Notices. Notice and request for applications

7,791 words·~35 min read·/register/2010/01/07/2010-29

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Availability of Seats for the Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council AGENCY: Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce (DOC). ACTION: Notice and request for applications. SUMMARY: The ONMS is seeking applications for both primary and alternate members of the following seats on its Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council (council):

Native Hawaiians, Fishing, Education, Research, Honolulu County, Hawaii County, Maui County, and Kauai County. Applicants are chosen based upon their particular expertise and experience in relation to the seat for which they are applying; community and professional affiliations; philosophy regarding the protection and management of marine resources; and possibly the length of residence in the area affected by the Sanctuary. Additionally, for the first time, the ONMS is seeking to fill a non-voting youth/student seat and alternate seat to represent the youth segment of the community, defined as ages 14-17.

The interest and enthusiasm of youth under the age of 18 is very important to the sanctuary; these students are our future generation of ocean stewards and leaders. The ONMS wishes to foster and facilitate these links with youth in sanctuary communities and has added a non-voting youth seat to the advisory council. Applicants who are chosen as members should expect to serve 2-year terms, pursuant to the Council's Charter. DATES: Applications are due by January 31, 2010. ADDRESSES:

Application kits may be obtained from Joseph Paulin, 6600 Kalanianaole Hwy, Suite 301, Honolulu, HI 96825 or *Joseph.Paulin@noaa.gov.* Completed applications should be sent to the same address. Applications are also available on line at *http://hawaiihumpbackwhale.noaa.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Naomi McIntosh, 6600 Kalanianaole Hwy, Suite 301, Honolulu, HI 96825 or *Naomi.McIntosh@noaa.gov* or 808.397.2651. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Council was established in March 1996 to assure continued public participation in the management of the sanctuary.

Since its establishment, the council has played a vital role in the decisions affecting the Sanctuary surrounding the main Hawaiian Islands. The council's seventeen voting members represent a variety of local user groups, as well as the general public. The council is supported by three committees: A Research Committee chaired by the Research Representative, an Education Committee chaired by the Education Representative, and a Conservation Committee chaired by the Conservation Representative, each respectively dealing with matters concerning research, education and resource protection.

The council represents the coordination link between the sanctuary and the State and Federal management agencies, user groups, researchers, educators, policy makers, and other various groups that help to focus efforts and attention on the humpback whale and its habitat around the main Hawaiian Islands. The council functions in an advisory capacity to the sanctuary management and is instrumental in helping to develop policies and program goals, and to identify education, outreach, research, long-term monitoring, resource protection and revenue enhancement priorities.

The council works in concert with the sanctuary management by keeping him or her informed about issues of concern throughout the sanctuary, offering recommendations on specific issues, and aiding in achieving the goals of the sanctuary within the context of Hawaii's marine programs and policies. Authority: 16 U.S.C. Sections 1431, *et seq.* (Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog Number 11.429 Marine Sanctuary Program) Dated: December 20, 2009. Daniel J. Basta, Director, Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. [FR Doc.

E9-31409 Filed 1-6-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-NK-M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XT58 North Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) Observer Advisory Committee

(OAC)will meet in Seattle, WA. DATES: The meeting will be held on January 29, 2010, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Alaska Fishery Science Center, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Bldg 4, Traynor Conference Center, Seattle, WA 98115. *Council address* : North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 W. 4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501-2252. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicole Kimball, Council staff, telephone:

(907)271-2809. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The primary purpose of the committee meeting is to review the next iteration of the Observer Restructuring Implementation Plan. Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Gail Bendixen at

(907)271-2809 at least 7 working days prior to the meeting date. Dated: December 31, 2009. William D. Chappell, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E9-31426 Filed 1-7-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XT59 Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) Ad Hoc Salmon Amendment Committee

(SAC)will hold a meeting to develop draft alternatives and plan analyses for an amendment to the Pacific Coast Salmon Fishery Management Plan

(FMP)to address the Magnuson-Stevens Act

(MSA)requirements for annual catch limits

(ACL)and accountability measures (AM). This meeting of the SAC is open to the public. DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, January 26, 2009, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Pacific Council Office, Large Conference Room, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220-1384; telephone:

(503)820-2280. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Chuck Tracy, Salmon Management Staff Officer, Pacific Fishery Management Council; telephone:

(503)820-2280. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reauthorized MSA established new requirements to end and prevent overfishing through the use of ACLs and AMs. Federal FMPs must establish mechanisms for ACLs and AMs by 2010 for stocks subject to overfishing and by 2011 for all others, with the exceptions of stocks managed under an international agreement or stocks with a life cycle of approximately one year. On January 16, 2009, NMFS published amended guidelines for National Standard 1

(NS1)of the MSA to provide guidance on how to comply with new ACL and AM requirements. The NS1 guidelines include recommendations for establishing several related reference points to ensure scientific and management uncertainty are accounted for when management measures are established. The purpose of this meeting is to develop alternatives to address those issues, and to plan analyses that will be used to evaluate those alternatives in a National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)analysis. Although non-emergency issues not contained in the meeting agenda may come before the SAC for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Ms. Carolyn Porter at

(503)820-2280 at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Dated: December 31, 2009. William D. Chappell, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E9-31427 Filed 1-6-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XT60 Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) Scientific and Statistical Committee, Coastal Pelagic Species Management Team, and Groundfish Management Team will hold a working meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: The joint meeting will be held Tuesday, January 26 through Thursday, January 28, 2010. The meeting will begin each day at 8:30 a.m. and continue until business for each day is completed. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Hotel Deca, 4507 Brooklyn Avenue Northeast, Seattle, WA 98105. *Council address* : Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220-1384. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mike Burner, Mr. John DeVore, or Ms. Kelly Ames, staff officers; telephone:

(503)820-2280. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the working meeting is to review and further develop analyses relating to harvest control rules, allowable biological catch, annual catch limits, and accountability measures for coastal pelagic species and groundfish. The advisory bodies may also address other assignments relating to coastal pelagic species management or groundfish management. No management actions will be decided by the advisory bodies. The role of the advisory bodies will be to develop analyses and recommendations for harvest control rules, allowable biological catch, annual catch limits, and accountability measures for consideration by the Council at future Council meetings. Although non-emergency issues not contained in the meeting agenda may come before the advisory bodies for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Advisory body actions will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the advisory bodies' intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Ms. Carolyn Porter at

(DOI)invited Federal, State, commonwealth, and territorial marine protected areas

(MPA)programs with potentially eligible existing MPAs to nominate their sites to the National System of MPAs (national system). The national system and the nomination process are described in the Framework for the National System of Marine Protected Areas of the United States (Framework), developed in response to Executive Order 13158 on Marine Protected Areas. The final Framework was published on November 19, 2008, (73 FR 69608) and provides guidance for collaborative efforts among Federal, State, commonwealth, territorial, Tribal and local governments and stakeholders to develop an effective and well coordinated national system of MPAs that includes existing MPAs meeting national system criteria as well as new sites that may be established by managing agencies to fill key conservation gaps in important ocean areas. DATES: Comments on the nominations to the national system of MPAs are due February 22, 2010. ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to Joseph A. Uravitch, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Protected Areas Center, 1305 East West Highway, N/ORM, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Fax:

(301)713-3110. E-mail: *mpa.comments@noaa.gov* . Comments will be accepted in written form by mail, e-mail, or fax. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren Wenzel, NOAA, at 301-713 3100, ext. 136 or via e-mail at *mpa.comments@noaa.gov* . An electronic copy of the list of nominated MPAs is available for download at *http://www.mpa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background on National System The national system of MPAs includes member MPA sites, networks and systems established and managed by Federal, State, Tribal and/or local governments that collectively enhance conservation of the nation's natural and cultural marine heritage and represent its diverse ecosystems and resources. Although participating sites continue to be managed independently, national system MPAs also work together at the regional and national levels to achieve common objectives for conserving the nation's important natural and cultural resources, with emphasis on achieving the priority conservation objectives of the Framework. Executive Order 13158 defines an MPA as: “any area of the marine environment that has been reserved by Federal, State, territorial, Tribal, or local laws or regulations to provide lasting protection for part or all of the natural and cultural resources therein.” As such, MPAs in the national system include sites with a wide range of protections, including multiple use areas that manage a broad spectrum of activities and no-take reserves where all extractive uses are prohibited. Although sites in the national system may include both terrestrial and marine components, the term MPA as defined in the Framework refers only to the marine portion of a site (below the mean high tide mark). Benefits of joining the national system of MPAs, which are expected to increase over time as the system matures, include a facilitated means to work with other MPAs in the region, and nationally on issues of common conservation concern; fostering greater public and international recognition of MPAs, MPA programs, and the resources they protect; priority in the receipt of available technical support, MPA partnership grants with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, cooperative project participation, and other support for cross-cutting needs; and the opportunity to influence Federal and regional ocean conservation and management initiatives (such as integrated ocean observing systems, systematic monitoring and evaluation, targeted outreach to key user groups, and helping to identify and address MPA research needs). In addition, the national system provides a forum for coordinated regional planning about place-based conservation priorities that does not currently exist. Joining the national system does not restrict or require changes affecting the designation process for new MPAs or management of existing MPAs. It does not bring State, territorial or local sites under Federal authority. It does not establish new regulatory authority or interfere with the exercise of existing agency authorities. The national system is a mechanism to foster great collaboration among participating MPA sites and programs to enhance stewardship in the waters of the United States. Nomination Process The Framework describes two major focal areas for building the national system of MPAs—a nomination process to allow existing MPAs that meet the entry criteria to become part of the system and a collaborative regional gap analysis process to identify areas of significance for natural or cultural resources that may merit additional protection through existing Federal, State, commonwealth, territorial, Tribal or local MPA authorities. The first call for nominations was issued in November 2008, resulting in the acceptance of 225 charter sites to the national system of MPAs in April 2009. The second nomination process for the national system began on August 7, 2009, when the National Marine Protected Areas Center (MPA Center) sent a letter to Federal, State, commonwealth, and territorial MPA programs inviting them to submit nominations of eligible MPAs to the national system. The initial deadline for nominations was November 6, 2009; this was extended to November 20, 2009. There are three entry criteria for existing MPAs to join the national system, plus a fourth for cultural heritage. Sites that meet all pertinent criteria are eligible for the national system. 1. Meets the definition of an MPA as defined in the Framework. 2. Has a management plan (can be site-specific or part of a broader programmatic management plan; must have goals and objectives and call for monitoring or evaluation of those goals and objectives). 3. Contributes to at least one priority conservation objective as listed in the Framework. 4. Cultural heritage MPAs must also conform to criteria for the National Register for Historic Places. The MPA Center used existing information in the MPA Inventory to determine which MPAs meet the first and second criteria. The inventory is online at *http://www.mpa.gov/helpful_resources/inventory.html* , and potentially eligible sites are posted online at *http://mpa.gov/pdf/national-system/allsitesumsheet8O9.pdf* . As part of the nomination process, the managing entity for each potentially eligible site is asked to provide information on the third and fourth criteria. List of MPAs Nominated to the National System The following 32 MPAs have been nominated by their managing programs to join the national system of MPAs. A list providing more detail for each site is available at *http://www.mpa.gov* . Federal Marine Protected Areas National Parks Acadia National Park Apostle Islands National Lakeshore Buck Island Reef National Monument Cabrillo National Monument Canaveral National Seashore Cape Cod National Seashore Cape Hatteras National Seashore Cape Lookout National Seashore Fire Island National Seashore Gateway National Recreation Area Golden Gate National Recreation Area Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve Kalaupapa National Historical Park Kaloko-Honokahau National Historical Park National Park of American Samoa Olympic National Park Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore Salt River Bay National Historical Park and Ecological Preserve San Juan Islands National Historical Park Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore National Wildlife Refuges Blackbeard Island National Wildlife Refuge Harris Neck National Wildlife Refuge Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge Pickney Island National Wildlife Refuge Tybee National Wildlife Refuge Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge Wolf National Wildlife Refuge Partnership Marine Protected Areas Jobos Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve (Puerto Rico) State Marine Protected Areas North Carolina Queen Anne's Revenge (Shipwreck) Virgin Islands East End Marine Park Washington San Juan County/Cypress Island Marine Biological Preserve Review and Approval Following this public comment period, the MPA Center will forward public comments to the relevant managing entity or entities, which will reaffirm or withdraw (in writing to the MPA Center) the nomination. After final MPA Center review, mutually agreed upon MPAs will be accepted into the national system and the List of National System MPAs will be posted at *http://www.mpa.gov* . Dated: December 30, 2009. David M. Kennedy, Assistant Administrator for Ocean Service and Coastal Zone Management. [FR Doc. E9-31406 Filed 1-6-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-580-810] Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipes From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain welded stainless steel pipes

