[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 227 (Wednesday, November 25, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65172-65173]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-31555]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-549-502]
Certain 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.
ACTION: Notice of Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from
Thailand.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On October 16, 1998 the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the final results of the administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on certain welded carbon steel pipes and
tubes from Thailand (63 FR 55578). This review covers the following
manufacturer/exporter of the subject merchandise to the United States:
Saha Thai Steel Pipe Company, Ltd. (``Saha Thai''), and its affiliated
exporter S.A.F. Pipe Export Co., Ltd. (``SAF''). The period of review
(POR) is March 1, 1996 through February 28, 1997.
On October 16, 1998, pursuant to section 353.28(a) of the
Department's regulations, Saha Thai, SAF, and two U.S. importers, Ferro
Union, Inc., and Asoma Corporation (collectively, ``Saha Thai'') filed
a ministerial error allegation regarding the Department's calculation
of importer-specific assessment rates in the final results of the
review. In addition, when reviewing Saha Thai's allegation, the
Department identified a misstatement in the Federal Register notice of
the final results. The Department is publishing these amended final
results to correct these ministerial errors.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 25, 1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Totaro, AD/CVD Enforcement Group
III, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
1374.
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 (hereinafter,
``the Act'') by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition,
unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department's
regulations are to the regulations codified at 19 CFR Part 353 (1997).
Although the Department's new regulations, codified at 19 CFR Part 351
(1998) (``Final Regulations''), do not govern this administrative
review, citations to those regulations are provided, where appropriate,
as a statement of current Departmental practice.
Ministerial Errors in the Final Results of Review
Where U.S. sales are on an export price (EP) basis and the record
does not contain entered value data, the Department's margin
calculation program calculates the duty amount to be collected from
each importer on a dollars-per-metric ton basis. Because Saha Thai's
sales during the POR were all EP sales, the Department's margin
calculation program intended to calculate the duty owed for assessment
purposes using the methodology described above. Saha Thai alleged that
the Department's margin calculation program contained a ministerial
error because in calculating the unit duty for each importer, the
Department inadvertently increased the quotient of its unit duty
calculation by a factor of 100. We examined the margin calculation
program, and we agree with Saha Thai that this is a clerical error
[[Page 65173]]
within the meaning of 19 CFR 353.28 (d), i.e., an error in arithmetic
functions of the calculation program. We have corrected the program so
that the result of the unit duty calculation program is no longer
multiplied by a factor of 100. This correction affects only the
importer-specific assessment rates, not the margin calculated in the
final results.
We also note one additional ministerial error not raised by the
parties in this review. In the final results Federal Register notice,
the Department stated that ``[f]or assessment purposes, we have
calculated importer-specific duty assessment rates for the merchandise
based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated
for the examined sales during the POR to the total entered value of
sales examined during the POR.'' 63 FR at 55590. This statement is
incorrect, and does not reflect the margin calculation program
disclosed to the parties with the final results of this review. As
stated above, the record of this review does not contain data on the
entered value of the sales examined during the POR. Therefore, for the
final results of this review we calculated the duty amount to be
collected from each importer on a unit basis, i.e., a ratio of the
total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales
during the POR to the total quantity of sales examined during the POR,
not a ratio of antidumping duties to the entered value of these sales.
Amended Final Results of Review
Upon correction of the ministerial errors described above, the
margin remains unchanged from the final results published in the
Federal Register on October 16, 1998. However, as discussed above, the
importer-specific assessment rates will change from those disclosed to
the parties with the final results. We will instruct the Customs
Service accordingly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer/Exporter Period Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saha Thai......................... 3/1/96-2/28/97 1.92%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department shall determine, and the U.S. Customs Service shall
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department
shall issue appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service.
As a result of this review, we have determined that the importer-
specific duty assessments rates are necessary. For assessment purposes,
therefore, we have calculated importer-specific duty assessment rates
for the merchandise based on the ratio of the total amount of
antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales during the POR to
the total quantity of sales examined during the POR.
Furthermore, the following deposit requirements shall be effective
upon publication of this notice of final results of review for all
shipments of certain 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)(1) of the Tariff
Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for the reviewed company will be the
rate 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 these reviews, or the original LTFV investigations, 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) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in
these reviews, the cash deposit rate for this case will continue to be
15.67 percent, the ``All Others'' rate made effective by the LTFV
investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.
This notice 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 notification of 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 amended administrative review and notice are in accordance
with section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and sections
353.22 and 353.28(c) of the Department's regulations.
Dated: November 18, 1998.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-31555 Filed 11-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
