58510 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 190 / Friday, September 29, 2000 / Notices

Background

On June 5, 2000, the Department

initiated a sunset review of the

antidumping duty order on CPF from

Thailand (65 FR 35604), pursuant to

section 751(c) of the Act. The

Department received a notice of intent

to participate on behalf of Maui

Pineapple Co., Ltd. (‘‘Maui’’) and the

International Longshoremen’s and

Warehousemen’s Union (the ‘‘Union’’)

(collectively, ‘‘domestic interested

parties’’), within the applicable deadline

(June 16, 1999) specified in section

351.218(d)(1)(i) of the Sunset

Regulations. 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 July 5, 2000, we received

substantive responses on behalf of

domestic interested parties and Dole.

Dole is an interested party pursuant to

section 771(9)(A) of the Act as a foreign

producer and exporter of subject

merchandise. Domestic interested

parties claim that they have participated

in every segment of this proceeding,

including the original investigation and

the four administrative reviews initiated

to date, pursuant to section 751(a) of the

Act (see July 5, 2000, Substantive

Response of domestic interested parties

at 3).

On July 10, 2000, we received rebuttal

comments on behalf of domestic

interested parties in response to Dole’s

substantive response. On July 14 and

July 27, 2000, we accepted additional

comments.

Scope of Review

The product covered by this review is

CPF from Thailand. CPF is defined as

pineapple processed and/or prepared

into various product forms, including

rings, pieces, chunks, tidbits, and

crushed pineapple, that is packed and

cooked in metal cans with either

pineapple juice or sugar syrup added.

CPF is currently classifiable under

subheadings 2008.20.0010 and

2008.20.0090 of the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule of the United States

(‘‘HTSUS’’). HTSUS 2008.20.0010

covers CPF packed in a sugar-based

syrup; HTSUS 2008.20.0090 covers CPF

packed without added sugar (i.e., juicepacked). Although these HTSUS

subheadings are provided for

convenience and for customs purposes,

our written description of the scope is

dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the case and

rebuttal briefs 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 September 23, 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 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 http://ia.ita.doc.gov/

import_admin/records/frn, under the

heading ‘‘Thailand.’’ The paper copy

and electronic version of the Decision

Memo are identical in content.

Preliminary Results of Review

We determine that revocation of the

antidumping duty order on CPF from

Thailand would be likely to lead to

continuation or recurrence of dumping

at the following percentage weightedaverage margins:

Manufacturer/exporters Margin

(percent)

Dole .......................................... 1.73

TIPCO ....................................... 38.68

SAICO ....................................... 51.16

Malee ........................................ 41.74

All Others .................................. 24.64

Any interested party may request a

hearing within 30 days of publication of

this notice in accordance with 19 CFR

351.310(c). Any hearing, if requested,

will be held on November 15, 2000, in

accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(d).

Interested parties may submit case briefs

no later than November 8, 2000, in

accordance with 19 CFR

351.309(c)(1)(i). Rebuttal briefs, which

must be limited to issues raised in the

case briefs, may be filed not later than

November 13, 2000. The Department

will issue a notice of final results of this

sunset review, which will include the

results of its analysis of issues raised in

any such briefs, no later than January

27, 2001.

This five-year (‘‘sunset’’) review and

notice are in accordance with sections

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

Dated: September 25, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–25082 Filed 9–28–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–423–602]

Industrial Phosphoric Acid From

Belgium: Final Results of Antidumping

Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On June 26, 2000, the

Department of Commerce (‘‘the

Department’’) published the preliminary

results of its administrative review of

the antidumping duty order on

industrial phosphoric acid from

Belgium. See Notice of Preliminary

Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review: Industrial

Phosphoric Acid From Belgium, 65 FR

39355 (June 26, 2000) (‘‘Preliminary

Results’’). The review covers one

manufacturer/exporter of this

merchandise to the United States,

Societe Chimique Prayon-Rupel S.A.

(‘‘Prayon’’). The period of review is

August 1, 1998, through July 31, 1999.

We gave interested parties an

opportunity to comment on the

Preliminary Results of review but

received no comments. Therefore, the

final results do not differ from the

Preliminary Results of review, in which

we found the dumping margin for

Prayon to be 0.60 percent.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 29, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Frank Thomson or Howard Smith, 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) 482–4793,

and 482–5193, respectively.

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 Rounds

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

unless otherwise indicated, all citations

to the Department’s regulations are to 19

CFR part 351 (1999).

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 190 / Friday, September 29, 2000 / Notices 58511

Background

On June 26, 2000, the Department

published in the Federal Register (65

FR 39355) the Preliminary Results of the

administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on industrial

phosphoric acid from Belgium for the

98–99 review period. We invited parties

to comment on our Preliminary Results

or review. We did not receive any

interested party comments on our

Preliminary Results.

We have now completed the

administrative review in accordance

with section 751 of the Act and

continue to find the dumping margin for

Prayon to be 0.60 percent.

Effective January 1, 2000, the

Department revoked the antidumping

duty order on industrial phosphoric

acid from Belgium, pursuant to section

751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR

351.222(i)(1). See Revocation of

Antidumping Duty Order: Industrial

Phosphoric Acid From Belgium; and

Revocation Countervailing Duty Order:

Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Israel,

65 FR 37115 (June 13, 2000). Therefore,

we will not issue cash deposit

instructions to the U.S. Customs Service

(‘‘Customs’’) based on the results of this

review. We have not received any

requests to conduct an administrative

review for the August 1999 through

December 1999 period, and the deadline

for such requests has passed. Since the

revocation is currently in effect, current

and future imports of industrial

phosphoric acid from Belgium shall be

entered into the United States without

regard to antidumping duties. We will

instruct Customs to liquidate imports

during the August 1999 through

December 1999 period as entered. We

have already instructed Customs to

liquidate all entries as of January 1,

2000 without regard to antidumping

duties. This is the notice of the final

results in the final review of this

antidumping duty order.

Scope of the Review

The products covered by this review

include shipments of IPA from Belgium.

This merchandise is currently

classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule (‘‘HTS’’) item numbers

2809.2000 and 4163.0000. The HTS

item numbers are provided for

convenience and Customs purposes.

The written description remains

dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

We did not receive any interested

party comments on our Preliminary

Results. Therefore, there is no Issues

and Decision Memorandum for the final

results of review.

Final Results of Review

We have determined that no changes

to our analysis are warranted for

purposes of these final results. As a

result of our review, we determine that

the following margin exists for the

period August 1, 1998, through July 31,

1999.

Exporter/manufacturer

Weightedaverage

margin percentage

Prayon ...................................... 0.60

The Department shall determine, and

Customs shall assess, antidumping

duties on all appropriate entries. We

have calculated an importer-specific

duty assessment rate based on the ratio

of the total amount of antidumping

duties calculated for the importerspecific sales to the total entered value

of the same sales. The rate will be

assessed uniformly on all entries by that

particular importer made during the

POR. The Department will issue

appraisement instructions directly to

Customs.

This notice 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 the 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 doubled antidumping

duties.

This notice also serves as a 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. 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.

We are issuing and publishing this

determination and notice in accordance

with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the

Act.

Dated: September 22, 2000.

Troy H. Cribb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–25083 Filed 9–28–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–570–601]

Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts

Thereof, Finished and Unfinished,

From the People’s Republic of China:

Extension of Final Results of

Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of extension of time limit

for final results of antidumping duty

administrative review.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 29, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg

Campbell at (202) 482–2239, Office of

AD/CVD Enforcement I, Group I, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20230.

Time Limits

Statutory Time Limits

Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act

of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires

the Department to make a preliminary

determination within 245 days after the

last day of the anniversary month of an

order/finding for which a review is

requested and a final determination

within 120 days after the date on which

the preliminary determination is

published. However, if it is not

practicable to complete the review

within the time period, section

751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the

Department to extend these deadlines to

a maximum of 365 days and 180 days,

respectively.

Background

On July 29, 1999, the Department

published a notice of initiation of

administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on tapered

roller bearings and parts thereof,

finished and unfinished, from the

People’s Republic of China, covering the

period June 1, 1998 to May 31, 1999 (64

FR 41075). On June 29, 2000, we issued

the preliminary results of review (65 FR

41944). In our notice of preliminary

results, we stated our intention to issue

the final results of this review no later

than November 4, 2000.

Extension of Final Results of Review

We determine that due to the

numerous complex issues raised by

parties in this review, it is not

practicable to complete the final results