[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 14, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2048-2049]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-632]



[[Page 2048]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-549-807]


Notice of Initiation and Preliminary Results of Changed-
Circumstances Antidumping Duty Review: Certain Carbon Steel Butt-Weld 
Pipe Fittings From Thailand

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) received a request 
from Awaji Materia (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (AMT), for initiation of a 
changed-circumstances review of the antidumping duty order on certain 
carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings (pipe fittings) from Thailand. 
After reviewing this request, we preliminarily determine that AMT is 
the successor-in-interest to Awaji Sangyo (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (AST), 
and, as a result, should be accorded the same treatment previously 
accorded to AST with respect to the antidumping duty order on pipe 
fittings from Thailand. Interested parties are invited to comment on 
these preliminary results.

DATES: Effective Date: January 14, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edythe Artman or Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
3931 and (202) 482-1690, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On July 6, 1992, the Department published an antidumping duty order 
on pipe fittings from Thailand in which it stated that AST was excluded 
from the order due to its de minimis margin in the less-than-fair-value 
investigation. See Antidumping Duty Order; Certain Carbon Steel Butt-
Weld Pipe Fittings From Thailand, 57 FR 29702 (July 6, 1992); see also 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Carbon 
Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Thailand, 57 FR 21065 (May 18, 
1992).\1\ On November 18, 2008, the Department received a request for a 
changed-circumstances review of this order from AMT to determine if, 
for purposes of the antidumping law, AMT is the successor-in-interest 
to AST. On December 4, 2008, we received a letter from Weldbend 
Corporation, a domestic producer of pipe fittings, in which it 
expressed support for AMT's request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As observed in the November 18, 2008 request from AMT, 
exports of subject merchandise of AST were also the subject of a 
subsequent investigation in which the International Trade Commission 
concluded that the exports did not result in the material injury or 
threat of material injury to the U.S. industry or in material 
retardation of the establishment of an industry in the United 
States. See Certain Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings From 
France, India, Israel, Malaysia, The Republic of Korea, Thailand, 
The United Kingdom, and Venezuela, 60 FR 18611 (April 12, 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The scope of the order covers certain pipe fittings from Thailand. 
They are defined as carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings, having an 
inside diameter of less than 14 inches, imported in either finished or 
unfinished form. These formed or forged pipe fittings are used to join 
sections in piping systems where conditions require permanent, welded 
connections, as distinguished from fittings based on other fastening 
methods (e.g., threaded, grooved, or bolted fittings). These imports 
are currently classifiable under subheading 7307.93.30 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the 
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, 
the written description remains dispositive as to the scope of the 
order.

Initiation and Preliminary Results of Changed-Circumstances Review

    Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(the Act), and 19 CFR 351.216, the Department will conduct a changed-
circumstances review upon receipt of information concerning, or a 
request from an interested party for review of, an antidumping duty 
order which shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review 
of the order. The Department finds that the documentation that AMT 
submitted with its November 18, 2008 request constitutes sufficient 
evidence of changed circumstances to warrant such a review. Thus, in 
accordance with section 751(b) of the Act, the Department is initiating 
a changed-circumstances review to determine whether AMT is the 
successor-in-interest to AST for purposes of determining antidumping 
duty liability with respect to imports of pipe fittings from Thailand.
    Furthermore, 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii) permits the Department to 
combine the notice of initiation of a changed-circumstances review and 
the notice of preliminary results for the review in a single notice if 
the Department concludes that expedited action is warranted. As 
explained below, we find that the evidence provided by AMT is 
sufficient to preliminarily determine that this company is the 
successor-in-interest to AST.
    In making a successor-in-interest determination, the Department 
examines several factors including but not limited to changes in the 
following: (1) Management; (2) production facilities; (3) supplier 
relationships; and (4) customer base. See, e.g., Notice of Final 
Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan, 67 FR 58 (January 2, 2002), 
and Brass Sheet and Strip from Canada: Final Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460, 20461 (May 13, 1992). While no 
single factor or combination of factors will necessarily provide a 
dispositive indication of a successor-in-interest relationship, 
generally the Department will consider the new company to be the 
successor to the previous company if the new company's resulting 
operation is not materially dissimilar to that of its predecessor. See, 
e.g., Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon from Norway; Final Results of 
Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 64 FR 
9979 (March 1, 1999) (Salmon from Norway), and Industrial Phosphoric 
Acid from Israel; Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR 
6944, 6945 (February 14, 1994). Thus, if the record evidence 
demonstrates that, with respect to the production and sale of the 
subject merchandise, the new company operates as the same business 
entity as the predecessor company, the Department may assign the new 
company the cash-deposit rate of its predecessor. See, e.g., Salmon 
from Norway, 64 FR at 9980.
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(3), we preliminarily determine 
that AMT is the successor-in-interest to AST. In its November 18, 2008 
filing, AMT provided evidence supporting its claim to be the successor-
in-interest to AST. Specifically, it provided the following 
documentation:
    (1) A declaration of the executive vice president of AMT in which 
the official states that the name change of the company from AST to AMT 
did not result in changes in management, production, facilities, 
supplier relationships or changes to the customer base;
    (2) Certifications of incorporation of both AST and AMT filed with 
the Thai Ministry of Commerce;
    (3) Copies of tax identification cards for AST and AMT that show 
the

[[Page 2049]]

companies were assigned the same taxpayer identification numbers;
    (4) A statement from a Thai bank confirming the change of the 
company account name from AST to AMT in August 2006;
    (5) Company outlines dated before and after the name change that 
demonstrate no changes in management or facilities between the two 
points in time;
    (6) A notice published by the European Union Commission recognizing 
the name change from AST to AMT for antidumping-duty purposes; and
    (7) Copies of letters AST sent to customers announcing the name 
change.
    In summary, AMT has presented evidence to establish a prima facie 
case of its successorship status. AST's name change to AMT has not 
changed the operations of the company in a meaningful way. AMT's 
management, production facilities, supplier relationships, and customer 
base are substantially unchanged from those of AST. The record evidence 
demonstrates that the new entity essentially operates in the same 
manner as the predecessor company. Consequently, we preliminarily 
determine that AMT should be assigned the same antidumping-duty 
treatment as AST, i.e., exclusion from the order. See Antidumping Duty 
Order; Certain Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings From Thailand, 57 
FR 29702 (July 6, 1992).

Public Comment

    Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary 
results. Written comments may be submitted no later than 14 days after 
the date of publication of these preliminary results. Rebuttals to 
written comments, limited to issues raised in such comments, may be 
filed no later than 21 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 
preliminary results. See 19 CFR 351.216(e).
    This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 
777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216 and 351.221.

Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-632 Filed 1-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P