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: 

Manufacturer/exporter 

Final results 

weighted-average 

margin percentage 

Amended final results weighted-average margin percentage 

Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Co. Ltd. ....................................................................................................... 2.13 percent 1.76 percent 

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 

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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 228 / Monday, November 29, 2010 / Notices 73035 

variable pressure capability, low kV and 

Schottky field emission source, 

secondary and backscatter detection, 

and a temperature control Peltier stage. 

Justification for Duty-Free Entry: There 

are no instruments of the same general 

category manufactured in the United 

States. Application accepted by 

Commissioner of Customs: October 27, 

2010. 

Docket Number: 10–066. Applicant: 

Vanderbilt University, 2201 West End 

Avenue, Nashville, TN 37235. 

Instrument: Electron Microscope. 

Manufacturer: JEOL Limited, Japan. 

Intended Use: The instrument will be 

used to study cement-based composites, 

environmental materials, and geological 

samples for their microstructure, phase 

characteristics, and interfacial 

processes. This instrument can image 

and analyze samples that are completely 

wet while carrying the humidity and 

pressure in the specimen chamber. This 

instrument also offers a WetSTEM 

detector for imaging completely wet 

samples in both bright field (BF) and 

dark field (DF) modes without special 

sample handling/encapsulation. 

Justification for Duty-Free Entry: There 

are no instruments of the same general 

category manufactured in the United 

States. Application accepted by 

Commissioner of Customs: October 27, 

2010. 

Dated: November 22, 2010. 

Gregory Campbell, 

Acting Director, IA Subsidies Enforcement 

Office. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29967 Filed 11–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–405–803] 

Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From 

Finland; Notice of Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On August 9, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published in the Federal 

Register the preliminary results of the 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on purified 

carboxymethylcellulose from Finland. 

See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose 

from Finland; Notice of Preliminary 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 75 FR 47788 

(August 9, 2010) (Preliminary Results). 

We gave interested parties an 

opportunity to comment on the 

Preliminary Results and received no 

comments. 

DATES: Effective Date: November 29, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tyler Weinhold, or Robert James, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 7, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482–1121 or (202) 482– 

0649, respectively 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On August 9, 2010, the Department 

published the preliminary results of 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order covering 

purified carboxymethylcellulose from 

Finland. See Preliminary Results. The 

parties subject to this review are CP 

Kelco Oy and CP Kelco U.S., Inc. 

(collectively, CP Kelco). The petitioner 

in this proceeding is the Aqualon 

Company, a division of Hercules 

Incorporated (Petitioner). 

In the Preliminary Results, the 

Department stated that interested parties 

may submit case briefs within 30 days 

of publication of the Preliminary Results 

and rebuttal briefs within five days after 

the due date for filing case briefs. See 

Preliminary Results at 47794. No 

interested party submitted a case or 

rebuttal brief. Accordingly, we made no 

changes for the final results. See 

Memorandum from Tyler Weinhold, to 

the File, ‘‘Analysis of Data Submitted by 

CP Kelco Oy and CP Kelco U.S. Inc. 

(collectively, CP Kelco) in the 

Preliminary Results of the 2008–2009 

Administrative Review of Purified 

Carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from 

Finland,’’ dated August 2, 2010; 

Memorandum from Tyler Weinhold, to 

the File, ‘‘Analysis of Data Submitted by 

CP Kelco Oy and CP Kelco U.S. Inc. 

(collectively, CP Kelco) in the 2008– 

2009 Administrative Review of Purified 

Carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from 

Finland,’’ and Memorandum from 

Sheikh M. Hannan, to the File, ‘‘Cost of 

Production and Constructed Value 

Calculation Adjustments for the 

Preliminary Results—CP Kelco Oy.’’ 

Period of Review 

The period of review (POR) is July 1, 

2008, through June 30, 2009. 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise covered by this 

order is all purified 

carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), 

sometimes also referred to as purified 

sodium CMC, polyanionic cellulose, or 

cellulose gum, which is a white to offwhite, non-toxic, odorless, 

biodegradable powder, comprising 

sodium CMC that has been refined and 

purified to a minimum assay of 90 

percent. Purified CMC does not include 

unpurified or crude CMC, CMC 

Fluidized Polymer Suspensions, and 

CMC that is cross-linked through heat 

treatment. Purified CMC is CMC that 

has undergone one or more purification 

operations which, at a minimum, reduce 

the remaining salt and other by-product 

portion of the product to less than ten 

percent. The merchandise subject to this 

order is classified in the Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States at 

subheading 3912.31.00. This tariff 

classification is provided for 

convenience and customs purposes; 

however, the written description of the 

scope of the order is dispositive. 

Final Results of Review 

The Department has determined that 

the following margin exists for the 

period July 1, 2008, through June 30, 

2009: 

Manufacturer 

Weightedaverage 

margin 

(percentage) 

CP Kelco Oy ......................... 6.10 

Assessment Rates 

Pursuant to these final results, the 

Department has determined, and U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries. The Department 

intends to issue assessment instructions 

for CP Kelco to CBP 15 days after the 

date of publication of these final results. 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we 

calculated importer-specific (or 

customer-specific) 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. We will instruct CBP to 

assess antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries covered by this 

review if any importer-specific (or 

customer-specific) assessment rate 

calculated in the final results of this 

review are above de minimis. 

The Department clarified its 

‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on 

May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment of 

Antidumping Duties). This clarification 

will apply to entries of subject 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES