Certain Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipes and Tubes From India; Initiation of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shippers Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
Federal RegisterJun 27, 1996
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
[[Page 33492]]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-533-502]
Certain Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipes and Tubes From India;
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shippers
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
and New Shippers Antidumping Duty Administrative Review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) has received
requests to conduct an administrative review and new shipper
administrative reviews of the antidumping duty order on certain welded
carbon steel standard pipes and tubes from India, which has a May
anniversary date. In accordance with the Department's regulations, we
are initiating both an administrative review and a new shippers review.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 27, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Davina Hashmi or Michael Rill, Office
of Antidumping Compliance, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-
0180 or (202) 482-4733.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On April 30, 1996, and May 22, 1996, the Department received
requests in accordance with 19 CFR 353.22 (h) (1995), for new shipper
reviews of the antidumping duty order on certain welded carbon steel
standard pipes and tubes from India, which has a May anniversary date,
with respect to two producers/exporters.
The Department has also received a timely request on May 24, 1996,
in accordance with 19 CFR 353.22(a), for an administrative review of
this antidumping duty order with respect to the same two producers/
exporters.
Initiation of Review
In accordance with section 19 CFR 353.22(c), and 353.22(h), we are
initiating an administrative review of the following antidumping duty
order and producers/exporters:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antidumping duty proceeding Period to be reviewed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
INDIA
Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and
Tubes, A-533-502
Lloyds Metals & Engineers Ltd......... 05/01/95-04/30/96
Rajinder Pipes Ltd.................... 05/01/95-04/30/96
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the requirements for initiation of a new shipper review
have been met with respect to both producers/exporters, we intend to
conduct the review as a new shippers review. Accordingly, we will issue
the preliminary results of these reviews not later than 180 days from
the date of publication of this notice and the final results within 90
days after issuance of the preliminary results, unless these time
limits are extended in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). We also will instruct the
U.S. Customs Service to allow, at the option of the importer, the
posting, until the completion of these reviews, of a bond or security
in lieu of a cash deposit for each entry of the merchandise exported by
the above-listed companies, in accordance with 19 CFR 353.22 (h)(4)
(1995).
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
administrative protective orders in accordance with 19 CFR 353.34 (b).
These initiations and this notice are in accordance with section
751 (a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)) and 19 CFR 353.22(c) and
353.22(h).
Dated: June 19, 1996.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Compliance.
[FR Doc. 96-16475 Filed 6-26-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.