[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