Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 97 / Thursday, May 18, 2000 / Notices 31515

in the relevant sections of the Decision

Memorandum. Further details regarding

the changes and corrections can be

found in the Decision Memorandum,

surrogate value memorandum (see

Surrogate Values Used for the Final

Results of the 1997–1998 Administrative

Review of Silicomanganese From the

People’s Republic of China) and

company-specific analysis memoranda

(see Analysis for the Final Results of the

1997–1998 Administrative Review of

Silicomanganese From the People’s

Republic of China: Guangxi Bayi

Ferroalloy and Analysis for the Final

Results of the 1997–1998 Administrative

Review of Silicomanganese From the

People’s Republic of China: Sichuan

Emei Ferroalloy Import and Export Co.,

Ltd.), all of which are on file in room B–

099 of the main Department of

Commerce building.

Final Results of Review

We determine that the following

percentage weighted-average margins

exist for the period December 1, 1997

through November 30, 1998:

Manufacturer/Exporter Margin

(percent)

Guangxi Bayi Ferroalloy

Works ................................ 126.22

Sichuan Emei Ferroalloy Import and Export Co., Ltd ... 182.97

The Department shall determine, and

Customs shall assess, antidumping

duties on all appropriate entries. In

accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b), we

have calculated exporter/importerspecific assessment rates. We divided

the total dumping margins for sales to

a specific importer by the total units of

subject merchandise sold to the

importer in order to calculate a per-unit

dollar assessment. The per-unit dollar

amount will be assessed uniformly

against each unit of subject merchandise

that the importer entered during the

POR.

Cash Deposit Requirements

The following deposit requirements

will be effective upon publication of

this notice of final results of

administrative review for all shipments

of silicomanganese from the PRC

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,

for consumption on or after the date of

publication, as provided by section

751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit

rates for the reviewed companies will be

the rates shown above; (2) for previously

reviewed or investigated companies not

listed above that have separate rates, the

cash deposit rate will continue to be the

company-specific rate published for the

most recent period; (3) the cash deposit

rate for all other PRC exporters will

continue to be 150.00 percent; and (4)

the cash-deposit rate for non-PRC

exporters will be the rate applicable to

the PRC supplier of that exporter.

These deposit requirements shall

remain in effect until publication of the

final results of the next administrative

review.

This notice also serves as a final

reminder to importers of their

responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)

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 doubled

antidumping duties.

This notice also serves as the only

reminder to parties subject to

administrative protective orders

(‘‘APOs’’) of their responsibility

concerning the return or destruction of

proprietary information disclosed under

an APO in accordance with 19 CFR

351.305 or conversion to judicial

protective order is hereby requested.

Failure to comply with the regulations

and terms of an APO is a violation

which is subject to sanction.

We are issuing and publishing this

determination and notice in accordance

with sections section 751(a)(1) and

771(i) of the Act.

Dated: May 8, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

Appendix—Issues in Decision

Memorandum

Comments and Responses

I. Factor Valuation

II. Facts Available

III. Clerical Errors

IV. Miscellaneous Issues

1. Classifying Electrode Paste as a Direct

Material or Part of Overhead

2. Allocating Costs Over Production

Quantities That Include Fines

3. Reducing Normal Value for Sales of

Silicomanganese Slag

4. Recalculating Emei’s Electricity

Consumption Based on Verification

Findings

[FR Doc. 00–12581 Filed 5–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C–533–063]

Certain Iron-Metal Castings from India:

Final Results of Countervailing Duty

Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of

countervailing duty administrative

review.

SUMMARY: On November 12, 1999, the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) published in the Federal

Register its preliminary results of

administrative review of the

countervailing duty order on certain

iron-metal castings from India for the

period January 1, 1997 through

December 31, 1997 (64 FR 61592). The

Department has now completed this

administrative review in accordance

with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of

1930, as amended (the Act).

We have not made changes in the

subsidy calculations from the

preliminary results. For information on

the net subsidy for each reviewed

company, and for all non-reviewed

companies, see the Final Results of

Review section of this notice. We will

instruct the U.S. Customs Service

(Customs) to assess countervailing

duties as detailed in the Final Results of

Review section of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 18, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Copyak, Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th

Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,

Room 4012, Washington, D.C. 20230;

telephone: (202) 482–2786.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the statute are references to

the provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930,

as amended by the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (URAA) effective

January 1, 1995. The Department is

conducting this administrative review

in accordance with section 751(a) of the

Act. All citations to the Department’s

regulations reference 19 CFR part 351

(1998), unless otherwise indicated.

Because the request for this

administrative review was filed before

January 1, 1999, the Department’s

substantive countervailing duty

regulations, which were published in

the Federal Register on November 25,

31516 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 97 / Thursday, May 18, 2000 / Notices

1Carnation Industries was formerly Carnation

Enterprise Pvt. Ltd.

2 Kajaria Iron Castings Ltd. was formerly Kajaria

Iron Castings Pvt. Ltd.

3 Kiswok Industries Pvt. Ltd. was formerly

Kejriwal Iron & Steel Works.

1998 (see CVD Regulations, 63 FR

65348), do not govern this review.

Background

On November 12, 1999, the

Department published the preliminary

results of administrative review of the

countervailing duty order on certain

iron metal castings from India. See

Notice of Preliminary Results and

Partial Recission of Countervailing Duty

Administrative Review: Certain IronMetal Castings from India, 64 FR 61592

(November 12, 1999) (Preliminary

Results). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(b),

this review covers only those producers/

exporters of the subject merchandise for

which a review was specifically

requested. The producers/exporters of

the subject merchandise for which this

review was requested are:

AGV Exports,

Agarwal Hardware,

Ambika Exports,

Bengal Export Corporation,

Bengal Iron Corporation,

Bhagyadevi Factory,

Calcutta Ferrous Ltd.,

Carnation Enterprise Pvt. Ltd.,

Carnation Industries,1

Commex Corporation,

Crescent Foundry Co. Pvt. Ltd.,

Delta Enterprises,

Delta Corporation Ltd.,

Dinesh Brothers Pvt. Ltd.,

Dugar International,

Edcons Castings,

Essen International,

Ganapati Suppliers,

Global Intertrade,

Hargolal & Sons,

Hindustahn Malleables & Forgings Ltd.,

J.K. Udyog,

Kajaria Iron Castings Ltd.,2

Kajaria Iron Castings Pvt. Ltd.,

Kauntia Exports,

Kejriwal Iron & Steel Works,

Kiswok Industries Pvt. Ltd.,3

Metflow Corporation Pvt. Ltd.,

Nandikeshwari Iron Foundry Pvt. Ltd.,

Orissa Metal Industries,

Overseas Iron Foundry Pvt. Ltd.,

Rangilal & Sons,

RBA Exports,

R.B. Agarwalla & Company,

R.B. Agarwalla & Company Pvt. Ltd.,

RR Enterprise,

RSI Limited,

RS Ispat Pvt. Ltd.,

Samitex Corporation,

Sammitex,

Serampore Industries Pvt. Ltd.,

Shakti Isabgel Industries,

Shree Hanuman Foundry & Engineering Co.

Ltd.,

Shree Rama Enterprises,

Shree Uma Foundries Pvt. Ltd.,

Siko Exports,

Sitaram Maohogarhia & Sons Pvt. Ltd.,

Sociedad J.B. Nagar,

SSL Exports,

Super Iron Foundry,

Tara Engineering Works,

Thames Engineering,

Tirupati International Pvt. Ltd.,

Tirupati Trading Company,

Trident Industries,

Trident International,

Uma Iron & Steel, and

Victory Castings Ltd.

The following companies, for which a

review was requested, certified that they

either do not produce or did not export

the subject merchandise to the United

States during the period of review

(POR): AGV Exports, Agarwal Hardware

Works & Foundries Pvt. Ltd., Ambika

Exports, Bengal Iron Corporation,

Bhagyadevi Factory, Delta Enterprises,

Edcons Castings Pvt. Ltd., Essen

International, Hargolal & Sons,

Hindustahn Malleables & Forgings Ltd.,

J.K. Udyog, Kauntia Exports, Metflow

Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Orissa Metal

Industries, Overseas Iron Foundry Pvt.

Ltd., RBA Exports, R.B. Agarwalla &

Company Pvt. Ltd., RR Enterprise, RS

Ispat Pvt. Ltd., Samitex Corporation,

Sammitex, Shree Hanuman Foundry &

Engineering Co. Ltd., Shree Rama

Enterprises, Shree Uma Foundries Pvt.

Ltd., Siko Exports, Sitaram Madhogarhia

& Sons Pvt. Ltd., Tara Engineering

Works, Tirupati International Pvt. Ltd.,

and Tirupati Trading Company. In

addition, the Government of India (GOI)

certified that the following companies

either do not exist or do not export the

subject merchandise to the United

States: Dugar International, Global

Intertrade, Shakti Isabgel Industries,

Sociedad J.B. Nagar, and Trident

Industries. Therefore, in accordance

with section 351.213(d)(3) of the

Department’s regulations, we rescinded

the review with respect to these

companies at the time of the

preliminary results.

See Preliminary Results, 64 FR at 61592

We invited interested parties to

comment on the preliminary results. On

December 13, 1999, case briefs were

submitted by the Engineering Export

Promotion Council of India and the

exporters of certain iron-metal castings

from India (respondents), and the

Municipal Castings Fair Trade Council

and its members (petitioners). On

December 20, 1999, rebuttal briefs were

submitted by the respondents and

petitioners. None of the interested

parties requested a hearing. This review

covers 29 programs.

Scope of the Review

Imports covered by this

administrative review are shipments of

Indian manhole covers and frames,

clean-out covers and frames, and catch

basin grates and frames. These articles

are commonly called municipal or

public works castings and are used for

access or drainage for public utility,

water, and sanitary systems. During the

review period, such merchandise was

classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule (HTS) item numbers

7325.10.0010 and 7325.10.0050. The

HTS item numbers are provided for

convenience and Customs purposes.

The written description remains

dispositive.

Verification

As provided in section 782(i) of the

Act, we verified information submitted

by the GOI and certain producers/

exporters of the subject merchandise.

We followed standard verification

procedures, including meeting with

government and company officials and

examining relevant accounting and

financial records and other original

source documents. Our verification

results, which were issued on

September 9, 1999, are outlined in the

verification reports, the public versions

of which are on file in the Central

Records Unit (CRU), Room B–099 of the

Main Commerce Building.

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the case and

rebuttal briefs by parties to this

administrative review are addressed in

the ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’

(Decision Memorandum) from Holly A.

Kuga, Acting Deputy Assistant

Secretary, Import Administration, to

Troy H. Cribb, Acting Assistant

Secretary for Import Administration,

dated concurrent with this notice,

which is hereby adopted by this notice.

A list of issues which parties have

raised and to which we have responded,

all of which are addressed in the

Decision Memorandum, is attached to

this notice as Appendix I. Parties can

find a complete discussion of all issues

raised in this review and the

corresponding recommendations in this

public memorandum which is on file in

the CRU. In addition, a complete

version of the Decision Memorandum

can be accessed directly on the web at

www.ita.doc.gov/importladmin/

records/frn. The paper copy and

electronic version of the Decision

Memorandum are identical in content.

Use of Facts Available

For a discussion of our application of

facts available, see the ‘‘Facts Available’’

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 97 / Thursday, May 18, 2000 / Notices 31517

section of the Decision Memorandum,

which is on file in the CRU and

available on the web at

www.ita.doc.gov/importladmin/

records/frn.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

We have not made any changes to the

subsidy rate calculations from the

preliminary results.

Final Results of Review

In accordance with 19 CFR

351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated an

individual subsidy rate for each

producer/exporter subject to this

review. We will instruct Customs to

assess countervailing duties as indicated

below on all appropriate entries. For the

period January 1, 1997 through

December 31, 1997, we determine the

net subsidy rates for the reviewed

companies to be as follows:

Producers/exporters

Ad valorem

rates

(percentages)

Bengal Export Corporation ... 8.35

Calcutta Ferrous Ltd ............. 9.28

Calcutta Iron Foundry ........... 0.42

Carnation Industries Ltd ....... 0.72

Commex Corporation ........... 2.71

Crescent Foundry Co. Pvt.

Ltd ..................................... 0.84

Delta Corporation Ltd ........... 27.65

Dinesh Brothers (Pvt.) Ltd .... 1.71

Ganapati Suppliers Pvt. Ltd 5.17

Kajaria Iron Castings Ltd ...... 5.19

Kiswok Industries Pvt. Ltd .... 14.90

Nandikeshwari Iron Foundry

Pvt. Ltd .............................. 13.72

Rangilal & Sons .................... 0.00

R.B. Agarwalla & Company .. 3.56

RSI Limited ........................... 0.90

Seramapore Industries Pvt.

