consists of a distribution of
polyphosphate chain lengths. It is a
collection of sodium polyphosphate
polymers built on repeating NaPO3
units. Sodium hexametaphosphate has a
P2O5 content from 60 to 71 percent.
Alternate names for sodium
hexametaphosphate include the
following: Calgon; Calgon S; Glassy
Sodium Phosphate; Sodium
Polyphosphate, Glassy; Metaphosphoric
Acid; Sodium Salt; Sodium Acid
Metaphosphate; Graham’s Salt; Sodium
Hex; Polyphosphoric Acid, Sodium Salt;
Glass H; Hexaphos; Sodaphos; Vitrafos;
and BAC–N–FOS. Sodium
hexametaphosphate is typically sold as
a white powder or granule (crushed)
and may also be sold in the form of
sheets (glass) or as a liquid solution. It
is imported under heading
2835.39.5000, HTSUS. It may also be
imported as a blend or mixture under
heading 3824.90.3900, HTSUS. The
American Chemical Society, Chemical
Abstract Service (‘‘CAS’’) has assigned
the name ‘‘Polyphosphoric Acid,
Sodium Salt’’ to sodium
hexametaphosphate. The CAS registry
number is 68915–31–1. However,
sodium hexametaphosphate is
commonly identified by CAS No.
10124–56–8 in the market. For purposes
of the review, the narrative description
is dispositive, not the tariff heading,
CAS registry number or CAS name.
The product covered by this review
includes sodium hexametaphosphate in
all grades, whether food grade or
technical grade. The product covered by
this review includes sodium
hexametaphosphate without regard to
chain length i.e., whether regular or
long chain. The product covered by this
review includes sodium
hexametaphosphate without regard to
physical form, whether glass, sheet,
crushed, granule, powder, fines, or other
form, and whether or not in solution.
However, the product covered by this
review does not include sodium
hexametaphosphate when imported in a
blend with other materials in which the
sodium hexametaphosphate accounts
for less than 50 percent by volume of
the finished product.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Final Results of Review
The weighted-average dumping
margin for the POR is as follows:
Manufacturer/exporter
Hubei Xingfa .............................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:17 Oct 19, 2010
Assessment
Upon issuance of the final results, the
Department will determine, and 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 the final results of
review. Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), we will calculate
importer-specific (or customer) ad
valorem duty assessment rates based on
the ratio of the total amount of the
dumping margins calculated for the
examined sales to the total entered
value of those same sales. In accordance
with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will
instruct CBP to liquidate, without regard
to antidumping duties, all entries of
subject merchandise during the POR for
which the importer-specific assessment
rate is zero or de minimis.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of these final results of this
administrative review for all shipments
of the subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date, as provided for by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the
exporters listed above, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate established in these
final results of review (except, if the rate
is zero or de minimis, i.e., less than 0.5
percent, a zero cash deposit rate will be
required for that company); (2) for
previously investigated or reviewed PRC
and non-PRC exporters not listed above
that have separate rates, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the
exporter-specific rate published for the
most recent period; (3) for all PRC
exporters of subject merchandise which
have not been found to be entitled to a
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will
be the PRC-wide rate of 188.05 percent;
and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of
subject merchandise which have not
received their own rate, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate applicable to the
PRC exporters that supplied that nonPRC exporter. These deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until publication of the
final results of the next administrative
review.
Reimbursement of Duties
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)
to file a certificate regarding the
reimbursement of antidumping duties
82.62
prior to liquidation of the relevant
Weighted
average
margin
(percent)
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
entries during this POR. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
result in the Department’s presumption
that reimbursement of antidumping
duties has occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping
duties.
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/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
which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing this
administrative review and notice in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i) of the Act.
Dated: October 12, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I—Issues & Decision
Memorandum
Comment 1: Inputs to Inputs—Electricity
Comment 2: Date of Sale
Comment 3: Surrogate Values
A. Sodium Pyrophosphate
B. Coal
C. Coke
D. Phosphate Slag
E. Labor
Comment 4: Surrogate Financial Ratios
Comment 5: Placement of By-products in the
Normal Value Calculation
[FR Doc. 2010–26458 Filed 10–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–549–502]
Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes
and Tubes From Thailand: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 13, 2010, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on circular
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2010 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
welded carbon steel pipes and tubes
(pipes and tubes) from Thailand. The
review was requested by Allied Tube
and Conduit Corporation (Allied Tube),
by Wheatland Tube Company
(Wheatland) (collectively, domestic
interested parties or petitioners), and by
Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Company
Ltd. (Saha Thai) (respondent). This
review covers one producer/exporter of
the subject merchandise, Saha Thai. The
period of review (POR) is March 1, 2008
through February 28, 2009. Based on the
results of verification and our analysis
of the comments received, we have
made changes to the preliminary results,
which are discussed in the ‘‘Changes
Since the Preliminary Results’’ section
below. For the final dumping margins,
see the ‘‘Final Results of Review’’ section
below.
DATES: Effective Date: October 20, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Myrna Lobo or Jacqueline Arrowsmith,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–2371 or (202) 482–
5255, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On April 13, 2010, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
preliminary results of administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on pipes and tubes from Thailand. See
Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and
Tubes from Thailand: Preliminary
Results and Rescission, in Part, of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 75 FR 18788 (April 13, 2010)
(Preliminary Results).
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department stated that its decision to
apply the quarterly cost methodology
and to perform quarterly price-to-price
comparisons raised a novel issue with
respect to the level of trade (LOT)
analysis of the pattern of price
differences and any possible LOT
adjustment warranted by that analysis.
The Department, therefore, invited
parties to comment on whether the
application of the quarterly cost
methodology necessarily requires an
evaluation on a quarterly basis of the
pattern of price differences and how any
such differences should be analyzed.
Parties were also invited to comment on
whether, if a pattern of price differences
is found to exist, any LOT adjustment
should be done on a yearly basis or on
a quarterly basis. On April 23, 2010, the
Department received comments from
Saha Thai.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:17 Oct 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
On May 4, 2010 we revised the due
dates for comments on the Preliminary
Results, due to the anticipated timing of
verification, and informed parties of the
same. The Department conducted a
verification of Saha Thai’s questionnaire
responses in Bangkok, Thailand, from
July 12, 2010 through July 23, 2010. See
‘‘Verification’’ section below.
On August 20, 2010 we informed
parties of the deadlines to comment on
the Preliminary Results and verification
reports and requested Saha Thai to
submit revised sales databases in view
of the minor corrections presented at
verification. On August 23, 2010 Saha
Thai submitted its revised sales
databases. On August 27, 2010 we
received a timely case brief from Saha
Thai, and on September 1, 2010, we
received a timely rebuttal brief from
Allied Tube on behalf of domestic
interested parties. The Department did
not receive a request for a hearing.
On May 21, 2010, the Department
extended the deadline for issuing the
final results until no later than October
12, 2010. See Circular Welded Carbon
Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand:
Extension of Time Limit for Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 75 FR 28557
(May 21, 2010). On October 12, 2010,
the Department tolled the deadline for
the final results by one day, to October
13, 2010, due to the occurrence of a fire
and the closure of the main Commerce
building on Friday, October 8, 2010.
Period of Review
The period of review (POR) is March
1, 2008 through February 28, 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 the
convenience and purposes of CBP, our
written description of the scope is
dispositive.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64697
Act’’), from July 12 through July 23,
2010, the Department verified the cost
and sales information submitted by
Saha Thai in its questionnaire responses
provided during the course of this
review. We used standard verification
procedures including examination of
relevant accounting and production
records, and original source documents
provided by the respondent. See
Memorandum from Heidi Schriefer,
Senior Accountant, to The File,
‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of
Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Company,
Limited, in the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review of Circular
Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes
from Thailand,’’ dated August 17, 2010
(‘‘Cost Verification Report’’); see also
Memorandum from Jacqueline
Arrowsmith and Myrna Lobo,
International Trade Compliance
Analysts, to The File, ‘‘Verification of
the Sales Response of Saha Thai Steel
Pipe (Public) Co., Ltd. in the
Antidumping Review of Circular
Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes
from Thailand,’’ dated August 18, 2010
(‘‘Sales Verification Report’’). The public
versions of both verification reports are
on file in the Central Records Unit
(CRU), Room 7046 of the main
Commerce Building.
Analysis of Comments Received
The issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this
administrative review are addressed in
the Memorandum from Susan H.
Kuhbach, Acting Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, to
Ronald K. Lorentzen, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration,
‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for
the Final Results of the Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order
on Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes
and Tubes from Thailand’’ (Decision
Memorandum), dated concurrently with
this notice and which is hereby adopted
by this notice. A list of the issues
addressed in the Decision Memorandum
is appended to this notice. The Decision
Memorandum is on file in the CRU, and
can be accessed directly on the Web at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy
and electronic version of the Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on the results of verification
and our analysis of comments received,
we have made adjustments to our
margin calculations. At the preliminary
results, we made an adjustment under
section 773(f)(2) of the Act, the
‘‘transactions disregarded rule,’’ to Saha
Thai’s purchases of coils from an
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
64698
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2010 / Notices
affiliated party. We have now
determined that record evidence shows
that these transactions were made at
arm’s length prices, and thus we are not
making any adjustment under section
773(f)(2) of the Act for the final results.
In addition, we have revised the general
and administrative and financial
expense rates by no longer adjusting the
cost of goods sold denominator to reflect
an adjustment for the transactions
disregarded rule. Further, we have
revised the financial expense rate
calculation from the preliminary results
to exclude interest income generated
from long-term assets. We have revised
the calculation of the total cost of
manufacturing from the preliminary
results to exclude the ‘‘other materials’’
(‘‘OTHMAT’’) field. We have determined
that this field serves only as a subtotal
of other material costs; therefore, the
inclusion of both the individual other
material cost fields and the ‘‘OTHMAT’’
field double counts these costs. We have
also revised the calculation of the cost
of production to exclude the ‘‘DUTY’’
field because these costs were already
included in the direct materials costs
field. We have also made adjustments to
hot-rolled coil costs, conversion costs,
and other material costs based on our
verification findings.
In addition, based on the results of
verification and the minor corrections
reported by Saha Thai at verification,
there are changes to the sales databases
including changes to U.S. sales ship
dates and certain U.S. and home market
movement and selling expenses, and the
correction of one reseller’s home market
prices. These adjustments are discussed
in detail in the Decision Memorandum;
and/or Memorandum to File from
Myrna Lobo, ‘‘Analysis of Saha Thai
Steel Pipe (Public) Company, Ltd., for
the Final Results of the Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review of Circular
Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes
from Thailand for the period 03/01/2008
through 02/28/2009,’’ dated
concurrently with this notice (‘‘Final
Results Analysis Memorandum’’); and/
or Memorandum to Neal M. Halper,
Director, Office of Accounting, from
Heidi K. Schriefer, Senior Accountant,
‘‘Cost of Production and Constructed
Value Calculation Adjustments for the
Final Results—Saha Thai Steel Pipe
(Public) Company, Ltd.,’’ also dated
concurrently with this notice, all of
which are on file in the CRU.
Level of Trade (LOT)
In the Preliminary Results we
determined that Saha Thai had two
distinct levels of trade (LOT 1 and LOT
2) in the home market, and a single LOT
in the U.S. market which matched LOT
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:17 Oct 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
1 in the home market. For U.S. sales for
which there is not a match in the home
market at LOT 1, that are matched with
LOT 2 sales, we must consider whether
an LOT adjustment is warranted when
the difference in LOT is demonstrated to
affect price comparability, based on a
pattern of consistent price differences.
However, our decision to apply the
quarterly cost methodology raised a
novel issue with respect to the LOT
analysis of pattern of price differences
and any possible LOT adjustment based
on that analysis. We therefore invited
parties to comment on this issue and we
received comments from Saha Thai
recommending that the Department
calculate a POR-wide LOT adjustment
even when a quarterly methodology had
been used to calculate costs and make
price to price comparisons. However,
after incorporating all the changes to the
cost and sales information necessitated
by verification, we find that all of Saha
Thai’s U.S. market sales are matched to
sales in the home market at the same
level of trade. Therefore, there is no
basis for conducting a level of trade
analysis and an LOT adjustment is
unwarranted.
Final Results of Review
As a result of our review, we
determine that the following weightedaverage margin exists for the period of
March 1, 2008 through February 28,
2009:
Manufacturer/
exporter
Weighted-average
margin (percent)
Saha Thai Steel
Pipe (Public)
Company, Ltd ....
2.13
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, and
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties
on all appropriate entries. Pursuant to
19 CFR 351.212(b)(1) of the
Department’s regulations, the
Department calculates an assessment
rate for each importer of the subject
merchandise. The Department intends
to issue appropriate assessment
instructions directly to CBP 15 days
after the date of publication of these
final results of review.
The Department clarified its
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This
clarification will apply to entries of
subject merchandise during the period
of review produced by the company
included in these final results of review
for which the reviewed company did
not know their merchandise was
destined for the United States. In such
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
instances, we will instruct CBP to
liquidate unreviewed entries at the allothers rate from the investigation if
there is no rate for the intermediate
company involved in the transaction.
For a full discussion of this clarification,
see Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Proceedings: Assessment of
Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May
6, 2003).
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements
will be effective upon publication of the
final results of this administrative
review for all shipments of subject
merchandise entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or
after the publication date of these final
results, as provided by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the
company covered by this review, the
cash deposit rate will be the rate listed
above; (2) for merchandise exported by
producers 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
producer 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 producer is, the
cash deposit rate will be that established
for the producer of the merchandise in
these final results of review or in the
most recent final results in which that
producer participated; and, (4) if neither
the exporter nor the producer is a firm
covered in this review or in any
previous segment of this proceeding, the
cash deposit rate will be 15.67 percent,
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).
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)
of the Department’s regulations 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 in the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2010 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Whereas, the Foreign-Trade Zones Act
provides for ‘‘* * * the establishment
* * * of foreign-trade zones in ports of
entry of the United States, to expedite
and encourage foreign commerce, and
for other purposes,’’ and authorizes the
Foreign-Trade Zones Board to grant to
qualified corporations the privilege of
establishing foreign-trade zones in or
adjacent to U.S. Customs and Border
Protection ports of entry;
Whereas, the Board’s regulations (15
CFR Part 400) provide for the
establishment of special-purpose
subzones when existing zone facilities
cannot serve the specific use involved,
and when the activity results in a
significant public benefit and is in the
public interest;
Whereas, the New River Economic
Development Alliance, Inc., grantee of
Foreign-Trade Zone 238, has made
application to the Board for authority to
establish a special-purpose subzone at
the warehouse/distribution facilities of
VF Corporation, located in Martinsville,
Virginia (FTZ Docket 54–2009, filed 12/
02/2009);
Whereas, notice inviting public
comment has been given in the Federal
Register (74 FR 66621–66622, 12/16/
2009) and the application has been
processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and
the Board’s regulations; and,
Whereas, the Board adopts the
findings and recommendations of the
examiner’s report, and finds that the
requirements of the FTZ Act and
Board’s regulations are satisfied, and
that the proposal is in the public
interest;
Now, therefore, the Board hereby
grants authority for subzone status for
activity related to apparel, footwear and
luggage warehousing and distribution at
the facilities of VF Corporation, located
in Martinsville, Virginia (Subzone
238A), as described in the application
and Federal Register notice, subject to
the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations,
including Section 400.28.
Foreign-Trade Zones Board
Signed at Washington, DC this 7th day of
October 2010.