(WSSP)from the Republic of Korea (Korea) for the period of review

(POR)December 1, 2007 through November 30, 2008. The review covers one respondent, SeAH Steel Corporation (SeAH). We preliminarily determine that sales made by SeAH have been made at below normal value (NV). If the preliminary results are adopted in our final results of administrative review, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)to assess antidumping duties on entries of SeAH's merchandise during the POR. Interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary results. DATES: *Effective Date:* January 7, 2010. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Holly Phelps or Elizabeth Eastwood, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-0656 or

(202)482-3874, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background In December 1992, the Department published in the **Federal Register** an antidumping duty order on certain WSSP from Korea. *See Antidumping Duty Order and Clarification of Final Determination: Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipes from Korea,* 57 FR 62301 (Dec. 30, 1992), as amended in *Notice of Amended Final Determination and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipe from the Republic of Korea,* 60 FR 10064 (Feb. 23, 1995) ( *Amended Final Determination and Order* ). On December 1, 2008, the Department published in the **Federal Register** a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order of WSSP from Korea for the period December 1, 2007, through November 31, 2008. *See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review,* 73 FR 72764 (Dec. 1, 2008). On December 29, 2008, the Department received a timely request from SeAH, in accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.213(b), for an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on WSSP from Korea. On February 2, 2009, the Department published, in the **Federal Register** , the notice of initiation of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on WSSP from Korea for SeAH. *See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part,* 74 FR 5821 (Feb. 2, 2009). In February 2009, the Department issued the antidumping duty questionnaire to SeAH. SeAH timely submitted its response to section A of the questionnaire ( *i.e.,* the section relating to general information about the company) on March 20, 2009, and its responses to sections B through D of its questionnaires ( *i.e.,* the sections relating to sales to the home and U.S. markets and cost information) on April 20, 2009. In August 2009, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(h)(2), we extended the deadline for the preliminary results of this review by 120 days until no later than December 31, 2009. * See Welded ASTM A-312 Stainless Steel Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, * 74 FR 39045 (Aug. 5, 2009). During the period August 2009 through December 2009, we issued supplemental questionnaires to SeAH. We received responses to these questionnaires from September 2009 through December 2009. 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: 7306.40.5005, 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. Normal Value Analysis In accordance with section 777A(d)(2) of the Act, to determine whether sales of WSSP from Korea were made in the United States at less than NV, we compared the constructed export price

(CEP)to the NV, as described in the “Constructed Export Price” and “Normal Value” sections of this notice. Product Comparisons When making comparisons in accordance with section 771(16) of the Act, we considered all products sold by the respondent in the home market during the POR as described in the “Scope of the Order” section of this notice, above, that were in the ordinary course of trade for purposes of determining appropriate product comparisons to U.S. sales. In accordance with section 771(16)(A) of the Act, we first attempted to compare products produced by the same company and sold in the U.S. and home markets that were identical with respect to the following characteristics: Specification and grade, hot or cold finish, size, wall thickness schedule, and end finish. Where there were no home market sales of foreign like product that were identical in these respects to the merchandise sold in the United States, in accordance with section 771(16)(B) and

(C)of the Act, we compared U.S. products with the most similar merchandise sold in the home market based on the characteristics listed above, in that order of priority. Constructed Export Price Pursuant to section 772(b) of the Act, for sales to the United States, we preliminarily determine that all of SeAH's U.S. sales are CEP sales because all sales of subject merchandise to the United States were made by Pusan Pipe America (PPA), SeAH's U.S. sales subsidiary, to an unaffiliated customer in the United States. We based CEP on the packed prices charged to the first unaffiliated customer in the United States. To establish CEP, where appropriate, we made net price adjustments, as defined by 19 CFR 351.102(b)(38), to PPA's starting price to account for early payment discounts, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.401(c). We made deductions for movement expenses, in accordance with section 772(c)(2) of the Act; these adjustments included, where appropriate, foreign inland freight expenses, foreign brokerage and handling expenses, ocean freight expenses, marine insurance, U.S. brokerage and handling expenses, and U.S. customs duties. For further discussion of the changes made to SeAH's reported U.S. sales data, see the December 31, 2009, memorandum from Holly Phelps, Analyst, to the File, entitled “Calculations Performed for SeAH Steel Corporation for the Preliminary Results in the 2007-2008 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipe from Korea” (SeAH Prelim Calc Memo). In accordance with sections 772(d)(1) and

(2)of the Act, we also deducted, where applicable, those selling expenses associated with economic activities occurring in the United States, including U.S. direct selling expenses ( *i.e.,* warranty and imputed credit expenses), and indirect selling expenses (including inventory carrying costs and other indirect selling expenses incurred in the United States). Pursuant to section 772(d)(3) of the Act, we further reduced the starting price by an amount for profit to arrive at CEP. In accordance with section 772(f) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.402(d), we calculated the CEP profit rate using the expenses incurred by SeAH and its U.S. affiliate on their sales of the subject merchandise in the United States and the profit associated with those sales. Normal Value In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we have based NV on the price at which the foreign like product was first sold for consumption in the home market, in the usual commercial quantities, in the ordinary course of trade, and, to the extent practicable, at the same level of trade

(LOT)as the CEP sale. *See* “Level of Trade” section, below. After testing home market viability and whether home market sales were at below-cost prices, we calculated NV for SeAH as discussed in the following sections. A. Home Market Viability and Selection of Comparison Markets In order to determine whether there is a sufficient volume of sales in the home market to serve as a viable basis for calculating NV ( *i.e.,* the aggregate volume of home market sales of the foreign like product is five percent or more of the aggregate volume of U.S. sales), we compared the volume of SeAH's home market sales of the foreign like product to the volume of U.S. sales of subject merchandise, in accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act. Based on this comparison, we determined that SeAH had a viable home market during the POR. Consequently, we based NV on home market sales, pursuant to section 773(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.404(b). B. Affiliated-Party Transactions and Arm's-Length Test During the POR SeAH made sales of WSSP in the home market to an affiliated party, as defined in section 771(33) of the Act. Consequently, we tested these sales to ensure that they were made at arm's-length prices, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.403(c). To test whether the sales to the affiliate were made at arm's-length prices, we compared the unit prices of sales to affiliated and unaffiliated customers net of all movement charges, direct selling expenses, and packing expenses. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.403(c) and in accordance with the Department's practice, where the price to that affiliated party was, on average, within a range of 98 to 102 percent of the price of the same or comparable merchandise sold to the unaffiliated parties at the same LOT, we determined that the sales made to the affiliated party were at arm's length. *See Antidumping Proceedings: Affiliated Party Sales in the Ordinary Course of Trade,* 67 FR 69186 (Nov. 15, 2002) (establishing that the overall ratio calculated for an affiliate must be between 98 and 102 percent, inclusive, of prices to unaffiliated customers in order for sales to that affiliate to be considered in the ordinary course of trade and used in the NV calculation). Sales to affiliated customers in the home market that were not made at arm's-length prices were excluded from our analysis because we considered these sales to be outside the ordinary course of trade. *See* section 771(15) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b). C. Level of Trade In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, to the extent practicable, we determine NV based on sales in the home market at the same LOT as CEP. Sales are made at different LOTs if they are made at different marketing stages (or their equivalent). *See* 19 CFR 351.412(c)(2). Substantial differences in selling activities are a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for determining that there is a difference in the stages of marketing. *Id; see also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from South Africa,* 62 FR 61731, 61732 (Nov. 19, 1997) ( *Plate from South Africa* ). In order to determine whether the home market sales were at different stages in the marketing process than the U.S. sales, we reviewed the distribution system in each market ( *i.e.,* the chain of distribution), including selling functions, class of customer (customer category), and the level of selling expenses for each type of sale. Pursuant to section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, in identifying LOTs for export price

