Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 189 / Thursday, September 28, 2000 / Notices 58261

LIST OF PETITION ACTION BY TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR PERIOD AUGUST 16, 2000–SEPTEMBER 22, 2000—

Continued

Firm name Address Date petition

accepted Product

Ameritex Yarn, L.L.C ........... 840 Plantation Drive, Burlington, NC 27215.15–Sep–2000 .................... Cotton yarn.

Jack Georges, Inc ............... 823 Main Avenue, Passaic,

NJ 07055.

15–Sep–2000 .................... Leather business cases and accessories.

Century Engineering Co.,

Inc.

4 Orono Street, Clifton, NJ

07015.

20–Sep–2000 .................... Industrial and commercial machinery used for cleaning, deburring, plating nodule removal, surface prep.

and general panel scrubbing for glass, plastic and

metal.

IEC Corporation ................... 3100 Longhorn Blvd., Austin, Texas 78758.22–Sep–2000 .................... Slip ring assemblies used as electrical conductors.

Bay Area, Inc., dba Valley

Sawmill.

10600 Cordova, Anchorage, AK 99515.22–Sep–2000 .................... Heavy timber, dimensional lumber, wood chips and

sawdust.

The petitions were submitted

pursuant to Section 251 of the Trade Act

of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2341). Consequently,

the United States Department of

Commerce has initiated separate

investigations to determine whether

increased imports into the United States

of articles like or directly competitive

with those produced by each firm

contributed importantly to total or

partial separation of the firm’s workers,

or threat thereof, and to a decrease in

sales or production of each petitioning

firm.

Any party having a substantial

interest in the proceedings may request

a public hearing on the matter. A

request for a hearing must be received

by Trade Adjustment Assistance, Room

7315, Economic Development

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no

later than the close of business of the

tenth calendar day following the

publication of this notice.

The Catalog of Federal Domestic

Assistance official program number and title

of the program under which these petitions

are submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment

Assistance.

Dated: September 20, 2000.

Anthony J. Meyer,

Coordinator, Trade Adjustment and

Technical Assistance.

[FR Doc. 00–24895 Filed 9–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–24–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–201–806]

Carbon Steel Wire Rope From Mexico;

Rescission of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Rescission of

Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review.

SUMMARY: On May 1, 2000, the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) initiated an administrative

review of the antidumping duty order

on carbon steel wire rope from Mexico

(65 FR 25303). The Department initiated

this review at the request of the

Committee of Domestic Steel Wire Rope

and Specialty Cable Manufacturers (the

petitioner). This review covers two

manufacturers, Camesa, S.A. de C.V.

(Camesa), and Cablesa, S.A. de C.V.

(Cablesa). The period of review (POR) is

March 1, 1999 through December 31,

1999. On May 10, 2000, Cablesa

certified that it did not have any exports

or sales to the United States during the

POR. On June 15, 2000, the petitioner

withdrew its request for a review of

Camesa. The Department has received

no additional submissions from any

party concerning this review.

Accordingly, we are rescinding this

review.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 28, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark Hoadley, Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

U.S. Department of Commerce,

Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone:

(202) 482–0666.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Applicable Statute

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. In addition, unless

otherwise indicated, all citations to the

Department’s regulations are to 19 CFR

Part 351 (1999).

Scope of Review

The merchandise covered by this

order consists of carbon steel wire rope.

Steel wire rope encompasses ropes,

cables, and cordage of iron or carbon

steel, other than stranded wire, not

fitted with fittings or made up into

articles, and not made up of brass plated

wire. Imports of these products are

currently classifiable under the

following Harmonized Tariff Schedule

of the United States (HTSUS)

subheadings: 7312.10.9030,

7312.10.9060 and 7312.10.9090.

Excluded from this review is stainless

steel wire rope, which is classifiable

under the HTSUS subheading

7312.10.6000, and all forms of stranded

wire, with the following exception.

Based on the affirmative final

determination of circumvention of the

antidumping duty order, 60 FR 10831

(Feb. 28, 1995), the Department has

determined that steel wire strand, when

manufactured in Mexico by Camesa and

imported into the United States for use

in the production of steel wire rope,

falls within the scope of the

antidumping duty order on steel wire

rope from Mexico. Such merchandise is

currently classifiable under subheading

7312.10.3020 of the HTSUS.

Although the HTSUS subheadings are

provided for convenience and customs

purposes, our written description of the

scope of this review is dispositive.

Rescission of Review

Section 351.213(d)(1) of the

Department’s regulations allows the

Department to rescind a review if the

party that requested the review

withdraws the request within 90 days of

the publication date of the initiation

notice. The Department published the

initiation notice on May 1, 2000 (65 FR

25303). The petitioner withdrew its

request for a review of Camesa’s sales on

June 15, 2000. The petitioner was the

58262 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 189 / Thursday, September 28, 2000 / Notices

only party to request a review of

Camesa’s sales for this period of the

proceeding. Therefore, in accordance

with section 351.213(d)(1), we are

rescinding this review of sales by

Camesa.

Section 351.213(d)(3) allows the

Department to rescind a review if the

Department concludes that during the

POR there were no entries, exports, or

sales of the subject merchandise, as the

case may be. Based on Cablesa’s

certification, submitted on May 10,

2000, which we independently

confirmed with the U.S. Customs

Service, we conclude that Cablesa had

no entries, exports, or sales during the

POR, and, thus, that there is no basis for

a review. Therefore, in accordance with

section 351.213(d)(3) we are rescinding

this review of sales by Cablesa.

We will instruct customs to liquidate

the entries made during the POR at the

rate entered. We are publishing this

notice in accordance with section

351.213(d)(4) of our regulations.

Dated: September 20, 2000.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Deputy Assistant Secretary, AD/CVD

Enforcement Group III.

[FR Doc. 00–24953 Filed 9–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–201–802]

Gray Portland Cement and Clinker

From Mexico: Final Results of

Changed-Circumstances Antidumping

Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Final Results of ChangedCircumstances Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review.

SUMMARY: On August 17, 2000, the

Department of Commerce published the

notice of preliminary results of its

changed-circumstances review

concerning its examination of whether

GCC Cemento, S.A. de C.V., is the

successor-in-interest to Cementos de

Chihuahua, S.A. de C.V., for purposes of

determining antidumping liability. We

have now completed that review and

determine that GCC Cemento, S.A. de

C.V., is the successor-in-interest to

Cementos de Chihuahua, S.A. de C.V.,

for antidumping duty law purposes and,

as such, receives the antidumping duty

cash deposit rate previously assigned to

Cementos de Chihuahua, S.A. de C.V.,

of 48.95 percent ad valorem.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 28, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Minoo Hatten or Robin Gray, Office of

AD/CVD Enforcement 3, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230;

telephone (202) 482–1690 or (202) 482–

4023, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On November 24, 1999, Cementos de

Chihuahua, S.A. de C.V. (CDC),

requested that the Department of

Commerce (the Department) conduct an

expedited changed-circumstances

review pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the

Act). In that letter, CDC stated that,

effective December 1, 1999, GCC

Cemento, S.A. de C.V. (GCCC), a newly

created company, would be the

successor in interest to CDC due to a

corporate reorganization. CDC also

stated that it would become a holding

company and the parent of GCCC and

its subsidiary companies. On December

13, 1999, the petitioner, the Southern

Tier Cement Committee, opposed CDC’s

request that the Department initiate an

expedited changed-circumstances

review. Since the Department had very

little information on the record

concerning this corporate

reorganization, the Department

concluded that it would be

inappropriate to conduct an expedited

changed-circumstances review and

issue a preliminary determination

concurrent with the initiation of a

changed-circumstance review. Thus, the

Department published only a notice of

initiation. See Gray Portland Cement

and Clinker From Mexico: Notice of

Initiation of Antidumping Duty

Changed-Circumstances Review, 65 FR

1592 (January 11, 2000). On January 20,

2000, the Department sent a

questionnaire to GCCC requesting

additional information. On February 9,

2000, the Department received GCCC’s

response to the questionnaire. On April

6, 2000, the Department sent a

supplemental questionnaire to GCCC.

GCCC responded on April 27, 2000. On

June 23, 2000, the Department

conducted a verification of information

pertaining to this changedcircumstances review at GCCC’s offices

in Chihuahua, Mexico.

On August 17, 2000, the Department

published in the Federal Register (65

FR 50180) the notice of preliminary

results of changed-circumstances

antidumping duty administrative review

of the antidumping duty order on gray

portland cement and clinker from

Mexico. We now have completed this

changed-circumstances review in

accordance with section 751(b) of the

Act.

The 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 Act by the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (URAA). In addition,

unless otherwise indicated, all citations

to the Department’s regulations are to 19

CFR Part 351 (1999).

Scope of the Review

The products covered by this review

include gray portland cement and

clinker. Gray portland cement is a

hydraulic cement and the primary

component of concrete. Clinker, an

intermediate material product produced

when manufacturing cement, has no use

other than of being ground into finished

cement. Gray portland cement is

currently classifiable under the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item

number 2523.29 and cement clinker is

currently classifiable under item

number 2523.10. Gray portland cement

has also been entered under item

number 2523.90 as ‘‘other hydraulic

cements.’’

The HTS subheadings are provided

for convenience and customs purposes

only. Our written description remains

dispositive as to the scope of the

product coverage.

Successorship

According to CDC’s November 24,

1999, letter, effective December 1, 1999,

GCCC, a newly created company, would

become the successor in interest to CDC

due to a corporate reorganization. CDC

requested that the Department make a

determination that GCCC should receive

the same antidumping duty treatment as

the former CDC with respect to gray

portland cement and clinker from

Mexico.

The Department examined the

following factors: (1) Management; (2)

production facilities; (3) supplier

relationships; (4) customer base. As a

result of its examination, the

Department has determined that the

resulting operation of GCCC is the same

as that of its predecessor, CDC, and thus

the Department has determined that

GCCC is the successor-in-interest to

CDC for purposes of determining

antidumping duty liability. For a

complete discussion of the basis for this

decision, see Gray Portland Cement and

Clinker from Mexico: Preliminary

Results of Changed Circumstances