Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 73033-73034 [2010-29962]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 228 / Monday, November 29, 2010 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
National Ranking Considerations
The appropriate State Conservationist
will evaluate proposals using a
competitive process and forward
recommended proposals to the Chief for
review and selection. The Chief will
give a higher priority to proposals that:
(a) Have a high potential to achieve
wetland restoration;
(b) Have a high potential to
significantly improve water quality;
(c) Have a high potential to
significantly improve wildlife habitat;
(d) Significantly leverage non-Federal
financial and technical resources and
coordinate with other local, State, tribal,
or Federal efforts;
(e) Demonstrate the partner’s history
of working cooperatively with
landowners on conservation easements;
(f) Provide innovation in wetland
protection, restoration, and
enhancement methods and outcomebased performance measures and
methods;
(g) Provide evidence that wetland
restoration and enhancement activities
will be completed within 2 years of
easement closing;
(h) Provide for monitoring and
evaluation of the effectiveness of the
restoration activities on water quality;
(i) Provide for matching financial or
technical assistance funds to assist
landowners with the implementation of
the Wetlands Reserve Plan of
Operations and associated contracts;
(j) Facilitate the submission of
landowner applications;
(k) Provide for outreach to, and
participation of, Indian tribes, beginning
farmers or ranchers, socially
disadvantaged farmers or ranchers, and
limited resource farmers or ranchers
within the area covered by the
agreement; and
(l) Integrate a MRBI–WREP proposal
with a MRBI–CCPI proposed or
approved project.
Partnership Agreements
Upon proposal selection, NRCS will
enter an agreement with a partner as the
mechanism for partner participation in
WREP. At a minimum, the agreement
will address:
(a) The role of the partner;
(b) The role of NRCS;
(c) The format and frequency of
reports that is required as a condition of
the agreement;
(d) The Plan of Work and budget to
identify other funding sources (if
applicable) for financial or technical
assistance;
(e) The specified project schedule and
timeframe;
(f) Whether the agreement will serve
as an obligating document or whether
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:57 Nov 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
funds will be obligated under a separate
agreement with the partner or with a
third party; and
(g) Other requirements deemed
necessary by NRCS to achieve purposes
of the WRP.
Landowner Application
Landowners must meet the eligibility
requirements of WRP, as published in 7
CFR part 1467. Landowners interested
in participating may apply for
designated WREP funds at their local
service center after WREP proposals are
selected. In FY 2011, NRCS will make
WREP funds available to eligible
landowners to enroll land under a
permanent easement, a 30-year
easement, a 30-year contract on acreage
owned by Indian tribes, or through a
Restoration Agreement.
NRCS and the partner may assist
landowners in determining whether the
application is appropriate for WREP
depending on the wetland protection,
restoration, and enhancement activities
that the applicant seeks to install or
perform.
Signed the 20th day of November, 2010, in
Washington, DC.
Dave White,
Vice President, Commodity Credit
Corporation and Chief, Natural Resources
Conservation Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–29958 Filed 11–26–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–16–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–549–502]
Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes
and Tubes from Thailand: Amended
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: November 29,
2010.
AGENCY:
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: On
October 13, 2010, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) completed
the final results of administrative review
of the antidumping duty order on
circular welded carbon steel pipes and
tubes (pipes and tubes) from Thailand,
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
73033
covering the period March 1, 2008
through February 28, 2009. The final
results were subsequently released to all
parties in the proceeding, and published
in the Federal Register on October 20,
2010. See Circular Welded Carbon Steel
Pipes and Tubes From Thailand: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 75 FR 64696
(October 20, 2010).
The Department disclosed the
calculations in connection with the final
results as required under 19 CFR
351.224(b). On October 20, 2010,
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(c)(2), we
received a timely filed allegation from
the respondent in this administrative
review, Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Public)
Company, Limited (Saha Thai), that the
Department made a ministerial error
with respect to the calculation of Saha
Thai’s dumping margin. See Letter from
Saha Thai to the Department of
Commerce, regarding ‘‘Ministerial Error
in Final Results,’’ dated October 20,
2010. For further details, see
Memorandum from Myrna Lobo, Case
Analyst, and Heidi Schriefer, Senior
Accountant, to Barbara E. Tillman,
Director, titled, ‘‘Ministerial Error
Allegation—Final Results of the
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of Circular Welded Carbon Steel
Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Saha
Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Company Ltd.,’’
dated November 19, 2010 (Ministerial
Error Allegation Memorandum). We did
not receive comments on this allegation
from any other interested parties.
A ministerial error, as defined at
section 751(h) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act), includes ‘‘errors
in addition, subtraction, or other
arithmetic function, clerical errors
resulting from inaccurate copying,
duplication, or the like, and any other
type of unintentional error which the
Department considers ministerial.’’ See
also 19 CFR 351.224(f). In its letter, Saha
Thai alleges that the Department made
a ministerial error by using Saha Thai’s
2008 selling and administrative
expenses to calculate Saha Thai’s 2007
general and administrative (G&A)
expense ratio. As stated in the final cost
calculation memorandum
accompanying the Final Results, we
calculated the fiscal year 2007 G&A
expense rate to use in the calculation of
cost of production and constructed
value for products with dates of sale
prior to the POR (i.e., the pre-POR
quarters). See Memorandum from Heidi
K. Schriefer, Senior Accountant to Neal
M. Halper, Director, Office of
Accounting ‘‘Cost of Production and
Constructed Value Calculation
Adjustments for the Final Results—Saha
Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Company, Ltd.
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
73034
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 228 / Monday, November 29, 2010 / Notices
(‘‘Saha Thai’’)’’ dated October 13, 2010.