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Orders
This notice is the only reminder to
parties subject to the administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under the APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3) of the
Department’s regulations. 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 the terms of an
APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these
final results and this notice in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: October 13, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I—Issues in Decision
Memorandum Circular Welded Carbon
Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review for the Period of
Review: 3/1/2008—2/28/2009
Comment 1: Analysis of Transactions With
an Affiliated Supplier
Comment 2: Treatment of Unpaid Exempted
Duties
Comment 3: Use of Single Average Coil Costs
Comment 4: Use of Lower of Cost or Market
(LCM) Write-Down for Raw Materials
Comment 5: Treatment of LCM Write-Downs
When Using the Alternative Cost
Methodology
Comment 6: Annualizing Costs Over the
Entire Cost Reporting Period
Comment 7: Total Cost Reconciliation
Comment 8: Treatment of Paid Import Duties
on Raw Materials
Comment 9: Treatment of Other Material
Costs
Comment 10: Level of Trade Adjustment
Comment 11: Use of the Zeroing
Methodology
[FR Doc. 2010–26424 Filed 10–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
[Order No. 1714]
Grant of Authority for Subzone Status;
VF Corporation (Apparel, Footwear and
Luggage Distribution), Martinsville, VA
Pursuant to its authority under the
Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18,
1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u),
the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the
Board) adopts the following Order:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:17 Oct 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, Alternate Chairman, ForeignTrade Zones Board.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–26418 Filed 10–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64699
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration
Commerce Spectrum Management
Advisory Committee Meeting
National Telecommunications
and Information Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
AGENCY:
This notice announces a
public meeting of the Commerce
Spectrum Management Advisory
Committee (Committee). The Committee
provides advice to the Assistant
Secretary of Commerce for
Communications and Information on
spectrum management policy matters.
DATES: The meeting will be held on
November 8, 2010, from 10 a.m. to 1
p.m., Eastern Standard Time.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue, NW., Room 4830,
Washington, DC. Public comments may
be mailed to Commerce Spectrum
Management Advisory Committee,
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration, 1401
Constitution Avenue, NW., Room 4725,
Washington, DC 20230, or e-mailed to
spectrumadvisory@ntia.doc.gov.
SUMMARY:
Joe
Gattuso, Designated Federal Officer, at
(202) 482–0977 or
jgattuso@ntia.doc.gov; and/or visit
NTIA’s Web site at https://
www.ntia.doc.gov/advisory/spectrum.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: The Committee provides
advice to the Assistant Secretary of
Commerce for Communications and
Information on needed reforms to
domestic spectrum policies and
management in order to: License radio
frequencies in a way that maximizes
their public benefits; keep wireless
networks open to innovation; and make
wireless services available to all
Americans (see charter, at https://www.
ntia.doc.gov/advisory/spectrum/csmac_
charter.html). This Committee is subject
to the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, and is
consistent with the National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration Act, 47 U.S.C. 904(b).
The Committee functions solely as an
advisory body in compliance with the
FACA. For more information about the
Committee visit: https://www.ntia.doc.
gov/advisory/spectrum.
Matters to be Considered: The
Committee will hear presentations on
issues and will receive status reports
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 202 (Wednesday, October 20, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64696-64699]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-26424]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-549-502]
Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 13, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
published the preliminary results of administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on circular
[[Page 64697]]
welded carbon steel pipes and tubes (pipes and tubes) from Thailand.
The review was requested by Allied Tube and Conduit Corporation (Allied
Tube), by Wheatland Tube Company (Wheatland) (collectively, domestic
interested parties or petitioners), and by Saha Thai Steel Pipe
(Public) Company Ltd. (Saha Thai) (respondent). This review covers one
producer/exporter of the subject merchandise, Saha Thai. The period of
review (POR) is March 1, 2008 through February 28, 2009. Based on the
results of verification and our analysis of the comments received, we
have made changes to the preliminary results, which are discussed in
the ``Changes Since the Preliminary Results'' section below. For the
final dumping margins, see the ``Final Results of Review'' section
below.
DATES: Effective Date: October 20, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myrna Lobo or Jacqueline Arrowsmith,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2371 or (202)
482-5255, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On April 13, 2010, the Department published in the Federal Register
the preliminary results of administrative review of the antidumping
duty order on pipes and tubes from Thailand. See Circular Welded Carbon
Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Preliminary Results and
Rescission, in Part, of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR
18788 (April 13, 2010) (Preliminary Results).
In the Preliminary Results, the Department stated that its decision
to apply the quarterly cost methodology and to perform quarterly price-
to-price comparisons raised a novel issue with respect to the level of
trade (LOT) analysis of the pattern of price differences and any
possible LOT adjustment warranted by that analysis. The Department,
therefore, invited parties to comment on whether the application of the
quarterly cost methodology necessarily requires an evaluation on a
quarterly basis of the pattern of price differences and how any such
differences should be analyzed. Parties were also invited to comment on
whether, if a pattern of price differences is found to exist, any LOT
adjustment should be done on a yearly basis or on a quarterly basis. On
April 23, 2010, the Department received comments from Saha Thai.
On May 4, 2010 we revised the due dates for comments on the
Preliminary Results, due to the anticipated timing of verification, and
informed parties of the same. The Department conducted a verification
of Saha Thai's questionnaire responses in Bangkok, Thailand, from July
12, 2010 through July 23, 2010. See ``Verification'' section below.
On August 20, 2010 we informed parties of the deadlines to comment
on the Preliminary Results and verification reports and requested Saha
Thai to submit revised sales databases in view of the minor corrections
presented at verification. On August 23, 2010 Saha Thai submitted its
revised sales databases. On August 27, 2010 we received a timely case
brief from Saha Thai, and on September 1, 2010, we received a timely
rebuttal brief from Allied Tube on behalf of domestic interested
parties. The Department did not receive a request for a hearing.
On May 21, 2010, the Department extended the deadline for issuing
the final results until no later than October 12, 2010. See Circular
Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Extension of Time
Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75
FR 28557 (May 21, 2010). On October 12, 2010, the Department tolled the
deadline for the final results by one day, to October 13, 2010, due to
the occurrence of a fire and the closure of the main Commerce building
on Friday, October 8, 2010.
Period of Review
The period of review (POR) is March 1, 2008 through February 28,
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 the convenience and purposes of CBP, our
written description of the scope is dispositive.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(``the Act''), from July 12 through July 23, 2010, the Department
verified the cost and sales information submitted by Saha Thai in its
questionnaire responses provided during the course of this review. We
used standard verification procedures including examination of relevant
accounting and production records, and original source documents
provided by the respondent. See Memorandum from Heidi Schriefer, Senior
Accountant, to The File, ``Verification of the Cost Response of Saha
Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Company, Limited, in the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review of Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes
from Thailand,'' dated August 17, 2010 (``Cost Verification Report'');
see also Memorandum from Jacqueline Arrowsmith and Myrna Lobo,
International Trade Compliance Analysts, to The File, ``Verification of
the Sales Response of Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Co., Ltd. in the
Antidumping Review of Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from
Thailand,'' dated August 18, 2010 (``Sales Verification Report''). The
public versions of both verification reports are on file in the Central
Records Unit (CRU), Room 7046 of the main Commerce Building.
Analysis of Comments Received
The issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this administrative review are addressed in the Memorandum from Susan
H. Kuhbach, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum
for the Final Results of the Administrative Review of the Antidumping
Duty Order on Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from
Thailand'' (Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with this notice
and which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues
addressed in the Decision Memorandum is appended to this notice. The
Decision Memorandum is on file in the CRU, and can be accessed directly
on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic
version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on the results of verification and our analysis of comments
received, we have made adjustments to our margin calculations. At the
preliminary results, we made an adjustment under section 773(f)(2) of
the Act, the ``transactions disregarded rule,'' to Saha Thai's
purchases of coils from an
[[Page 64698]]
affiliated party. We have now determined that record evidence shows
that these transactions were made at arm's length prices, and thus we
are not making any adjustment under section 773(f)(2) of the Act for
the final results. In addition, we have revised the general and
administrative and financial expense rates by no longer adjusting the
cost of goods sold denominator to reflect an adjustment for the
transactions disregarded rule. Further, we have revised the financial
expense rate calculation from the preliminary results to exclude
interest income generated from long-term assets. We have revised the
calculation of the total cost of manufacturing from the preliminary
results to exclude the ``other materials'' (``OTHMAT'') field. We have
determined that this field serves only as a subtotal of other material
costs; therefore, the inclusion of both the individual other material
cost fields and the ``OTHMAT'' field double counts these costs. We have
also revised the calculation of the cost of production to exclude the
``DUTY'' field because these costs were already included in the direct
materials costs field. We have also made adjustments to hot-rolled coil
costs, conversion costs, and other material costs based on our
verification findings.