Ltd ..................................... 1.51

SSL Exports .......................... 27.65

Super Iron Foundry .............. 1.08

Thames Engineering ............ 27.65

Trident International .............. 27.65

Uma Iron & Steel Company 2.10

Victory Castings Ltd ............. 1.88

Revocation of CVD Order

As a result of the International Trade

Commission’s determination that

revocation of this countervailing duty

order would not likely lead to

continuation or recurrence of material

injury to an industry in the United

States in the reasonably foreseeable

future, the Department, pursuant to

section 751(d)(2) of the Act, revoked the

countervailing duty order on iron metal

castings from India. See Revocation of

Countervailing Duty Order: Iron Metal

Castings from India, 64 FR 61602

(November 12, 1999). Pursuant to

section 751(c)(6)(A)(iv) of the Act and

19 CFR 351.222(i)(2)(ii), the effective

date of revocation was January 1, 2000.

Accordingly, the Department instructed

Customs to discontinue suspension of

liquidation and collection of cash

deposits on entries of the subject

merchandise entered or withdrawn from

warehouse on or after January 1, 2000.

The Department, however, will conduct

administrative reviews of subject

merchandise entered prior to the

effective date of revocation in response

to appropriately filed requests for

review.

Administrative Protective Order

This notice also serves as a final

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 351.305. Timely written

notification of return/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.

This administrative review and notice

are in accordance with section 751(a)(1)

of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)).

Dated: May 10, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

Appendix I—Issues Addressed in the

Decision Memorandum

Methodology and Background Information

I. Applicable Statute and Regulations

II. Facts Available

III. Benchmark Rate

Analysis of Programs

I. Programs Conferring Subsidies

A. Pre-Shipment Export Financing

B. Post-Shipment Export Financing

C. Exemption of Export Credit from Interest

Taxes

D. Income Tax Deductions Under Section

80 HHC

E. Import Mechanisms (Sale of Licenses)

F. Passbook Scheme

G. Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme

II. Programs Determined To Be Not

Countervailable

A. Long-Term Financing from ‘‘All-India

Development Banks’’

B. Long-Term Loan from the West Bengal

Industrial Finance Corporation

C. Leasing of Land from the Regional

Government of West Bengal

III. Programs Found To Be Not Used

A. West Bengal Incentive Scheme 1993

1. State Capital Investment Subsidy

B. Market Development Assistance

C. Rediscounting of Export Bills Abroad

D. International Price Reimbursement

Scheme

E. Cash Compensatory Support Program

F. Programs Operated by the Small

Industries Development Bank of India

G. Export Promotion Replenishment

Scheme

H. Export Promotion Capital Goods

Scheme

I. Benefits for Export Oriented Units and

Export Processing Zones

J. Special Imprest Licenses

K. Special Benefits

L. Duty Drawback on Excise Taxes

M. Payment of Premium Against Advance

Licenses

N. Pre-Shipment Export Financing in

Foreign Currency

O. Subsidies Provided by the State of

Orissa

P. Advance Licenses

IV. Other Program Examined

A. Bridge Loan

V. Programs Found Not To Exist

A. State Value-Added Tax ‘‘Set-Off’’

Program

B. Interest Rate Surcharge Exemption

VI. Analysis of Comments

A. Cash Credit Benchmark Interest Rate

B. Leasing of Land

C. Long-Term Financing

D. Benefit Provided Under the Passbook

Scheme

E. Section 80HHC—Tax Savings Relating to

Subject Castings

F. Double-Counting of Subsidies

G. Overdue Penalty Interest Paid

[FR Doc. 00–12580 Filed 5–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

Notice of Recruitment

AGENCY: International Trade

Administration, Department of

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Recruitment.

SUMMARY: U.S. Department of

Commerce Invites Small and Medium

Enterprises to Join U.S. Delegation to

Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation

(APEC) Small and Medium Enterprise

(SME) Ministerial Meeting and Related

Events.

DATES: Conference: June 19–23, 2000.

Apply for participation in the U.S.

Delegation by: no later than June 2,

2000.

ADDRESSES: Conference location at

International Convention Center in

Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei

Darussalam.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs.

Brenda J. Fisher, APEC Affairs

Coordinator, Room 2316, International

Trade Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce at phone 202/482–5334;

fax 202/482–3316; or email:

Brenda(underscore)Fisher@ita.doc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: