[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 10 (Wednesday, January 15, 1997)] [Notices] [Pages 2131-2132] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 97-995] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE [A-549-502] Certain 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. SUMMARY: On November 1, 1996, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the final results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand (61 FR 56515). This review covers Saha Thai Steel Pipe Company, SAF Steel Pipe Export Company, and Pacific Pipe Company.1 The period of review (POR) is March 1, 1994 through February 28, 1995. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The Department has determined that Pacific Pipe Company had no U.S. sales during the period of review. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- On October 31, 1996, counsel for the petitioning companies Allied Tube & Conduit Corporation, Sawhill Tubular Division of Armco, Inc., American Tube Company, Inc., Laclede Steel Company, Sharon Tube Company, Wheatland Tube Company, and Eagle Pipe (``petitioners'') filed timely allegations, pursuant to 19 CFR 353.28, of ministerial and clerical errors with regard to the final results in the 1994-95 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand. Petitioners'' allegations were limited to alleged errors in calculating the dumping margin for subject merchandise manufactured by Saha Thai. On November 20, 1996, Saha Thai also submitted timely allegations of clerical errors. Saha Thai did not comment on the allegations submitted by petitioners. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 15, 1997. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Rice or Jean Kemp, AD/CVD Enforcement Group III, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482- 0162 or (202) 482-4037, respectively. Applicable Statute Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. In addition, unless otherwise indicated, [[Page 2132]] all citations to the Department's regulations are to the current regulations, as amended by the interim regulations published in the Federal Register on May 11, 1995 (60 FR 25130). Scope of the Review The products covered by this administrative review are certain circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand. The subject merchandise has an outside diameter 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 ``pipe and tube.'' The merchandise is classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) 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 Customs purposes, our written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. Ministerial and Clerical Errors in the Final Results of Review Petitioners alleged that the Department made four ministerial errors in the final results. First, petitioners contend that the Department inadvertently added indirect selling expenses to the calculation of export price. Second, petitioners contend that the Department failed to include a difference in merchandise adjustment in its calculation of FUPDOL. Third, petitioners argued that the Department failed to include direct selling expenses in the calculation of normal value for constructed value. For these three allegations, the Department agrees that these are ministerial errors, and we have amended our final results to correct these errors. Fourth, petitioners alleged that the Department failed to include straightening labor and overhead expenses for black pipe produced by Saha. The Department disagrees with petitioners'' assertion that this represents a ministerial error. As stated in the verification report, the straightening costs identified by petitioners relate to the straightening which is required following the deformation that occurs during the galvanization process. In the final results of administrative review, the Department calculated COP and CV for black pipe exclusive of these straightening costs because they are not incurred in the production of black pipe. Respondents did not object to petitioners' ministerial allegations, but on November 20, 1996, alleged that a clerical error occurs in the Department's calculation of COP. Saha Thai alleges that the Department double counted its inventory carrying costs in calculating COP. The Department agrees that this is a clerical error, and in accordance with 19 CFR 353.28, we have amended the final results to correct this error. Saha Thai also contends that the Department's model match program departed from prior practice in that the program searched only for what the Department considered best match rather than for subsequent next- best matches before resorting to CV. We disagree with respondents that this is a ministerial error. The issue of the model match program used in this review is a methodological issue. Consequently, it is inappropriate to change the model match program because of an alleged ministerial error. See 19 CFR 353.28(d). (For further information, see the Decision Memorandum from Joseph A. Spetrini to Robert S. LaRussa, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated December 20, 1996, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099 of the main Commerce building.) Amended Final Results of Review Upon correction of the ministerial errors, we have determined that the following margin exists for the period indicated: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Margin Manufacturer/exporter Time period (percent) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Saha Thai/SAF.............................. 3/1/94-2/28/95 7.27 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Customs Service shall assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Individual differences between United States price and normal value may vary from the percentages stated above. The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service. Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective, upon publication of this notice of amended final results of review for all shipments of certain circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand 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) The cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates for those firms as stated above; (2) for previously investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, or the original 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 (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 15.67 percent for circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes, the all others rate established in the LTFV investigations. See Final Determination and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand, (51 FR 8341, March 11, 1986). These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 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 double antidumping duties. This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with section 353.34(d) of the Department's regulations. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. This administrative review and notice are in accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR 353.28(c). Dated: January 7, 1997. Robert S. LaRussa, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 97-995 Filed 1-14-97; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P