35606 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 108 / Monday, June 5, 2000 / Notices

recurrence of dumping at the following

percentage weighted-average margins:

Manufacturer/Exporter Margin

(percent)

PRC:

Hangzhou Spring Washer

Plant (‘‘HSWP’’) ............. 69.88

HSWP via IFI Morgan Limited ................................. 69.88

HSWP via Carway Development Ltd. .................... 69.88

HSWP via Midway Fasteners Ltd. ...................... 69.88

HSWP via Linkwell Industry Co., Ltd. .................... 69.88

HSWP via Fastwell Industry Co., Ltd. .................... 69.88

HSWP via Sunfast International Corp. ................ 69.88

HSWP via Winner Standard Parts Co., Ltd. ......... 69.88

All Others ........................... 128.63

Taiwan:

Spring Lake Enterprises .... 31.93

Ceimiko Industrial .............. 31.93

Par Excellence Industrial ... 31.93

All Others ........................... 31.93

This notice serves as the only

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 of the

Department’s regulations. Timely

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.

These five-year (‘‘sunset’’) reviews

and notices are in accordance with

sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the

Act.

Dated: May 30, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–14022 Filed 6–2–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–570–855]

Notice of Amended Final

Determination of Sales at Less Than

Fair Value and Antidumping Duty

Order: Certain Non-Frozen Apple Juice

Concentrate From the People’s

Republic of China

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 5, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Craig Matney, Sally Hastings, or Annika

O’Hara, Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)

482–1778, 482–3464, or 482–3798,

respectively.

Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as

amended (‘‘the Act’’), are references to

the provisions effective January 1, 1995,

the effective date of the amendments

made to 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 are to 19

CFR part 351 (1998).

Scope of Order

The product covered by this order is

certain non-frozen apple juice

concentrate (‘‘NFAJC’’). Certain NFAJC

is defined as all non-frozen

concentrated apple juice with a Brix

scale of 40 or greater, whether or not

containing added sugar or other

sweetening matter, and whether or not

fortified with vitamins or minerals.

Excluded from the scope of this

investigation are: frozen concentrated

apple juice; non-frozen concentrated

apple juice that has been fermented; and

non-frozen concentrated apple juice to

which spirits have been added.

The merchandise subject to this order

is classified in the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule of the United States

(‘‘HTSUS’’) at subheadings

2009.70.00.20 and 2106.90.52. Although

the HTSUS subheadings are provided

for convenience and customs purposes,

the written description of the

merchandise under investigation is

dispositive.

Amended Final Determination

In accordance with section 735(a) of

the Act, on April 13, 2000, the

Department published its final

determination of the antidumping duty

investigation of certain NFAJC from the

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

which we determined that U.S. sales of

NFAJC from the PRC were made at less

than normal value (65 FR 19873

(ldquo;NFAJC Final’’)). On April 18,

2000, we received ministerial error

allegations, timely filed pursuant to

§ 351.224(c)(2) of the Department’s

regulations from Yantai North Andre

Juice Co., Ltd. (‘‘North Andre’’); Shaanxi

Haisheng Fresh Fruit Juice Co., Ltd.

(‘‘Haisheng’’); Sanmenxia Lakeside Fruit

Juice Co., Ltd. (‘‘Lakeside’’); Shandong

Zhonglu Co., Ltd./Rushan ShangjinZhonglu Foodstuff Co., Ltd./Shandong

Luling Fruit Juice Co./Rushan Dongjin

Foodstuffs (‘‘Zhonglu’’); Yantai Oriental

Juice Co., Ltd. (‘‘Oriental’’); Qingdao

Nannan Foods Co., Ltd. (‘‘Nannan’’);

Xian Asia Qin Fruit Co., Ltd. (‘‘Asia’’);

Xian Yang Fuan Juice Co., Ltd.

(‘‘Fuan’’); Changsha Industrial Products

& Minerals Import and Export Co., Ltd.

(‘‘Changsha Industrial’’); and Shangdong

Foodstuffs Import and Export

Corporation (‘‘Shangdong Foodstuffs’’)

(hereinafter collectively referred to as

‘‘the respondents’’) regarding the

Department’s final margin calculations.

On April 24, 2000, we received

comments on the respondents’

ministerial error allegations from

Coloma Frozen Foods, Inc.; Green

Valley Packers; Knouse Foods

Cooperative, Inc.; Mason County Fruit

Packers Co-op, Inc.; and Tree Top Inc.

(hereinafter collectively referred to as

‘‘the petitioners’’).

We have determined in accordance

with section 735(e) of the Act that a

ministerial error in the calculation of

the international freight surrogate value

was made in our final margin

calculations. For a detailed discussion

of the above-cited ministerial error

allegations and the Department’s

analysis, see Memorandum to Richard

W. Moreland, dated May 8, 2000. We

are amending the final determination of

the antidumping duty investigation of

NFAJC from the PRC to correct this

ministerial error. The revised final

weighted-average dumping margins are

as follows:

Exporter/manufacturer

Original

weightedaverage

margin percentage

Revised

weightedaverage

margin percentage

North Andre ...... 0.00 0.00

Haisheng ........... 12.90 12.03

Lakeside ........... 28.54 27.57

Zhonglu ............. 9.40 8.98

Oriental ............. 9.96 9.96

Nannan ............. 26.43 25.55

Asia ................... 15.36 14.88

Yang ................. 15.36 14.88

Changsha Industrial ........... 15.36 14.88

Shandong Foodstuffs .............. 15.36 14.88

PRC-wide rate .. 51.74 51.74

Antidumping Duty Order

On May 30, 2000, in accordance with

section 735(d) of the Act, the U.S.

International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’)

notified the Department that a U.S.

industry is ‘‘materially injured,’’ within

the meaning of section 735(b)(1)(A) of

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 108 / Monday, June 5, 2000 / Notices 35607

the Act, by reason of less-than-fair-value

imports of NFAJC from the PRC.

Therefore, the Department will direct

the U.S. Customs Service to assess,

upon further advice by the Department,

antidumping duties equal to the amount

by which the normal value of the

subject merchandise exceeds the export

price or constructed export price of the

subject merchandise for all entries of

NFAJC from the PRC, except for subject

merchandise both produced and

exported by North Andre, which

received a zero final margin. The ITC

further found that critical circumstances

do not exist with respect to imports of

the subject merchandise from the PRC.

As a result, antidumping duties will be

assessed on all unliquidated entries of

NFAJC entered, or withdrawn from

warehouse, for consumption on or after

November 23, 1999, the date of

publication of the Department’s

preliminary determination in the

Federal Register (64 FR 65675), and the

Department will direct Customs to

refund any cash deposits made, or

bonds posted, on any subject

merchandise which was entered prior to

the Department’s preliminary

determination publication date of

November 23, 1999. Finally, we will

instruct Customs to liquidate without

regard to antidumping duties and to

refund all cash deposits, or bonds

posted, for entries of subject

merchandise both produced and

exported by North Andre.

On or after the date of publication of

this notice in the Federal Register,

Customs officers must require, at the

same time as importers would normally

deposit estimated duties, cash deposits

for the subject merchandise equal to the

weighted-average antidumping duty

margins as noted below:

Exporter/manufacturer

Revised

Weightedaverage

margin percentage

North Andre .............................. (1)

Haisheng ................................... 12.03

Lakeside ................................... 27.57

Zhonglu ..................................... 8.98

Oriental ..................................... 9.96

Nannan ..................................... 25.55

Asia ........................................... 14.88

Fuan .......................................... 14.88

Changsha Industrial .................. 14.88

Shandong Foodstuffs ............... 14.88

PRC-wide rate .......................... 51.74

1Excluded.

This notice constitutes the

antidumping duty order with respect to

NFAJC from the PRC, pursuant to

section 735(a) of the Act. Interested

parties may contact the Central Records

Unit, Room B–099 of the main

Commerce building for copies of an

updated list of antidumping duty orders

currently in effect.

This order is published in accordance

with section 736(a) of the Act and 19

CFR 351.211.

Dated: May 30, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–14029 Filed 6–2–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–351–806]

Silicon Metal From Brazil; Final

Results of Expedited Sunset Review of

Antidumping Duty Order

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of

expedited sunset review of silicon metal

from Brazil.

SUMMARY: On November 2, 1999, the

Department of Commerce (‘‘the

Department’’) initiated a sunset review

of the antidumping duty order on

silicon metal from Brazil (64 FR 59160)

pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff

Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). On

the basis of a notice of intent to

participate and an adequate substantive

response filed on behalf of domestic

interested parties and inadequate

response (in this case, waivers of

response) from respondent interested

parties, the Department determined to

conduct an expedited review. As a

result of this review, the Department

finds that revocation of the antidumping

duty order would likely lead to

continuation or recurrence of dumping

at the levels indicated in the Final

Results of Review section of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 5, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathryn B. McCormick or Carole A.

Showers, Office of Policy for Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;

telephone: (202) 482–1930 or (202) 482–

3217, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the Act are references to the

provisions effective January 1, 1995, the

effective date of the amendments made

to the Act by the Uruguay Round

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

unless otherwise indicated, all citations

to the Department regulations are to 19

CFR part 351 (1999). Guidance on

methodological or analytical issues

relevant to the Department’s conduct of

sunset reviews is set forth in the

Department’s Policy Bulletin 98.3—

Policies Regarding the Conduct of Fiveyear (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews of

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty

Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871

(April 16, 1998) (‘‘Sunset Policy

Bulletin’’).

Background

On November 2, 1999, the Department

initiated a sunset review of the

antidumping duty order on silicon

metal from Brazil (64 FR 59160),

pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff

Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’).

The Department received a notice of

intent to participate on behalf of

American Silicon Technologies

(‘‘AST’’), Elkem Metals Company

(‘‘Elkem’’), and Globe Metallurgical Inc.

(‘‘Globe’’) (collectively, ‘‘domestic

interested parties’’), within the

applicable deadline (November 15,

1999) specified in 19 CFR

351.218(d)(1)(i). Domestic interested

parties claimed interested-party status

under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as

U.S. producers of a domestic like

product.

On November 29, 1999, we received

a waiver of response from respondent

interested parties Companhia Brasileira

Carbureto de Calcio, Camargo Correa

Metais, S.A., Ligas de Aluminio S.A.,

Companhia Ferroligas Minas Gerais—

Minasligas, and RIMA Industrial S.A.,

pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(d)(2)(i). On

December 2, 1999, we received a waiver

of response from respondent interested

party Eletrosilex Bela Horizonte.

On December 1, 1999, we received a

complete substantive response from

domestic interested parties, within the

30-day deadline specified in the Sunset

Regulations under § 351.218(d)(3)(i).

Domestic interested parties claim that,

in 1990, Elkem, Globe, and four other

domestic producers filed the petition

that resulted in the issuance of the

antidumping duty order on silicon

metal from Brazil (see December 1,

1999, Substantive Response of domestic

interested parties at 2). Domestic

interested parties also claim that at least

one of them has actively participated in

each of the administrative reviews

conducted by the Department, as well as

in a number of related appeals and

remand proceedings. Id. at 3. Without a

substantive response from respondent