(EP)and comparison market sales ( *i.e.,* NV based on either home market or third country prices), 1 we consider the starting prices before any adjustments. For CEP sales, we consider only the selling activities reflected in the price after the deduction of expenses and profit under section 772(d) of the Act. *See Micron Tech., Inc.* v. *United States,* 243 F.3d 1301, 1314-16 (Fed. Cir. 2001). 1 Where NV is based on constructed value (CV), we determine the NV LOT based on the LOT of the sales from which we derive selling expenses, general and administrative (G&A) expenses, and profit for CV, where possible. When the Department is unable to match U.S. sales of the foreign like product in the comparison market at the same LOT as the EP or CEP, the Department may compare the U.S. sale to sales at a different LOT in the comparison market. In comparing EP or CEP sales at a different LOT in the comparison market, where available data make it possible, we make an LOT adjustment under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. Finally, for CEP sales only, if the NV LOT is at a more advanced stage of distribution than the LOT of the CEP and there is no basis for determining whether the difference in LOTs between NV and CEP affects price comparability ( *i.e.,* no LOT adjustment was possible), the Department shall grant a CEP offset, as provided in section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act. *See, e.g., Plate from South Africa,* 62 FR at 61732-33. In determining whether separate LOTs exist, we obtained information from SeAH regarding the marketing stages for the reported U.S. and home market sales, including a description of the selling activities performed for each channel of distribution. Generally, if the reported LOTs are the same, the functions and activities of the seller at each level should be similar. Conversely, if a party reports that LOTs are different for different groups of sales, the selling functions and activities of the seller for each group should be dissimilar. In the current review, SeAH reported that it made sales through a single channel of distribution in the home market ( *i.e.,* direct sales to affiliated and unaffiliated customers). SeAH reported performing the following selling functions for its home market sales: Sales negotiation, sales personnel training, sales promotion, order input/processing, invoicing, collection of payment, sales forecasting, sales marketing support, market research, freight/delivery, warehouse operations, and inventory maintenance. These selling activities can be generally grouped into three selling function categories for analysis:

(1)Sales and marketing;

(2)freight and delivery; and

(3)inventory management. Accordingly, based on the selling functions noted above, we find that SeAH performed sales and marketing, freight and delivery services, and inventory management services for home market sales. Because all home market sales are made through a single distribution channel and the selling activities to SeAH's customers do not vary within the channel, we preliminarily determine that there is one LOT in the home market for SeAH. With respect to the United States, SeAH reported that it made sales through one channel of distribution ( *i.e.* , CEP sales via an affiliated reseller) and that the selling functions were performed at a lower level of intensity than in the home market. We examined the selling functions performed for U.S. sales and found that SeAH performed the following selling functions: order input/processing, invoicing, collection of payment, freight/delivery, and inventory maintenance. These selling activities can be generally grouped into three selling function categories for analysis:

(1)Sales and marketing;

(2)freight and delivery; and

(3)inventory management. Accordingly, based on the selling functions, we find that SeAH performed sales and marketing, freight and delivery services, warranty and technical services, and inventory management for all U.S. sales. Because all U.S. sales are made through a single distribution channel and the selling activities to SeAH's affiliated reseller do not vary within the channel, we preliminarily determine that there is one LOT to the U.S. market for SeAH. SeAH stated that its U.S. sales were made at a different, less advanced LOT than its home market sales. SeAH is not seeking a LOT adjustment, however, because it had only one LOT in the home market. Instead, it claims that a CEP offset is warranted. As a result, we compared the U.S. LOT to the home market LOT and found that the selling functions performed for U.S. and home market customers differ, as SeAH did not perform identical selling functions in both markets, and the selling functions for sales in the home market are at a greater intensity than for sales to the United States. Specifically, we determine that differences in sales negotiation, sales personnel training, warehousing, and advertising exist between sales to home market and U.S. customers. *See* SeAH's September 10, 2009, section A supplemental response at page 5 and Exhibit A-37. In this case, because SeAH sold at one LOT in the home market, there is no basis upon which to determine whether there is a pattern of consistent price differences between LOTs. Therefore, we have not made a LOT adjustment. Instead, in accordance with section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act, we preliminarily determine that a CEP offset is appropriate to reflect that SeAH's home market sales are at a more advanced stage than the LOT of SeAH's CEP sales. We based the amount of the CEP offset on home market indirect selling expenses and limited the deduction to the amount of the indirect selling expenses deducted from CEP under section 772(d)(1)(D) of the Act. We applied the CEP offset to the NV-CEP comparisons. D. Cost of Production Analysis Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, for SeAH there were reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that SeAH made home market sales at prices below its cost of production

(COP)in this review because the Department had disregarded sales that failed the cost test for SeAH in the most recently completed segment of this proceeding in which SeAH participated ( *i.e.,* the 1997-1998 administrative review) at the time of the initiation of this administrative review. *See Certain Welded ASTM A-312 Stainless Steel Pipe from Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 64 FR 72645, 72647 (Dec. 28, 1999), unchanged in *Certain Welded ASTM A-312 Stainless Steel Pipe from the Republic of Korea; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 65 FR 30071 (May 10, 2000). As a result, the Department initiated an investigation to determine whether SeAH made home market sales during the POR at prices below their COPs. 1. Calculation of COP In accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the Act, we calculated COP based on the sum of SeAH's cost of materials and fabrication for the foreign like product, plus amounts for G&A expenses and interest expenses. *See* the “Test of Home Market Sales Prices” section below for treatment of home market selling expenses. We relied on the COP information provided by SeAH in its questionnaire response, except for the following instances where the information was not appropriately quantified or valued: i. During the POR, SeAH purchased hot-rolled stainless steel coil from a Korean affiliate, Pohang Iron and Steel Company (POSCO). Stainless steel coil is a major input in the production of stainless steel pipe. In accordance with section 773(f)(3) of the Act, we evaluated transactions between SeAH and its affiliate using the transfer price, COP, and market price of stainless steel coils. We adjusted SeAH's reported costs to reflect the highest of these three values for SeAH's purchases of stainless steel coil from POSCO. ii. We adjusted the numerator of SeAH's G&A expense ratio to include raw material and work-in-process inventory