The Department agrees that this
constitutes a ministerial error within the
meaning of section 751(h) of the Act and
19 CFR 351.224(f) because it
inadvertently used the 2008 figure
instead of the 2007 figure to calculate
the 2007 G&A expense ratio. Therefore,
the Department has corrected this
expense ratio and revised its margin
calculations to reflect this correction.
See Ministerial Error Allegation
Memorandum at 2.
In accordance with section 751(h) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(e), we are
amending the final results in this
antidumping duty administrative review
of pipes and tubes from Thailand. As a
result of correcting the ministerial error,
the amended final weighted-average
dumping margin is as follows:
Final results
weighted-average
margin percentage
Manufacturer/exporter
Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Co. Ltd. .......................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
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), 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 amended final
results of review.
The Department clarified its
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
May 6, 2003. This clarification will
apply to entries of subject merchandise
during the period of review produced by
the company included in these
amended 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
amended 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 amended 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:57 Nov 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
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 of Interested Parties
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 the antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Amended final results weighted-average margin percentage
2.13 percent
1.76 percent
and terms of an APO is a violation that
is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these
amended final results of review and
notice in accordance with sections
751(a), 751(h), and 777(i) of the Act, and
19 CFR 351.224(e).
Dated: November 19, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010–29962 Filed 11–26–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Application(s) for Duty-Free Entry of
Scientific Instruments
Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the
Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub.
L. 89–651, as amended by Pub. L. 106–
36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301), we
invite comments on the question of
whether instruments of equivalent
scientific value, for the purposes for
which the instruments shown below are
intended to be used, are being
manufactured in the United States.
Comments must comply with 15 CFR
301.5(a)(3) and (4) of the regulations and
be postmarked on or before December
20, 2010. Address written comments to
Statutory Import Programs Staff, Room
3720, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, DC 20230. Applications
may be examined between 8:30 a.m. and
5 p.m. at the U.S. Department of
Commerce in Room 3720.
Docket Number: 10–065. Applicant:
Vanderbilt University, 2201 West End
Avenue, Nashville, TN 37235.
Instrument: Electron Microscope.
Manufacturer: FEI Company, Czech
Republic. Intended Use: The instrument
will be used to support general
biological investigations into structure
function relationships. Key capabilities
of the instrument include extended
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 228 (Monday, November 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73033-73034]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29962]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-549-502]
Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand:
Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: November 29, 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: On October 13, 2010, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) completed the final results of administrative
review of the antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon steel
pipes and tubes (pipes and tubes) from Thailand, covering the period
March 1, 2008 through February 28, 2009. The final results were
subsequently released to all parties in the proceeding, and published
in the Federal Register on October 20, 2010. See Circular Welded Carbon
Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 75 FR 64696 (October 20, 2010).
The Department disclosed the calculations in connection with the
final results as required under 19 CFR 351.224(b). On October 20, 2010,
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(c)(2), we received a timely filed allegation
from the respondent in this administrative review, Saha Thai Steel Pipe
(Public) Company, Limited (Saha Thai), that the Department made a
ministerial error with respect to the calculation of Saha Thai's
dumping margin. See Letter from Saha Thai to the Department of
Commerce, regarding ``Ministerial Error in Final Results,'' dated
October 20, 2010. For further details, see Memorandum from Myrna Lobo,
Case Analyst, and Heidi Schriefer, Senior Accountant, to Barbara E.
Tillman, Director, titled, ``Ministerial Error Allegation--Final
Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Circular
Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Saha Thai Steel Pipe
(Public) Company Ltd.,'' dated November 19, 2010 (Ministerial Error
Allegation Memorandum). We did not receive comments on this allegation
from any other interested parties.
A ministerial error, as defined at section 751(h) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act), includes ``errors in addition,
subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical errors resulting
from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other type
of unintentional error which the Department considers ministerial.''
See also 19 CFR 351.224(f). In its letter, Saha Thai alleges that the
Department made a ministerial error by using Saha Thai's 2008 selling
and administrative expenses to calculate Saha Thai's 2007 general and
administrative (G&A) expense ratio. As stated in the final cost
calculation memorandum accompanying the Final Results, we calculated
the fiscal year 2007 G&A expense rate to use in the calculation of cost
of production and constructed value for products with dates of sale
prior to the POR (i.e., the pre-POR quarters). See Memorandum from
Heidi K. Schriefer, Senior Accountant to Neal M. Halper, Director,
Office of Accounting ``Cost of Production and Constructed Value
Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results--Saha Thai Steel Pipe
(Public) Company, Ltd.
[[Page 73034]]
(``Saha Thai'')'' dated October 13, 2010. The Department agrees that
this constitutes a ministerial error within the meaning of section
751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(f) because it inadvertently used
the 2008 figure instead of the 2007 figure to calculate the 2007 G&A
expense ratio. Therefore, the Department has corrected this expense
ratio and revised its margin calculations to reflect this correction.
See Ministerial Error Allegation Memorandum at 2.
In accordance with section 751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(e),
we are amending the final results in this antidumping duty
administrative review of pipes and tubes from Thailand. As a result of
correcting the ministerial error, the amended final weighted-average
dumping margin is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended final
Final results results weighted-
Manufacturer/exporter weighted-average average margin
margin percentage percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Co. 2.13 percent 1.76 percent
Ltd..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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), 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 amended
final results of review.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003. This clarification will apply to entries of subject
merchandise during the period of review produced by the company
included in these amended 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 amended 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
amended 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 of Interested Parties
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 the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, 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 that is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these amended final results of review
and notice in accordance with sections 751(a), 751(h), and 777(i) of
the Act, and 19 CFR 351.224(e).
Dated: November 19, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010-29962 Filed 11-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P