```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 15 (Monday, January 24, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3661-3662]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-1659]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-423-602]

Final Results of Full Sunset Review: Industrial Phosphoric Acid 
From Belgium

AGENCY:  Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION:  Notice of Final Results of Full Sunset Review: Industrial 
Phosphoric Acid from Belgium.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY:  On September 23, 1999, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') published a notice of preliminary results of the full 
sunset review of the antidumping duty order on industrial phosphoric 
acid from Belgium (64 FR 51511) pursuant to section 751(c) of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). We provided interested 
parties an opportunity to comment on our preliminary results. We 
received comments from the domestic interested parties. The Department 
did not receive a request for a public hearing, and, therefore, no 
hearing was held. 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:  January 24, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Darla D. Brown or Melissa G. Skinner, 
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-
3207 or (202) 482-1560, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:   

Statute and Regulations

    This review was conducted pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752 of 
the Act. The Department's procedures for the conduct of sunset reviews 
are set forth in Procedures for Conducting Five-year (``Sunset'') 
Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 FR 13516 
(March 20, 1998) (``Sunset Regulations'') and 19 CFR Part 351 (1998) in 
general. 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 
Five-year (``Sunset'') Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998) (``Sunset Policy 
Bulletin'').

Scope

    The merchandise subject to this antidumping duty order is 
industrial phosphoric acid (``IPA'') from Belgium. IPA is currently 
classifiable under item number 2809.20.00 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the 
written description remains dispositive.

Background

    On September 23, 1999, the Department issued its Preliminary 
Results of Full Sunset Review: Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Belgium 
(64 FR 51511) (``Preliminary Results''). In our Preliminary Results, we 
found that revocation of the order would likely result in continuation 
or recurrence of dumping. In addition, we preliminarily determined that 
the magnitude of the margin of dumping likely to prevail were the order 
revoked was 14.67 percent for Societe Chimique Prayon-Rupel, S.A. 
(``Prayon'') as well as for ``all other'' producers and/or exporters.
    On November 8, 1999, within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 
351.309(c)(1)(i), we received comments on behalf of Albright and Wilson 
Americas, Inc., FMC Corporation, and Solutia Inc. (collectively, the 
``domestic interested parties''). We have addressed the comments 
received below.

Comments

    Comment 1: The domestic interested parties maintain that the 
Department

[[Page 3662]]

correctly found that dumping would likely continue or recur if the 
antidumping duty order were revoked. The domestic interested parties 
base their conclusion on the fact that dumping has continued over the 
life of the order as well as the fact that import volumes have declined 
significantly over the life of the order. In addition, the domestic 
interested parties argue that the Department correctly rejected 
Prayon's argument that future exchange rates would eliminate Prayon's 
dumping margin.
    Department: The Department agrees with the domestic interested 
parties. For reasons provided in greater detail in our Preliminary 
Results, we find that dumping has continued over the life of the order 
and is likely to continue if the order were revoked.
    Comment 2: The domestic interested parties argue that the 
Department correctly chose the margin of dumping found in the original 
less than fair value (``LTFV'') determination as the margin to report 
to the International Trade Commission (``the Commission''). The 
domestic interested parties maintain that the Department was correct in 
selecting the margins from the original investigation to forward to the 
Commission because these margins are the only calculated rates which 
reflect the behavior of producers/exporters without the discipline of 
the order in place.
    Department: The Department agrees with the domestic interested 
parties. Again, for reasons provided in detail in our Preliminary 
Results, we find that the margins likely to prevail were the order 
revoked would be 14.67 percent for Prayon and 14.67 percent for ``all 
others''.

Final Results of Review

    As a result of this review, the Department preliminarily finds that 
revocation of the antidumping duty order would likely lead to 
continuation or recurrence of dumping at the margins listed below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                   Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prayon.....................................................        14.67
All Others.................................................        14.67
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.
    This five-year (``sunset'') review and notice are in accordance 
with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: January 18, 2000.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-1659 Filed 1-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
```