In addition, based on the results of verification and the minor
corrections reported by Saha Thai at verification, there are changes to
the sales databases including changes to U.S. sales ship dates and
certain U.S. and home market movement and selling expenses, and the
correction of one reseller's home market prices. These adjustments are
discussed in detail in the Decision Memorandum; and/or Memorandum to
File from Myrna Lobo, ``Analysis of Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Public)
Company, Ltd., for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review of Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes
from Thailand for the period 03/01/2008 through 02/28/2009,'' dated
concurrently with this notice (``Final Results Analysis Memorandum'');
and/or Memorandum to Neal M. Halper, Director, Office of Accounting,
from Heidi K. Schriefer, Senior Accountant, ``Cost of Production and
Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results--Saha
Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Company, Ltd.,'' also dated concurrently with
this notice, all of which are on file in the CRU.
Level of Trade (LOT)
In the Preliminary Results we determined that Saha Thai had two
distinct levels of trade (LOT 1 and LOT 2) in the home market, and a
single LOT in the U.S. market which matched LOT 1 in the home market.
For U.S. sales for which there is not a match in the home market at LOT
1, that are matched with LOT 2 sales, we must consider whether an LOT
adjustment is warranted when the difference in LOT is demonstrated to
affect price comparability, based on a pattern of consistent price
differences. However, our decision to apply the quarterly cost
methodology raised a novel issue with respect to the LOT analysis of
pattern of price differences and any possible LOT adjustment based on
that analysis. We therefore invited parties to comment on this issue
and we received comments from Saha Thai recommending that the
Department calculate a POR-wide LOT adjustment even when a quarterly
methodology had been used to calculate costs and make price to price
comparisons. However, after incorporating all the changes to the cost
and sales information necessitated by verification, we find that all of
Saha Thai's U.S. market sales are matched to sales in the home market
at the same level of trade. Therefore, there is no basis for conducting
a level of trade analysis and an LOT adjustment is unwarranted.
Final Results of Review
As a result of our review, we determine that the following
weighted-average margin exists for the period of March 1, 2008 through
February 28, 2009:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-average margin
Manufacturer/ exporter (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Company, Ltd.... 2.13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1) of the Department's
regulations, the Department calculates an assessment rate for each
importer of the subject merchandise. The Department intends to issue
appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after the
date of publication of these final results of review.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification will apply to entries of
subject merchandise during the period of review produced by the company
included in these final results of review for which the reviewed
company did not know their merchandise was destined for the United
States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed
entries at the all-others rate from the investigation if there is no
rate for the intermediate company involved in the transaction. For a
full discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all
shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the publication date of these final
results, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the
company covered by this review, the cash deposit rate will be the rate
listed above; (2) for merchandise exported by producers 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
producer 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 producer is, the cash deposit rate will be that established for
the producer of the merchandise in these final results of review or in
the most recent final results in which that producer participated; and,
(4) if neither the exporter nor the producer is a firm covered in this
review or in any previous segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit
rate will be 15.67 percent, 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).
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) of the Department's regulations
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 in
the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.
[[Page 64699]]
Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders
This notice is the only reminder to parties subject to the
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under the APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3) of the
Department's regulations. 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 the
terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these final results and this notice
in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: October 13, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I--Issues in Decision Memorandum Circular Welded Carbon Steel
Pipes and Tubes From Thailand Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review for the Period of Review: 3/1/2008--2/28/2009
Comment 1: Analysis of Transactions With an Affiliated Supplier
Comment 2: Treatment of Unpaid Exempted Duties
Comment 3: Use of Single Average Coil Costs
Comment 4: Use of Lower of Cost or Market (LCM) Write-Down for Raw
Materials
Comment 5: Treatment of LCM Write-Downs When Using the Alternative
Cost Methodology
Comment 6: Annualizing Costs Over the Entire Cost Reporting Period
Comment 7: Total Cost Reconciliation
Comment 8: Treatment of Paid Import Duties on Raw Materials
Comment 9: Treatment of Other Material Costs
Comment 10: Level of Trade Adjustment
Comment 11: Use of the Zeroing Methodology
[FR Doc. 2010-26424 Filed 10-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