(WIP)valuation losses. We also adjusted the denominator of the G&A expense ratio to exclude these inventory valuation losses. iii. We excluded the long-term interest income generated from retirement and severance deposits from the calculation of the interest expense ratio. We also adjusted the denominator of the financial expense ratio to exclude raw material and WIP inventory valuation losses. iv. We replaced the negative labor cost reported for one product (or “control number”) with the labor cost of the most similar control number. For further discussion of these adjustments, see the memorandum from Laurens van Houten, Accountant, to Neal M. Halper, Director, Office of Accounting, entitled, “Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Preliminary Results—SeAH Steel Corporation,” dated December 31, 2009. 2. Test of Home Market Sales Prices To determine whether SeAH's home market sales had been made at prices below the COP, we computed weighted-average COPs during the POR, and compared the weighted-average COP figures to home market sales prices of the foreign like product as required under section 773(b) of the Act. On a product-specific basis, we compared the COP to the home market prices, net of billing adjustments, any applicable movement charges, selling expenses, and packing expenses. 3. Results of the COP Test Pursuant to sections 773(b)(1)(A) and (b)(2)(C)(i) of the Act, where less than 20 percent of SeAH's sales of a given product were at prices less than the COP, we did not disregard any below-cost sales of that product because we determined that the below-cost sales were not made in “substantial quantities.” Where 20 percent or more of SeAH's sales of a given product were at prices below the COP, we determined that sales of that model were made in “substantial quantities” within an extended period of time (as defined in section 773(b)(2)(B) of the Act), in accordance with section 773(b)(2)(C)(i) of the Act. In such cases, we also determined that such sales were not made at prices which would permit recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time, in accordance with section 773(b)(1)(B) and (b)(2)(D) of the Act. Therefore, for purposes of this administrative review, we disregarded these below-cost sales for SeAH and used the remaining sales as the basis for determining NV, in accordance with section 773(a)(1) of the Act. E. Calculation of Normal Value We calculated NV based on the starting prices to home market customers. We made adjustments, where appropriate, to the starting price for billing adjustments in accordance with 19 CFR 351.401(c). In addition, where appropriate, we made deductions for inland freight expenses, in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(B)(ii) of the Act. Pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(C) of the Act, we made adjustments for credit expenses. We made a CEP offset pursuant to section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.412(f). We calculated the CEP offset as the lesser of the indirect selling expenses on the home-market sales or the indirect selling expenses deducted from the starting price in calculating CEP. We deducted home market packing costs and added U.S. packing costs, in accordance with sections 773(a)(6)(A) and

(B)of the Act. Finally, we made an adjustment to NV to account for differences in physical characteristics of the merchandise, in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.411(a). Currency Conversion In accordance with section 773A of the Act, we made currency conversions based on the official exchange rates in effect on the dates of the U.S. sales as certified by the Federal Reserve Bank. *See http://www.ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/index.html. See also* 19 CFR 351.415. Preliminary Results of the Review We preliminarily determine that the following margin exists for SeAH during the period December 1, 2007, through November 30, 2008: Manufacturer/producer/exporter Percent margin SeAH Steel Corporation 5.15 Assessment Rates Upon completion of the administrative review, the Department shall determine, and 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 for each respondent. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate importer-specific assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales and the total entered value of the examined sales. These rates will be assessed uniformly on all entries of the respective importers made during the POR if these preliminary results are adopted in the final results of review. The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review. 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 Policy Notice* ). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by SeAH for which SeAH did not know that the merchandise it sold to the intermediary ( *e.g.* , a reseller, trading company, or exporter) was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediary involved in the transaction. *See Assessment Policy Notice* for a full discussion of this clarification. Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise 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)(2)(C) of the Act:

(1)The cash deposit rate for SeAH will be that established in the final results of this review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent and, therefore, *de minimis* within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero;

(2)for previously reviewed or investigated companies not participating in this review, 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 this review, or the original less-than-fair-value

(LTFV)investigation, 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) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 7.00 percent, the all-others rate made effective by the LTFV investigation. *See Amended Final Determination and Order* , 60 FR 10061, 10065 (Feb. 23, 1995). These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Disclosure and Public Hearing The Department will disclose to parties the calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results within five days of the date of publication of this notice. *See* 19 CFR 351.224(b). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c), interested parties may submit cases briefs not later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than five days after the date for filing case briefs. *See* 19 CFR 351.309(d). Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument:

(1)A statement of the issue;

(2)a brief summary of the argument; and

(3)a table of authorities. *See* 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or to participate if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Room 1870, within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain:

(1)The party's name, address and telephone number;

(2)the number of participants; and

(3)a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case briefs. The Department will issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of the issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. Notification to Importers This notice also serves as a preliminary 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 antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. This administrative review and notice are published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4). Dated: December 31, 2009. Susan Kuhbach, Senior Director, Office 1, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. [FR Doc. 2010-29 Filed 1-6-10; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 17

Traces to 17 documents

U.S. Code