Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 99 / Friday, May 22, 1998 / Notices 28357

Memorandum to the Official File re:

Adjustments to Cost of Production and

Constructed Value (January 12, 1998).)

Accordingly, in reaching our

preliminary determination we relied on

the actual costs incurred to produce the

subject merchandise during the sixmonth period contemporaneous to the

reported sales. This approach is

consistent with the Department’s

obligation to ensure that the

calculations are based on costs which

‘‘* * * reasonably reflects and

accurately captures all of the actual

costs incurred in producing * * * the

product under investigation or review.’’

(See, Statement of Administrative

Action accompanying the URRA, H.R.

5110, H.R. Doc. No. 103–316, vol. 1

(1994) at 834 (SAA); see also Final

Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Reviews: Certain ColdRolled and Corrosion-Resistant Carbon

Steel Flat Products From Korea, 63 FR

13170, 13192 (March 18, 1998), where

the Department determined that the

POR costs differed from the company’s

fiscal year costs, and after reviewing the

information, based the margin

calculations on the POR costs rather

than on the fiscal year costs.)

Accordingly, we continue to rely on

costs incurred during the six-month

period in these final results.

As to Ferbasa’s comment that the

Department’s general practice of

calculating SG&A and interest expense

based on the fiscal year requires that

COM be based on that same period, we

disagree. The Department normally

calculates SG&A and interest expenses

over the closest corresponding fiscal

year’s audited financial statements. We

then use these ratios to determine the

per-unit SG&A and interest expense

associated with each product. This

calculation measures, over a full fiscal

year, the level of G&A expenses

associated with the company’s sales.

The basis for calculating these ratios

over the full fiscal year is not because

it is the exact same period as that

examined for the cost calculation, but

rather because using the annual ratio is

most reflective of these type of

expenses, which are typically incurred

unevenly throughout the year. (See

Final Determination of Sales at Less

Than Fair Value: Oil Country Tubular

Goods from Argentina, 60 FR 33,539,

33,549 (June 28, 1995); and Final

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair

Value: Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat

Products, Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat

Products, Corrosion-Resistant Carbon

Steel Flat Products, and Cut-to Length

Carbon Steel Plate from Canada, 58 FR

37105, 37113 (July 9, 1993).)

Comment 2

Ferbasa contends that the Department

should not have included valued added

taxes (IPI and ICMS) in the calculation

of constructed value (CV). According to

Ferbasa, section 773(a)(6)(B) of the Act

provides for the exclusion of home

market consumption taxes from normal

value (NV) in order to maintain a tax

neutral comparison for purposes of

measuring whether dumping has

occurred.

The petitioners contend that the

Department properly included the IPI

and ICMS taxes in CV. According to the

petitioners, section 773(e) of the Act

provides that any home market tax

imposed on export goods should be

included in CV unless the tax is

refunded or remitted upon exportation.

The petitioner argues that Ferbasa has

not stated nor did the verification

conclude that these IPI and ICMS taxes

have been remitted or refunded upon

exportation.

Department’s Position:

Because the NV in these final results

was based on Ferbasa’s home market

prices and not on CV, this issue is moot.

Therefore, we are not addressing it here.

Final Results of Review

Our final results are unchanged from

those presented in our preliminary

results. Therefore, the dumping margin

for Ferbasa remains at zero percent for

the period March 1, 1996, through

February 28, 1997.

The following deposit requirement

will be effective for all shipments of

subject merchandise from Brazil

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,

for consumption on or after the

publication date of the final results of

this administrative review, as provided

by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The

cash deposit rate for the reviewed

company will be zero; (2) for

merchandise exported by manufacturers

or exporters not covered in this review

but covered in previous reviews or the

original less-than-fair-value (LTFV)

investigation, the cash deposit rate will

continue to be the rate published in the

most recent final results or

determination for which the

manufacturer or exporter received a

company-specific rate; (3) if the exporter

is not a firm covered in this review, a

previous review, or the LTFV

investigation, but the manufacturer is,

the cash deposit rate will be the rate

established for the manufacturer of the

merchandise in the final results of this

review, earlier review or the LTFV

investigation, whichever is the most

recent; (4) if neither the exporter nor the

manufacturer is a firm covered in this or

any previous reviews, the cash deposit

will be 35.95 percent, the ‘‘All Others’’

rate made effective by the antidumping

duty order (59 FR 11769, March 14,

1994).

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 19 CFR 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 terms of the

APO is a sanctionable violation.

This administrative review and notice

are in accordance with sections

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Dated: May 14, 1998.

Robert S. LaRussa,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 98–13802 Filed 5–21–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–351–826]

Small Diameter Circular Seamless

Carbon and Alloy Steel Standard, Line

and Pressure Pipe From Brazil; Notice

of Initiation and Preliminary Results of

Changed Circumstances Antidumping

Duty Administrative Review, and Intent

to Revoke Order in Part

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of initiation and

preliminary results of changed

circumstances antidumping duty

administrative review, and intent to

revoke order in part.

SUMMARY: In response to a request made

on April 27, 1998, by the Gulf States

Tube Division of Vision Metals (‘‘Gulf
28358 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 99 / Friday, May 22, 1998 / Notices

1 Gulf States was previously a division of Quanex

Corporation.

States’’) 1, a petitioner in this case, the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) is initiating a changed

circumstances antidumping duty

administrative review and issuing a

preliminary intent to revoke in part the

antidumping duty order on small

diameter circular seamless carbon and

alloy steel standard, line and pressure

pipe from Brazil, the scope of which

currently includes certain glass-lined

seamless pressure pipe. Gulf States and

Koppel Steel Corporation, the

petitioners in this case, have expressed

no further interest in the relief provided

by the antidumping duty order with

respect to certain glass-lined seamless

pressure pipe imported from Brazil.

Accordingly, we intend to revoke this

order in part.

Interested parties are invited to

comment on these preliminary results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 22, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Helen M. Kramer or Linda Ludwig, AD/

CVD Enforcement Group III, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, N.W., Washington D.C. 20230;

telephone (202) 482–0405 or (202) 482–

3833, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute and Regulations

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

(URAA). In addition, unless otherwise

indicated, all citations to the

Department’s regulations are to the

regulations at 19 CFR Part 351 (62 FR

27296, May 19, 1997).

Background

On August 3, 1995, the Department

published the amended final

determination and antidumping duty

order in the less-than-fair-value (LTFV)

investigation of small diameter circular

seamless carbon and alloy steel

standard, line and pressure pipe from

Brazil (60 FR 39707). On April 27, 1998,

Gulf States, a petitioner, requested

partial revocation of the antidumping

duty order due to changed

circumstances, pursuant to 19 U.S.C.

1675(b)(1) and 19 CFR 351.222(g), 62 FR

27,296 at 27,400–01 (May 19, 1997),

with respect to imports from Brazil of

certain glass-lined seamless pressure

pipe. On May 1, 1998, the second

petitioner, Koppel Steel Corporation,

informed the Department by telephone

that it has no interest in continuing the

application of the order to glass-lined

seamless pressure pipe. See

Memorandum for the File from Helen

M. Kramer, Case Analyst, to Linda

Ludwig, Program Manager (May 1,

1998).

Scope of the Review

Imports covered by this review and

partial revocation are shipments of

seamless carbon and alloy (other than

stainless) steel pipes, of circular crosssection, not more than 114.3 mm (4.5

inches) in outside diameter, regardless

of wall thickness or manufacturing

process (hot-finished or cold-drawn)

that (1) has been cut into lengths of six

to 120 inches, (2) has had the inside

bore ground to a smooth surface, (3) has

had multiple layers of specially

formulated corrosion resistant glass

permanently baked on at temperatures

of 1,440 to 1,700 degrees Fahrenheit in

thicknesses from 0.032 to 0.085 inch (40

to 80 mils), and (4) has flanges or other

forged stub ends welded on both ends

of the pipe. The special corrosion

resistant glass referred to in this

definition may be glass containing by

weight (1) 70 to 80 percent of an oxide

of silicone, zirconium, titanium or

cerium (Oxide Group RO2), (2) 10 to 15

percent of an oxide of sodium,

potassium, or lithium (Oxide Group

RO), (3) from a trace amount to 5

percent of an oxide of either aluminum,

cobalt, iron, vanadium, or boron (Oxide

Group R2O3, or (4) from a trace amount

to 5 percent of a fluorine compound in

which fluorine replaces the oxygen in

any one of the previously listed oxide

groups. These glass-lined pressure pipes

are commonly manufactured for use in

glass-lined equipment systems for

processing corrosive or reactive

chemicals, including acrylates,

alkanolamines, herbicides, pesticides,

pharmaceuticals and solvents.

The glass-lined pressure pipes subject

to this review are currently classifiable

under subheadings 7304.39.0020,

7304.39.0024 and 7304.39.0028 of the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (HTSUS). The HTSUS

subheadings are provided for

convenience and U.S. Customs’

purposes only. The written description

of the scope of this review remains

dispositive.

Initiation and Preliminary Results of

Changed Circumstances Antidumping

Duty Administrative Review, and Intent

to Revoke in Part

At the request of the petitioner, Gulf

States, in accordance with section

751(b) of the Act and section 351.216 of

the Department’s regulations, the

Department is initiating a changed

circumstances review of small diameter

circular seamless carbon and alloy steel

standard, line and pressure pipe from

Brazil to determine whether partial

revocation of the antidumping duty

order is warranted with respect to glasslined seamless pressure pipe. Section

782(h)(2) of the Act and section

351.222(g)(1)(i) of the Department’s

regulations provide that the Department

may revoke an order if it determines

that producers accounting for

substantially all of the production of the

domestic like product have no further

interest in the order. In addition, in the

event the Department determines that

expedited action is warranted, section

351.221(c)(3)(ii) of the regulations

permits the Department to combine the

notices of initiation and preliminary

results.

In accordance with section 751(b) of

the Act and sections 351.222(g)(1)(i) and

351.221(c)(3), we are initiating this

changed circumstances administrative

review and have determined that

expedited action is warranted. Our

decision to expedite this review stems

from the domestic industry’s lack of

interest in applying the antidumping

duty order to glass-lined seamless

pressure pipe.

Based on the expression of no interest

by Gulf States and Koppel Steel and

absent any objection by any other

domestic interested parties, we have

preliminarily determined that

substantially all of the domestic

producers of the like product have no

interest in continued application of the

antidumping duty order to glass-lined

seamless pressure pipe from Brazil.

Because we have concluded that

expedited action is warranted, we are

combining these notices of initiation

and preliminary results. Therefore, we

are hereby notifying the public of our

intent to revoke, in part, the

antidumping duty order as it relates to

imports of certain glass-lined seamless

pressure pipe from Brazil.

Interested parties may submit case

briefs and/or written comments no later

than 30 days after the date of

publication of these preliminary results.

Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals to written

comments, limited to issues raised in

such briefs or comments, may be filed

no later than 37 days after the date of

publication. The Department will issue

the final results of this changed

circumstances review, which will

include the results of its analysis raised

in any such written comments, no later

than 270 days after the date on which

this review was initiated, or within 45

days if all parties agree to our
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 99 / Friday, May 22, 1998 / Notices 28359

preliminary determination. See section

351.216(e) of the Department’s

regulations.

If final revocation occurs, we will

instruct the U.S. Customs Service to end

the suspension of liquidation and to

refund, with interest, any estimated

antidumping duties collected for all

unliquidated entries of glass-lined

seamless pressure pipe from Brazil. The

current requirement for a cash deposit

of estimated antidumping duties on all

subject merchandise will continue

unless and until it is modified pursuant

to the final results of this changed

circumstances review.

This initiation of review and notice

are in accordance with sections 751(b)

of the Act, as amended (19 U.S.C.

1675(b)), and 19 CFR 351.216, 351.221,

and 351.222 (62 FR 27396, 27398–9,

May 19, 1997).

Dated: May 18, 1998.

Robert S. LaRussa,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 98–13801 Filed 5–21–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D. 011996A]

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife;

Recovery Plans for Listed Sea Turtles

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

SUMMARY: NMFS and the Fish and

Wildlife Service (FWS), Department of

the Interior, (collectively, the Services)

announce the availability of the final

recovery plans for U.S. Pacific

populations of endangered and

threatened sea turtles, as required by the

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA).

DATES: May 22, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the

recovery plans may be submitted to the

Chief, Endangered Species Division,

Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,

1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring,

MD 20910. Copies may be purchased

from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Reference Service, 5430 Grosvenor

Lane, Suite 110, Bethesda, MD 20814,

1–800–582–3421. Electronic copies in

.pdf format are also available at NMFS’

Protected Resources internet website

(www.nmfs.gov/prot_res/).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Barbara Schroeder, Office of Protected

Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910,

Phone: 301–713–1401, or Sandy

MacPherson, FWS, 6620 Southpoint Dr.

South, Jacksonville, FL 32216, Phone:

904–232–2580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The ESA is administered jointly by

the Services. NMFS has jurisdiction

over most species in the marine system

while FWS has jurisdiction elsewhere.

Listed endangered and threatened

species under NMFS jurisdiction are

enumerated in 50 CFR 222.23(a) and 50

CFR 227.4, respectively. The List of

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife,

which contains species under the

jurisdiction of both Services, is found in

50 CFR 17.11(h).

Pursuant to a Memorandum of

Agreement between the two Services,

the jurisdiction over listed sea turtles is

shared: FWS has responsibility for sea

turtles primarily in the terrestrial

environment, while NMFS has

responsibility for sea turtles primarily in

the marine environment. Presently, all

sea turtle species found in the United

States are listed as follows: Kemp’s

ridley (Lepidochelys kempii),

leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), and

hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) are

listed as endangered; loggerhead

(Caretta caretta), green (Chelonia

mydas), and olive ridley (Lepidochelys

olivacea) turtles are listed as threatened,

except for breeding populations of green

turtles in Florida and on the Pacific

coast of Mexico, and for breeding

populations of olive ridleys on the

Pacific coast of Mexico, which are listed

as endangered.

Section 4(f)(1) of the ESA requires

that the Secretary of the Interior or the

Secretary of Commerce develop and

implement recovery plans for the

conservation and survival of endangered

and threatened species listed pursuant

to section 4(c) of the ESA, unless such

plans would not promote the

conservation of the species. Pursuant to

section 4(f)(4) of the ESA, prior to final

approval and implementation of a new

or revised recovery plan, the Secretary

shall provide public notice and an

opportunity for public review and

comment. The Services published a

notice of availability of the draft

recovery plans in the Federal Register

on March 12, 1996 (61 FR 9978). No

comments were received during the 60-

day comment period.

The recovery plans are for the U.S.

Pacific populations of the loggerhead,

olive ridley, leatherback, hawksbill,

green turtle and the East Pacific

population of the green turtle. These are

the first comprehensive recovery plans

for sea turtle populations in the U.S.

Pacific. To accomplish the drafting of

the recovery plans, a team was formed

consisting of professional biologists

with experience in the region and with

marine turtles.

While similar in format to previous

sea turtle recovery plans for the Atlantic

and the Caribbean, the unique nature of

the Pacific required some changes to

that format. The geographic scope of

these plans is much larger than any

previously attempted, with over 5,000

islands and 3,000 miles (4,827 km) of

ocean, as well as the mainland United

States, to consider. Furthermore, the

amount of jurisdictional overlap

between nations, commonwealths,

territories, and compact-of-freeassociation-states and the various turtle

populations required a broader

management perspective than has been

attempted previously. Finally, sea

turtles have not been studied as

intensively in the Pacific as in other

U.S. areas, and thus there is a large void

in basic biological information. For

these reasons, these plans have more

extensive text on the general biology of

the turtles, so that they might act as a

resource to managers seeking a handy

reference to the species. The plans are

also subdivided into U.S. jurisdictional

areas (i.e. the various commonwealths

and territories), so that local managers

can address issues within their

respective regions more easily.

To implement these plans, NMFS will

form implementation teams, where

needed, consisting of representatives

from Federal agencies, states, territories,

and commonwealths. The team(s) will

produce a plan that identifies solutions

for achieving recovery of these

populations.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531–1543 et seq.

Dated: May 15, 1998.

Hilda Diaz-Soltero,

Director, Office of Protected Resources,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 98–13763 Filed 5–21–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D. 051398F]

North Pacific Fishery Management

Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and