36406 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Notices

1See Notice of Scope Rulings, 62 FR 62288

(November 21, 1997).

expedited sunset review. The

Department is conducting this sunset

review in accordance with sections 751

and 752 of the Act.

Scope of Review

The product covered by this order is

glycine, which is a free-flowing

crystalline material, like salt or sugar.

Glycine is produced at varying levels of

purity and is used as a sweetener/taste

enhancer, a buffering agent, reabsorbable amino acid, chemical

intermediate, and a metal complexing

agent. Glycine is currently classified

under subheading 2922.49.4020 of the

Harmonized Tariff schedule of the

United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). The scope

of this order includes glycine of all

purity levels. In a separate scope

ruling, the Department determined that

D(-)Phenylglycine Ethyl Dane Salt is

outside the scope of the order.1

Although the HTSUS subheadings are

provided for convenience and customs

purposes, our written description of the

scope of this proceeding is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in substantive

responses by parties to this sunset

review are addressed in the Issues and

Decision Memorandum (‘‘Decision

Memo’’) from Jeffrey A. May, Director,

Office of Policy, Import Administration,

to Troy H. Cribb, Acting Assistant

Secretary for Import Administration,

dated June 2, 2000, which is hereby

adopted by this notice. The issues

discussed in the attached Decision

Memo include the likelihood of

continuation or recurrence of dumping

and the magnitude of the margin likely

to prevail were the order revoked.

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 room B–099, the Central Records

Unit, of the main Commerce building.

In addition, a complete version of the

Decision Memo can be accessed directly

on the Web at www.ita.doc.gov/

importladmin/records/frn. The paper

copy and electronic version of the

Decision Memo are identical in content.

Final Results of Review

We determine that revocation of the

antidumping duty order would be likely

to lead to continuation or recurrence of

dumping at the following percentage

weighted-average margin:

Manufacturer/exporter Margin

(percent)

PRC-wide .................................. 155.59

This notice also serves as the only

reminder to parties subject to

administrative protective orders

(‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility

concerning the return or destruction of

proprietary information disclosed under

APO in accordance with 19 CFR

351.305 of the Department’s regulations.

Timely notification of the return or

destruction of APO materials 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(c), 752, and

777(i) of the Act.

Dated: June 2, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–14500 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–122–506]

Notice of Final Results of Antidumping

Duty New Shipper Review: Oil Country

Tubular Goods From Canada

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of

antidumping duty new shipper review.

SUMMARY: On November 30, 1999, the

Department of Commerce (‘‘the

Department’’) published the preliminary

results of new shipper review of the

antidumping duty order on oil country

tubular goods (‘‘OCTG’’) from Canada.

This review covers one manufacturer/

exporter, Atlas Tube, Inc. (‘‘Atlas’’), and

the period June 1, 1998 through

November 30, 1998.

We received comments by petitioners,

Lone Star Steel Company and Maverick

Tube Corporation, (collectively ‘‘the

petitioners’’), and rebuttal comments

from Atlas. Based on our analysis of

comments received and corrections

from verification, we have made

changes in the margin calculations.

Therefore, the final results differ from

the preliminary results. The final

weighted-average dumping margin for

the reviewed firm is listed below, in the

section entitled ‘‘Final Results of

Review.’’

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 8, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark Manning or Nithya Nagarajan, AD/

CVD Enforcement Group II, Office IV,

Import Administration, International

Trade Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,

DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–3936 or

(202) 482–5253, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute

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 Rounds Agreements Act

(‘‘URAA’’). In addition, unless

otherwise indicated, all citations to the

Department’s regulations are to the

current regulations at 19 CFR part 351

(1998).

Background

On November 30, 1999, the

Department published the preliminary

results of administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on OCTG from

Canada (64 FR 66886). The review

covers one manufacturer/exporter. The

period of review (‘‘POR’’) is June 1, 1998

through November 30, 1998. We invited

parties to comment on our preliminary

results of review. None of the interested

parties requested a public hearing;

therefore, none was held. The

Department has conducted this

administrative review in accordance

with section 751 of the Act.

Scope of the Review

The products covered by this review

include shipments of OCTG from

Canada. This includes American

Petroleum Institute (‘‘API’’)

specification OCTG and all other pipe

with the following characteristics except

entries which the Department

determined through its end-use

certification procedure were not used in

OCTG applications: Length of at least 16

feet; outside diameter of standard sizes

published in the API or proprietary

specifications for OCTG with tolerances

of plus 1⁄8 inch for diameters less than

or equal to 85⁄8 inches and plus 1⁄4 inch

for diameters greater than 85⁄8 inches,

minimum wall thickness as identified

for a given outer diameter as published

in the API or proprietary specifications

for OCTG; a minimum of 40,000 PSI

yield strength and a minimum 60,000

PSI tensile strength; and if with seams,

must be electric resistance welded.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Notices 36407

Furthermore, imports covered by this

review include OCTG with nonstandard size wall thickness greater than

the minimum identified for a given

outer diameter as published in the API

or proprietary specifications for OCTG,

with surface scabs or slivers, irregularly

cut ends, ID or OD weld flash, or open

seams; OCTG may be bent, flattened or

oval, and may lack certification because

the pipe has not been mechanically

tested or has failed those tests. This

merchandise is currently classifiable

under the Harmonized Tariff Schedules

(HTS) item numbers 7304.20, 7305.20,

and 7306.20. The HTS item numbers are

provided for convenience and U.S.

Customs purposes. The written

description remains dispositive.

Verification

As provided in section 782(i) of the

Act, we conducted verifications of the

information provided by Atlas. We used

standard verification procedures,

including: On-site inspection of the

manufacturers’ facilities, examination of

relevant sales and financial records, and

selection of relevant source

documentation as exhibits. Our

verification findings are detailed in the

memoranda dated March 8, 2000, the

public versions of which are on file in

the Central Records Unit, Room B–099

of the Main Commerce building (B–

099).

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the case and

rebuttal briefs by parties to this new

shipper review are addressed in the

‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’

(‘‘Decision Memorandum’’) from Holly

A. Kuga, Acting Deputy Assistant

Secretary, Important Administration, to

Troy H. Cribb, Acting Assistant

Secretary for Import Administration,

dated June 1, 2000, which is hereby

adopted by this notice. A list of the

issues parties have raised and to which

we have responded, all of which are in

the Decision Memorandum, is attached

to this notice as an Appendix. Parties

will find a complete discussion of all

issues raised in this review and the

corresponding recommendations in this

public memorandum which is on file in

room B–099. In addition a complete

version of the Decision Memo can be

accessed directly on the Web at

www.ita.doc.gov/importladmin/

records/frn/, under the heading

‘‘Applicable Country.’’ The paper copy

and electronic version of the Decision

Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

of Review

The Department, at verification, found

certain errors in the reported values for

inland freight in the home market and

U.S. sales databases. The Department

adjusted for these errors in these final

results of new shipper review. See Sales

Verification Report, dated March 8,

2000; see also Final Calculation

Memorandum, dated June 1, 2000. No

other changes were made to our margin

calculation program.

Final Results of Review

We determine that the following

percentage weighted-average margins

exist for the period June 1, 1998,

through November 30, 1998:

Manufacturer/exporter Margin

(percent)

Atlas Tube, Inc ......................... 0.88

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 an importer-specific

duty assessment rate. With respect to

both export price and constructed

export price sales, we divided total

dumping margins for the reviewed sales

by the total entered value of those

reviewed sales for each importer. We

will direct Customs to assess the

resulting percentage margins against the

entered Customs values for the subject

merchandise on each of that importer’s

entries under the order during the

review period.

Cash Deposit Requirements

The following deposit requirements

will be effective upon completion of the

final results of this administrative

review for all shipments of OCTG from

Canada entered, or withdrawn from

warehouse, for consumption on or after

the publication date of the final results

of this new shipper review, as provided

by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The

cash deposit rate for Atlas will be the

rate shown above; (2) for previously

reviewed or investigated companies not

listed above, 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, in a prior review, or the

original 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 16.65

percent. This rate is the ‘‘All-Others’’

rate established in the less than fair

value investigation.

These deposit requirements shall

remain in effect until publication of the

final results of administrative review for

a subsequent review period.

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 double

antidumping duties.

This notice also serves as the only

reminder to parties subject to

administrative protective orders

(‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility

concerning the return or destruction of

proprietary information disclosed under

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.

This administrative review and notice

are in accordance with sections

751(a)(2) and 771(i) of the Act.

Dated: June 1, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

Appendix—Issues in Decision Memo

Comments and Responses

1. Cost of Production and Constructed Value

A. Product Specific Costs

2. Date of Sale

A. Contract Date vs. Invoice Date

3. Home Market Sales and Export Price

A. Billing Adjustments

[FR Doc. 00–14501 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–122–506]

Notice of Preliminary Results of

Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review: Oil Country Tubular Goods

From Canada

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of

antidumping duty administrative

review.