Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 102 / Thursday, May 25, 2000 / Notices 33803

which has authority from the FTZ Board

to produce the drug under zone

procedures at its Chicago, Illinois, plant.

The application remains otherwise

unchanged.

The comment period is reopened

until June 26, 2000.

Dated: May 17, 2000.

Dennis Puccinelli,

Acting Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–13098 Filed 5–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–851–802]

Preliminary Determination of Critical

Circumstances: Certain Small

Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless

Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe

From the Czech Republic

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 25, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Brinkmann or Dennis McClure, AD/CVD

Enforcement, Office 6, Group II, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20230;

telephone: (202) 482–4126 or 482–0984,

respectively.

The Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the statute are references to

the provisions effective January 1, 1995,

the effective date of the amendments

made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act)

by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.

In addition, unless otherwise indicated,

all citations to the Department’s

regulations are references to the

provisions codified at 19 CFR part 351

(April 1999).

Background

On February 4, 2000, the Department

published the preliminary affirmative

determination in the antidumping duty

investigation on certain small diameter

carbon and alloy seamless standard, line

and pressure pipe (seamless pipe) from

the Czech Republic, 65 FR 5599. On

April 18, 2000, the petitioners alleged

that there is a reasonable basis to believe

or suspect that critical circumstances

exist with respect to imports of seamless

pipe from the Czech Republic.

Critical Circumstances

Section 733(e)(1) of the Act provides

that the Department will preliminarily

determine that critical circumstances

exist if there is a reasonable basis to

believe or suspect that: (A)(i) There is a

history of dumping and material injury

by reason of dumped imports in the

United States or elsewhere of the subject

merchandise, or (ii) the person by

whom, or for whose account, the

merchandise was imported knew or

should have known that the exporter

was selling the subject merchandise at

less than its fair value and that there

was likely to be material injury by

reason of such sales, and (B) there have

been massive imports of the subject

merchandise over a relatively short

period. Section 351.206(h)(1) of the

Department’s regulations provides that,

in determining whether imports of the

subject merchandise have been

‘‘massive,’’ the Department normally

will examine: (i) The volume and value

of the imports; (ii) seasonal trends; and

(iii) the share of domestic consumption

accounted for by the imports. In

addition, section 351.206(h)(2) of the

Department’s regulations provides that

an increase in imports of 15 percent

during the ‘‘relatively short period’’ of

time may be considered ‘‘massive.’’

Section 351.206(i) of the Department’s

regulations defines ‘‘relatively short

period’’ as normally being the period

beginning on the date the proceeding

begins (i.e., the date the petition is filed)

and ending at least three months later.

The regulations also provide, however,

that if the Department finds that

importers, or exporters or producers,

had reason to believe, at some time prior

to the beginning of the proceeding, that

a proceeding was likely, the Department

may consider a period of not less than

three months from that earlier time.

History of Dumping and Importer

Knowledge

Because we are aware of the European

Union’s (EU’s) November 17, 1997,

finding that the Czech Republic had

sold similar products (e.g., seamless

pipes, of iron or non-alloy steel) at less

than fair value and had caused injury to

the domestic industry, we find that a

reasonable basis exists to believe or

suspect that there is a history of

dumping and material injury by reason

of dumped imports in the United States

or elsewhere of the subject merchandise,

pursuant to section 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the

Act. Although the products investigated

by the EU are not all identical to those

covered by the scope of this

investigation, we do not require the

scope of our proceedings to match

exactly the scope of the foreign

proceeding. See Notice of Final

Determination of Sales at Less Than

Fair Value: Disposable Pocket Lighters

From the People’s Republic of China, 60

FR 22359, 22368 (May 5, 1995). In

addition, the Department may look to

the second criterion for determining

importer knowledge of dumping.

In determining whether there is a

reasonable basis to believe or suspect

that an importer knew or should have

known that the exporter was selling the

seamless pipe at less than fair value,

pursuant to section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of

the Act, the Department’s normal

practice is to consider margins of 25

percent or more for export price (EP)

sales sufficient to impute knowledge of

dumping. See Certain Cut-to-Length

Carbon Steel Plate From the People’s

Republic of China, 62 FR 31972, 31978

(June 11, 1997). In the instant case, the

respondent, Nova Hut, received a

margin of 32.26 percent in the amended

preliminary determination, 65 FR

12971. Therefore, we have imputed

knowledge of dumping to importers of

subject merchandise from Nova Hut.

In determining whether there is a

reasonable basis to believe or suspect

that an importer knew or should have

known that there was likely to be

material injury by reason of dumped

imports, under section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of

the Act, the Department normally will

look to the preliminary injury

determination of the International Trade

Commission (ITC). If the ITC finds a

reasonable indication of present

material injury to the relevant U.S.

industry, the Department will determine

that a reasonable basis exists to impute

importer knowledge that there was

likely to be material injury by reason of

dumped imports. In this case, the ITC

has found that a reasonable indication

of present material injury due to

dumping exists for all imports of

seamless pipe from the Czech Republic.

See Certain Seamless Carbon and Alloy

Steel Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe

from the Czech Republic, Japan, Mexico,

Romania and South Africa, 64 FR 46953

(August 27, 1999). As a result, the

Department has determined that there is

a reasonable basis to believe or suspect

that importers knew or should have

known that there was likely to be

material injury by reason of dumped

imports of subject merchandise from the

Czech Republic.

Massive Imports

In determining whether there are

‘‘massive imports’’ over a ‘‘relatively

short period,’’ pursuant to 733(e)(1)(B)

of the Act, the Department normally

compares the import volume of the

subject merchandise for three months

immediately preceding and following

the filing of the petition. Imports

normally will be considered massive

33804 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 102 / Thursday, May 25, 2000 / Notices

1Because the respondent withdrew from

verification, we considered the company noncooperating and did not request monthly shipment

data from the company.

2 IM–145 import statistics on HTS numbers

included within the scope of the investigation.

3As stated in Final Determination of Sales at Less

Than Fair Value: Certain Cut-to-Length CarbonQuality Steel Plate from Indonesia (64 FR 73164,

December 29, 1999), the Department’s practice is to

use the longest period for which information is

available from the month that the petition was

submitted through the date of the preliminary

determination.

when imports have increased by 15

percent or more during this ‘‘relatively

short period.’’

We do not have verifiable data from

Nova Hut because it withdrew from

verification. Therefore, the Department

must base its ‘‘massive imports’’

determination as to the company on the

facts available, pursuant to section

776(a) of the Act.1 Accordingly, we first

examined U.S. Customs data 2 on

imports of seamless pipe from the Czech

Republic for January through June 1999

(the six months preceding the June 30,

1999, filing of the petition) and from

July through December 1999 (the six

months following the filing of the

petition).3 We found that the total

volume of imports of small diameter

seamless pipe from the Czech Republic

increased by 45.75 percent in the sixmonth period following the filing of the

petition (July through December 1999),

as compared to the total volume of such

imports from January through June

1999. Second, we considered that Nova

Hut, the sole respondent in the

investigation, was the only company

identified by both the petitioner and the

Government of the Czech Republic as a

Czech producer of merchandise under

investigation. From this we infer that

Nova Hut is a significant producer of the

merchandise under investigation. As

facts available, then, we also infer that

a significant portion of the 45.75 percent

increase in imports is attributable to

Nova Hut. We recognize that some of

the HTS categories analyzed to derive

the 45.75 percent increase in imports

are basket categories that may include

non-scope merchandise. However, given

that Nova Hut’s refusal to supply

verifiable data prevents the Department

from doing a company-specific massive

imports analysis, we are, pursuant to

section 776(b) of the Act, making the

adverse inference that the country-wide

import data is representative of Nova

Hut’s import data. Moreover, the

Department’s practice has been to make

an adverse inference concerning

massive imports with respect to an

uncooperative respondent even when

country-wide data was not available or

not considered. See, e.g., Notice of Final

Determination of Sales at Less Than

Fair Value: Collated Roofing Nails from

Taiwan, 62 FR 51427, 51437 (October 1,

1997). We, therefore, find that Nova Hut

had massive imports of the subject

merchandise over a relatively short

period of time, under section

733(e)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR

351.206(h)(2).

Based on our determination that there

is a reasonable basis to believe or

suspect that there is a history of

dumping and material injury by reason

of dumped imports of the subject

merchandise in the EU, as well as

importer knowledge of dumping, and

that there have been massive imports of

seamless pipe from this producer over a

relatively short period, we preliminarily

determine that critical circumstances

exist for imports from the Czech

Republic of seamless pipe produced by

Nova Hut.

All Other Exporters

In regard to the ‘‘all others’’ category,

it is the Department’s normal practice to

conduct its critical circumstances

analysis based on the experience of

investigated companies. See Notice of

Final Determination of Sales at Less

Than Fair Value: Certain Steel Concrete

Reinforcing Bars from Turkey (Rebars

from Turkey), 62 FR 9737, 9741 (March

4, 1997). In Rebars from Turkey, the

Department determined that because it

found critical circumstances existed for

three out of the four companies

investigated, critical circumstances also

existed for companies covered by the

‘‘all others’’ rate. However, in Notice of

Final Determination of Sales at Less

Than Fair Value: Stainless Steel Sheet

and Strip in Coils from Japan (Stainless

Steel from Japan), 64 FR 30574 (June 8,

1999), the Department did not extend its

affirmative critical circumstances

findings to the ‘‘all others’’ categories

while finding affirmative critical

circumstances for four of the five

respondents, because the affirmative

determinations were based on adverse

facts available.

In the instant case, in our critical

circumstances analysis for the one

investigated company, Nova Hut, we

determined that the EU’s finding that

the Czech Republic had sold similar

products at less than fair value and had

caused injury to the domestic industry

provides reasonable basis to believe or

suspect that there is a history of

dumping and material injury by reason

of dumped imports in this case.

Consistent with our practice, we

similarly extend this finding to the ‘‘all

others’’ category.

With respect to massive imports,

however, we are unable to rely on our

import level analysis for Nova Hut

because it is based upon adverse facts

available, and we have no verified data

upon which to base a massive imports

analysis. Instead, consistent with the

approach taken in Notice of Final

Determination of Sales at Less Than

Fair Value: Hot-Rolled Flat-Rolled

Carbon-Quality Steel Products from

Japan, 64 FR 24239 (May 6, 1999) and

Notice of Final Determinations of Sales

at Less Than Fair Value: Certain ColdRolled Flat-Rolled Carbon-Quality Steel

Products From Argentina, Japan and

Thailand 65 FR 5220, 5227 (February 4,

2000), we examined U.S. Customs data

on overall imports from the Czech

Republic for the six months preceding

and the six months following the filing

of the petition in order to see if we

could ascertain whether an increase in

shipments of greater than 15 percent or

more occurred within a relatively short

period following the point at which

importers had reason to believe that a

proceeding was likely. Information on

the record indicates that there was a

45.75 percent increase in overall

imports from the Czech Republic for the

six months following the filing of the

petition, as compared to the six months

preceding the filing of the petition.

However, these data cover numerous

HTS categories that may include

merchandise other than subject

merchandise. Although we made an

adverse inference based on this data

with respect to Nova Hut, it is not

appropriate to make a similar inference

with respect to ‘‘all others.’’ Because we

have no reliable data upon which to

determine whether there were massive

imports of seamless pipe from the

producers included in the ‘‘all others’’

category, a necessary criterion for

determining affirmative critical

circumstances has not been met.

Therefore, we have preliminarily

determined that critical circumstances

do not exist for imports from the Czech

Republic of seamless pipe for

companies in the ‘‘all others’’ category.

Suspension of Liquidation

In accordance with section 733(e)(2)

of the Act, the Department will direct

the Customs Service to suspend

liquidation of all entries of seamless

pipe from the Czech Republic produced

by Nova Hut, that are entered, or

withdrawn from warehouse, for

consumption on or after November 6,

1999, which is 90 days prior to the date

of publication in the Federal Register of

our preliminary determination of sales

at less than fair value. The Customs

Service shall require a cash deposit or

posting of a bond equal to the estimated

preliminary dumping margin reflected

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 102 / Thursday, May 25, 2000 / Notices 33805

in the preliminary determination of

sales at less than fair value published in

the Federal Register. This suspension of

liquidation will remain in effect until

further notice. The margin in the

preliminary determination is as follows:

Nova Hut—32.26 percent.

Final Critical Circumstances

Determination

We will make final critical

circumstances determinations when we

issue our final determination in the lessthan-fair-value investigation, which is

due to be made no later than June 19,

2000.

ITC Notification

In accordance with section 733(f) of

the Act, we have notified the ITC of our

determination.

This notice is published pursuant to

section 777(i) of the Act.

Dated: May 17, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–13097 Filed 5–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–570–853]

Notice of Final Determination of Sales

at Less Than Fair Value: Bulk Aspirin

From the People’s Republic of China

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce

is conducting an antidumping duty

investigation of Bulk Aspirin from the

People’s Republic of China. We

determine that sales have been made at

less than fair value. The estimated

dumping margins are shown in the

Continuation of Suspension of

Liquidation section of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 25, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosa

Jeong, Ryan Langan or Blanche Ziv,

Import Administration, International

Trade Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3853,

482–1279, or 482–4207, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the statute are references to

the provisions effective January 1, 1995,

the effective date of the amendments

made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the

Act’’) by the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (‘‘URAA’’). In addition,

unless otherwise indicated, all citations

to the Department of Commerce’s (‘‘the

Department’s’’) regulations refer to the

regulations codified at 19 CFR part 351

(1998).

Case History

Since the preliminary determination

(see 65 FR 116 (January 3, 2000)

(‘‘Preliminary Determination’’)), the

following events have occurred:

On December 28, 1999, one of the

respondents, Shandong Xinhua

Pharmaceutical Factory (‘‘Shandong’’),

requested a postponement of the final

determination and, on January 4, 2000,

requested an extension of provisional

measures. On January 20, 2000, we

published in the Federal Register a

notice of postponement of the final

determination and extension of

provisional measures (65 FR 3204).

Supplemental information regarding

surrogate values was submitted on

February 14, 2000, by the petitioner and

respondents.

In February and March 2000, we

conducted verification of the

questionnaire responses submitted by

Shandong and Jilin Pharmaceutical

Import and Export Corporation (‘‘Jilin’’).

We issued reports on our findings of

these verifications on April 5, 2000.

The petitioner and respondents filed

case briefs and rebuttal briefs on April

12 and April 19, 2000, respectively. At

the request of the petitioner and

respondents, the Department held a

public hearing on April 25, 2000.

We also received a case brief from

Dastech International, Inc. (‘‘Dastech’’),

an interested party in this investigation.

After reviewing Dastech’s comments, we

determined that the information

contained in Dastech’s brief constituted

factual information that was filed on an

untimely basis as set forth in section

351.301 of the Department’s regulations.

Therefore, pursuant to section

351.302(d) of the Department’s

regulations, we removed Dastech’s

submission from the record, and did not

consider the comments for the final

determination. See ‘‘Rejection of

Interested Party’s Brief’’ Memorandum

to Richard W. Moreland, Deputy

Assistant Secretary, Import

Administration, dated May 17, 2000.

Scope of the Investigation

For purposes of this investigation, the

product covered is bulk acetylsalicylic

acid, commonly referred to as bulk

aspirin, whether or not in

pharmaceutical or compound form, not

put up in dosage form (tablet, capsule,

powders or similar form for direct

human consumption). Bulk aspirin may

be imported in two forms, as pure orthoacetylsalicylic acid or as mixed orthoacetylsalicylic acid. Pure orthoacetylsalicylic acid can be either in

crystal form or granulated into a fine

powder (pharmaceutical form). This

product has the chemical formula

C9H8O4. It is defined by the official

monograph of the United States

Pharmacopoeia (‘‘USP’’) 23. It is

classified under the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule of the United States

(‘‘HTSUS’’) subheading 2918.22.1000.

Mixed ortho-acetylsalicylic acid

consists of ortho-acetylsalicylic acid

combined with other inactive

substances such as starch, lactose,

cellulose, or coloring materials and/or

other active substances. The presence of

other active substances must be in

concentrations less than that specified

for particular nonprescription drug

combinations of aspirin and active

substances as published in the

Handbook of Nonprescription Drugs,

eighth edition, American

Pharmaceutical Association. This

product is classified under HTSUS

subheading 3003.90.0000. Although the

HTSUS subheadings are provided for

convenience and customs purposes, the

written description of the merchandise

under investigation is dispositive.

Period of Investigation

The period of this investigation

(‘‘POI’’) is October 1, 1998, through

March 31, 1999.

Nonmarket Economy Country and

Market-Oriented Industry Status

The Department has treated the

People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) as

a nonmarket economy (‘‘NME’’) country

in all past antidumping investigations.

See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination

of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:

Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the

People’s Republic of China, 63 FR 72255

(December 31, 1998) (‘‘Mushrooms’’).

Under section 771(18)(C) of the Act, this

NME designation remains in effect until

it is revoked by the Department.

The respondents in this investigation

have not requested a revocation of the

PRC’s NME status and no further

information has been provided that

would lead to such a revocation.

Therefore, we have continued to treat

the PRC as an NME in this investigation.

Furthermore, no interested party has

requested that the bulk aspirin industry

in the PRC be treated as a marketoriented industry and no further

information has been provided that

would lead to such a determination.

Therefore, we have not treated the bulk