Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 5, 2000 / Notices 41433

In addition, a complete version of the

Decision Memo can be accessed directly

on the Web at ia.doc.gov/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 margins:

Manufacturer/exporter Margin

(percent)

PRC-wide .................................. 376.67

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 28, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–16954 Filed 7–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–475–811; A–588–831]

Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel From

Italy and Japan; Final Results of

Expedited Sunset Reviews of

Antidumping Duty Orders

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of

expedited sunset reviews: grain-oriented

electrical steel from Italy and Japan.

SUMMARY: On December 1, 1999, the

Department of Commerce (‘‘the

Department’’) initiated sunset reviews of

the antidumping duty orders on grainoriented electrical steel (‘‘GOES’’) from

Italy and Japan (64 FR 67247) pursuant

to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of

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

basis of notices of intent to participate

and adequate substantive responses

filed on behalf of domestic interested

parties and inadequate response from

respondent interested parties (in these

cases, no response), the Department

determined to conduct expedited

reviews. As a result of these reviews, the

Department finds that revocation of the

antidumping duty orders would likely

lead to continuation or recurrence of

dumping at the levels indicated in the

Final Results of Reviews section of this

notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 5, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathryn B. McCormick or James

Maeder, 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–

3330, 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’’).

Scope of Reviews

The scope of these reviews includes

GOES, which is a flat-rolled alloy steel

product containing by weight at least

0.6 percent of silicon, not more than

0.08 percent of carbon, not more than

1.0 percent of aluminum, and no other

element in an amount that would give

the steel the characteristics of another

alloy steel, of a thickness of no more

than 0.56 millimeters, in coils of any

width, or in straight lengths which are

of a width measuring at least 10 times

the thickness, as currently classifiable in

the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (‘‘HTS’’) under item

numbers 7225.10.0030, 7226.10.1030,

7226.10.5015, and 7226.10.5056.

Although the HTS subheadings are

provided for convenience and customs

purposes, our written descriptions of

the scope of these proceedings are

dispositive.

Background

On December 1, 1999, the Department

initiated the sunset reviews of the

antidumping duty orders on GOES from

Italy and Japan (64 FR 67247), pursuant

to section 751(c) of the Act. The

Department received a notice of intent

to participate in these cases on behalf of

Allegheny Ludlum Corporation

(‘‘Allegheny Ludlum’’), AK Steel

Corporation (‘‘AK Steel’’), Butler Armco

Independent Union, the United

Steelworkers of America AFL-CIO/CLC,

and the Zanesville Armco Independent

Union (collectively, ‘‘domestic

interested parties’’), within the

applicable deadline (December 16,

1999) specified in 19 CFR

351.218(d)(1)(i). Additionally, on

December 16, 1999, Acciai Speciali

Terni S.p.A. and Acciai Speciali Terni

USA Inc. (together, ‘‘AST’’) submitted

an entry of appearance in the Italian

proceeding and, pursuant to 19 CFR

351.305(b), an application for access to

business proprietary information under

administrative protect order.

Allegheny Ludlum and AK Steel

claimed interested-party status under

section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as U.S.

producers of a domestic like product.

The unions listed above are interested

parties, pursuant to 771(9)(D), because

they are certified or recognized unions

or groups of workers representative of

the industry engaged in the

manufacture, production, or wholesale

in the United States of the domestic like

product.

Domestic interested parties state that

Allegheney Ludlum, Armco Inc.

(‘‘Armco’’), United Steel Workers of

America, Butler Armco Independent

Union, and Zanesville Armco

Independent Union were the petitioners

in the initial investigation of GOES from

Italy and participated in the only

completed administrative review of the

Italian order (see January 3, 2000,

substantive response of domestic

interested parties at 5). Armco was not

a petitioner in the case concerning

GOES from Japan because Armco had

certain technical relationships with a

Japanese producer of GOES at the time

that it wanted to preserve. However, the

relationship terminated prior to AK

Steel’s acquisition of Armco, on

September 30, 1999, when it assumed

control of Armco’s production of GOES.

Id. Accordingly, AK Steel, as the

successor of Armco, has replaced Armco

as a domestic interested party for

purposes of these sunset reviews and all

other administrative reviews. Id.

41434 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 5, 2000 / Notices

On January 3, 2000, we received a

complete substantive response from

domestic interested parties, within the

30-day deadline specified in the Sunset

Regulations under 19 CFR

351.218(d)(3)(i). Although we received

an entry of appearance from AST in the

Italian review, AST did not submit a

substantive response. Therefore,

without a substantive response from

respondent interested parties in the

Italian and Japanese reviews, the

Department, pursuant to section

751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR

351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), determined to

conduct expedited, 120-day reviews of

these orders. On February 9, 2000, we

received domestic interested parties’

comments in support of the

Department’s decision to conduct

expedited reviews of the antidumping

duty orders on GOES from Italy and

Japan (see February 9, 2000, domestic

interested parties’ comments on

adequacy at 3).

In accordance with section

751(c)(5)(C)(v) of the Act, the

Department may treat a review as

extraordinarily complicated if it is a

review of a transition order (i.e., an

order in effect on January 1, 1995).

These reviews concern transition orders

within the meaning of section

751(c)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act. Accordingly,

on April 6, 2000, the Department

determined that the sunset reviews of

GOES from Italy and Japan are

extraordinarily complicated, and

extended the time limit for completion

of the final results of these reviews until

not later than June 28, 2000 (65 FR

18058), in accordance with section

751(c)(5)(B) of the Act.

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the substantive

responses by parties to these sunset

reviews 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 28, 2000, which is hereby

adopted by this notice. The issues

discussed in the Decision Memo include

the likelihood of continuation or

recurrence of dumping and the

magnitude of the margin likely to

prevail were these orders revoked.

Parties can find a complete discussion

of all issues raised in these reviews and

the corresponding recommendations in

this public memorandum which is on

file in the Central Records Unit, room

B–099, 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/

import_admin/records/frn. The paper

copy and electronic version of the

Decision Memo are identical in content.

Final Results of Reviews

As a result of these reviews, we

determine that revocation of the

antidumping duty orders on GOES from

Italy and Japan would be likely to lead

to continuation or recurrence of

dumping at the following percentage

weighted-average margins:

Manufacturer/exporters Margin

(percent)

Italy:

ILVA S.p.A ......................... 60.79

Acciai Speciali Terni, S.r.I 60.79

All Others ........................... 60.79

Japan:

Kawasaki Steel Corporation ................................. 31.08

Nippon Steel Corporation .. 31.08

All Others ........................... 31.08

This notice also serves as the only

reminder to parties subject to 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.

These reviews and notice are in

accordance with sections 751(c), 752,

and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Dated: June 22, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–16951 Filed 7–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–588–703]

Internal Combustion Forklift Trucks

From Japan; Corrected Final Results

of Expedited Sunset Review and

Continuation of Antidumping Order

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Correction to Final

Results of Expedited Sunset Review and

Continuation of Antidumping Order:

Internal Combustion Forklift Trucks

from Japan.

SUMMARY: On August 5, 1999, the

Department of Commerce (the

‘‘Department’’) published in the Federal

Register the final results of the

expedited sunset review of the

antidumping duty order on internal

combustion forklift trucks from Japan

(64 FR 30962). On June 2, 2000, the

Department published the notice of

continuation of this order (65 FR

35323). Subsequent to the publication of

these notices, we identified an

inadvertent error in the ‘‘Scope’’ section

of the notices. Therefore, we are

correcting and clarifying these

inadvertent errors.

The error lies in the first sentence of

the scope section of each notice: ‘‘The

merchandise subject to this

antidumping duty order is internal

combustion industrial forklift trucks,

with a lifting capacity of 2,000 to 5,000

pounds, from Japan.’’ This sentence

should be replaced with: ‘‘The

merchandise subject to this

antidumping duty order is internal

combustion industrial forklift trucks,

with a lifting capacity of 2,000 to 15,000

pounds, from Japan.’’

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 17, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathryn B. McCormick or James

Maeder, Office of Policy for Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230:

telephone (202) 482–1930 and (202)

482–3330, respectively.

This correction is issued and

published in accordance with sections

751(h) and 777(i) of the Act.

Dated: June 27, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–16950 Filed 7–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–570–826]

Paper Clips From the People’s

Republic of China; 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: paper clips

from the People’s Republic of China