31242 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 30, 2009 / Notices 

Trading’’), the producer of the subject 

merchandise, certified that it did not 

export the subject merchandise to the 

United States during the POI. In 

addition, pursuant to section 

751(a)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A), Sea-line certified 

that, since the initiation of the 

investigation, it has never been affiliated 

with any Chinese exporter or producer 

who exported steel nails to the United 

States during the POI, including those 

not individually examined during the 

investigation has not been affiliated 

with . In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.214(b)(2)(iv), Sea-line submitted 

documentation establishing the 

following: (1) The date on which it first 

shipped fresh garlic for export to the 

United States and the date on which 

fresh garlic were first entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption; (2) the volume of its first 

shipment; and (3) the date of its first 

sale to an unaffiliated customer in the 

United States. 

Initiation of New Shipper Review 

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

‘‘Act’’) and 19 CFR 351.214(d)(1), we 

find that the request submitted by Sealine meets the threshold requirements 

for initiation of a new shipper review 

for shipments of fresh garlic from the 

PRC, exported by Sea-line and produced 

by Juxinyuan Trading. See 

Memorandum to the File through 

Barbara E. Tillman, Director, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 6, Fresh Garlic from 

the People’s Republic of China: 

Initiation of Antidumping New Shipper 

Review, dated concurrently with this 

notice. See 19 CFR 351.214(g)(1)(i)(B). 

The Department will conduct this 

review according to the deadlines set 

forth in section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the 

Act. It is the Department’s usual 

practice, in cases involving non-market 

economies, to require that a company 

seeking to establish eligibility for an 

antidumping duty rate separate from the 

country-wide rate provide evidence of 

de jure and de facto absence of 

government control over the company’s 

export activities. Accordingly, we will 

issue a questionnaire to Sea-line, which 

will include a separate rate section. The 

review will proceed if the response 

provides sufficient indication that Sealine is not subject to either de jure or de 

facto government control with respect to 

its export of fresh garlic. 

On August 17, 2006, the Pension 

Protection Act of 2006, Public Law 109– 

280, (‘‘H.R. 4’’), was signed into law. 

Section 1632 of H.R. 4 temporarily 

suspended the authority of the 

Department to instruct U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection to collect a bond 

or other security in lieu of a cash 

deposit in new shipper reviews initiated 

during the period April 1, 2006 through 

June 30, 2009. Therefore, the posting of 

a bond or other security under section 

751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act in lieu of a 

cash deposit is not available in this case. 

Importers of fresh garlic, exported by 

Sea-line, must continue to post a cash 

deposit of estimated antidumping duties 

on each entry of subject merchandise at 

the per unit PRC-wide rate. 

Interested parties requiring access to 

proprietary information in this new 

shipper review should submit 

applications for disclosure under 

administrative protective order in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 and 

351.306. 

This initiation and notice are in 

accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of 

the Act and 19 CFR 351.214 and 

351.221(c)(1)(i). 

Dated: June 24, 2009. 

John M. Andersen, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. E9–15459 Filed 6–29–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–810] 

Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipes 

From the Republic of Korea: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On December 24, 2008, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published the preliminary 

results of administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on certain 

welded stainless steel pipes (WSSP) 

from the Republic of Korea. The review 

was requested by Bristol Metals LLC 

(domestic interested party), and covers 

one producer of the subject 

merchandise, SeAH Steel Corporation 

(SeAH). The period of review (POR) is 

December 1, 2006 through November 

30, 2007. Based on our analysis of the 

comments received, we have made 

changes to the preliminary results, 

which are discussed in the ‘‘Changes 

Since the Preliminary Results’’ section 

below. For the final dumping margin, 

see the ‘‘Final Results of Review’’ 

section below. 

DATES: Effective Date: June 30, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Myrna Lobo, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 6, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–2371. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On December 24, 2008, the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register the preliminary results of the 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on WSSP from 

the Republic of Korea. See Certain 

Welded Stainless Steel Pipes from the 

Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results 

of Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review, 73 FR 79050 (December 24, 

2008) (Preliminary Results). In the 

preliminary results, the Department 

explained it intended to solicit quarterly 

pipe cost of production (COP) and 

constructed value (CV) information from 

SeAH after the preliminary results. On 

January 15, 2009, the Department issued 

a supplemental section D questionnaire 

requesting the quarterly cost 

information. On January 26, 2009, SeAH 

submitted its response. After evaluating 

the information, on April 29, 2009, the 

Department issued its preliminary 

decision to adjust the COP and CV 

information. See Memorandum from 

Gina Lee, Senior Accountant to Neal M. 

Halper, Director, Office of Accounting, 

Proposed Adjustments to the Cost of 

Production and Constructed Value 

Information—SeAH Steel Corporation 

dated April 29, 2009. 

The Department conducted sales and 

cost verifications of SeAH in Seoul, 

South Korea in February 2009 and 

March 2009, and a sales verification of 

SeAH’s U.S. affiliate, Pusan Pipe 

America (PPA) in April 2009. See the 

‘‘Verification’’ section below for 

additional information. 

On April 2, 2009, the Department 

extended the deadline for the final 

results from April 23, 2009 to June 22, 

2009. See Welded ASTM A–312 

Stainless Steel Pipe From South Korea: 

Extension of Time Limit for Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 74 FR 14959 

(April 2, 2009). 

The Department invited parties to 

comment on the Preliminary Results, 

the preliminary decision to adjust COP 

and CV information, and the verification 

reports. On May 4, 2009, the 

Department extended the deadlines for 

case briefs and rebuttal briefs. On May 

11, 2009, the domestic interested party 

and respondent filed timely case briefs. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES6
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 30, 2009 / Notices 31243 

On May 18, 2009, both parties filed 

rebuttal briefs. 

The Department met with interested 

parties on May 28, 2009, and June 1, 

2009. See Memorandum to the File from 

Dana Mermelstein, Program Manager, 

Office 6, Administrative Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order on Welded 

Stainless Steel Pipe from Korea: 

Meetings with Interested Parties, dated 

June 2, 2009. 

Period of Review 

The POR is December 1, 2006 through 

November 30, 2007. 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to the 

antidumping duty order is welded 

austenitic stainless steel pipe that meets 

the standards and specifications set 

forth by the American Society for 

Testing and Materials (ASTM) for the 

welded form of chromium-nickel pipe 

designated ASTM A–312. The 

merchandise covered by the scope of the 

order also includes austenitic welded 

stainless steel pipes made according to 

the standards of other nations which are 

comparable to ASTM A–312. 

WSSP is produced by forming 

stainless steel flat-rolled products into a 

tubular configuration and welding along 

the seam. WSSP is a commodity product 

generally used as a conduit to transmit 

liquids or gases. Major applications for 

steel pipe include, but are not limited 

to, digester lines, blow lines, 

pharmaceutical lines, petrochemical 

stock lines, brewery process and 

transport lines, general food processing 

lines, automotive paint lines, and paper 

process machines. Imports of WSSP are 

currently classifiable under the 

following Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

of the United States (HTSUS) 

subheadings: 306.40.5005, 

7306.40.5015, 7306.40.5040, 

7306.40.5065, and 7306.40.5085. 

Although these subheadings include 

both pipes and tubes, the scope of the 

antidumping duty order is limited to 

welded austenitic stainless steel pipes. 

The HTSUS subheadings are provided 

for convenience and customs purposes. 

However, the written description of the 

scope of the order is dispositive. 

Verification 

As provided in section 782(i) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the 

Act’’), from February 9, 2009 through 

February 13, 2009, and from March 9, 

2009 through March 13, 2009, the 

Department verified the sales and cost 

information submitted by SeAH in its 

questionnaire responses provided 

during the course of this review. The 

Department also conducted verification 

of SeAH’s U.S. affiliate, Pusan Pipe 

America (PPA) on April 15 and 16, 

2009, in Los Angeles, California. We 

used standard verification procedures 

including examination of relevant 

accounting and production records, and 

original source documents provided by 

the respondent. See Memorandum from 

Jacqueline Arrowsmith and Douglas 

Kirby, International Trade Compliance 

Analysts, to The File, ‘‘Verification of 

the Sales Response of SeAH Steel 

Corporation (SeAH) in the 2006–2007 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review of certain welded Stainless Steel 

Welded Pipe from the Republic of Korea 

(South Korea),’’ dated March 25, 2009 

(‘‘Sales Verification Report’’); 

Memorandum from Douglas Kirby and 

Summer Avery, International Trade 

Compliance Analysts, to The File, 

‘‘Verification of the Sales Response of 

Pusan Pipe America (PPA) in the 2006– 

2007 Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review of certain welded Stainless Steel 

Welded Pipe from the Republic of Korea 

(South Korea),’’ dated April 27, 2009 

(‘‘CEP Verification Report’’); 

Memorandum from Stephanie Arthur to 

Neal Halper ‘‘Verification of the Cost 

Response of SeAH Steel Corporation in 

the Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review of Welded ASTM A–312 

Stainless Steel Pipe from Korea,’’ dated 

April 28, 2009 (‘‘Cost Verification 

Report’’). The public versions of these 

verification reports are on file in the 

Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 1117 

of the main Commerce Building. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

The issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to this 

administrative review are addressed in 

the Memorandum from John M. 

Andersen, Acting Deputy Assistant 

Secretary for Import Administration to 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant 

Secretary for Import Administration; 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review of Certain Welded Stainless 

Steel Pipes from the Republic of Korea: 

Issues and Decision Memorandum for 

the Final Results (Decision 

Memorandum), dated concurrently with 

this notice and which is hereby adopted 

by this notice. A list of the issues 

addressed in the Decision Memorandum 

is appended to this notice. The Decision 

Memorandum is also on file in the CRU, 

and can be accessed directly on the Web 

at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper 

copy and electronic version of the 

Decision Memorandum are identical in 

content. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on the results of verification, 

our analysis of comments received, and 

our consideration of information 

submitted by SeAH on January 26, 2009, 

in its supplemental questionnaire 

response, received subsequent to the 

issuance of the Preliminary Results, we 

have made adjustments to our margin 

calculations. As explained in our 

Decision Memorandum, we have 

continued to use a quarterly cost 

averaging methodology in calculating 

COP and CV. However, for these final 

results, we have made several changes 

to the calculation of COP and CV, and 

the margin program. We adjusted 

SeAH’s reported financial expense ratio 

to (1) exclude interest income generated 

on retirement and severance deposits, 

and (2) include the net gain associated 

with currency options and swaps; we 

changed the adjustment applied to COM 

in our preliminary results pursuant to 

the major input and transactions 

disregarded rules; and, we made certain 

modifications to the program to ensure 

proper product comparisons and the use 

of the correct reporting period. These 

adjustments are discussed in detail in 

the Decision Memorandum, and in the 

Memorandum to the File, from Myrna 

Lobo, Case Analyst, Calculation 

Memorandum for the Final Results of 

Administrative Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order on Stainless 

Steel Pipe from the Republic of Korea— 

SeAH Steel Corporation (June 22, 2009) 

at the section titled ‘‘Changes from the 

Preliminary Results.’’ See also 

Memorandum from Stephanie Arthur to 

Neal Halper, Adjustments to the Cost of 

Production and Constructed Value 

Information for the Final Results—SeAH 

Steel Corporation, (June 22, 2009). 

Final Results of Review 

As a result of our review, we 

determine that the following weightedaverage margin exists for the period of 

December 1, 2006 through November 

30, 2007: 

Manufacturer/Exporter 

Weighted-Average 

margin 

(Percent) 

SeAH Steel Corporation ....... 9.05 

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) of the 

Department’s regulations, 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 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES6
31244 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 30, 2009 / Notices 

after the date of publication of these 

final results of review. 

The Department clarified its 

‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on 

May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This 

clarification will apply to entries of 

subject merchandise during the period 

of review produced by the company 

included in these 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 allothers 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 

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 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 7.00 percent, 

the all-others rate established in the less 

than fair value investigation. See Notice 

of Amended Final Determination and 

Antidumping Duty Order: Certain 

Welded Stainless Steel Pipe From the 

Republic of Korea, 60 FR 10064 

(February 23, 1995). 

Notification to Importers 

This notice also serves as a final 

reminder to importers of their 

responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 

of the Department’s regulations 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 in the subsequent 

assessment of double antidumping 

duties. 

Notification Regarding Administrative 

Protective Orders 

This notice is the only reminder to 

parties subject to the administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the return or 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under the APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3) of the 

Department’s regulations. Timely 

written notification of the return or 

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. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

final results and this notice in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 

777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: June 22, 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I—Issues in Decision 

Memorandum 

Comment 1: Whether to Apply an 

Alternative Cost-Averaging Methodology 

a. Legal Framework and Case Precedent 

b. Significance of Cost Changes 

c. Linkage Between Costs and Sales Prices 

d. The Elimination of the Window Period 

for Price-to-Price Comparisons 

e. The Cost Recovery Test 

Comment 2: Application of the Major Input 

Rule 

Comment 3: The Treatment of Gains 

Associated With Foreign Currency Swaps 

Comment 4: The Treatment of Interest 

Income Earned on Retirement and Severance 

Deposits 

Comment 5: Whether the Department 

Should Refrain From Zeroing Negative 

Margins 

Comment 6: Calculation Issues 

[FR Doc. E9–15492 Filed 6–29–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–890] 

Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the 

People’s Republic of China: 

Preliminary Results of New Shipper 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On September 9, 2008, the 

Department of Commerce (‘‘the 

Department’’) initiated a new shipper 

review (‘‘NSR’’) of the antidumping 

duty order on wooden bedroom 

furniture from the People’s Republic of 

China (‘‘PRC’’) covering sales of subject 

merchandise made by Shanghai Fangjia 

Industry Co., Ltd. (‘‘Fangjia’’). See 

Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the 

People’s Republic of China: Initiation of 

New Shipper Review, 73 FR 52296 

(September 9, 2008) (‘‘Initiation of 

NSR’’). 

The Department preliminarily 

determines that Fangjia has not made 

sales at less than normal value (‘‘NV’’). 

If these preliminary results are adopted 

in our final results of review, the 

Department will instruct U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to assess 

antidumping duties on entries of subject 

merchandise during the period of 

review (‘‘POR’’), of January 1, 2008 

through June 30, 2008, for which the 

importer-specific assessment rates are 

above de minimis. 

DATES: Effective Date: June 30, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Stolz or Lori Apodaca, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 8, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–4474 and (202) 

482–4551, respectively. 

Background 

The Department published an 

antidumping duty order on wooden 

bedroom furniture from the PRC on 

January 4, 2005. See Notice of Amended 

Final Determination of Sales at Less 

Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty 

Order: Wooden Bedroom Furniture from 

the People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 

329 (January 4, 2005) (‘‘the Order’’). On 

July 11, 2008, Fangjia requested that the 

Department conduct an NSR of its sales 

of subject merchandise during the 

January 1, 2008 through June 30, 2008 

POR. On September 9, 2008, the 

Department initiated an NSR of Fangjia. 

On September 10, 2008, the 

Department issued an antidumping duty 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES6