This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

59390

Vol. 65, No. 194

Thursday, October 5, 2000

JOINT BOARD FOR THE

ENROLLMENT OF ACTUARIES

Renewal of Advisory Committee on

Actuarial Examinations

AGENCY: Joint Board for the Enrollment

of Actuaries.

ACTION: Renewal of Advisory

Committee.

SUMMARY: The Joint Board for the

Enrollment of Actuaries announces the

renewal of the Advisory Committee on

Actuarial Examinations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gloria Walker, 202–694–1854.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

purpose of the Committee is to advise

the Joint Board on examinations in

actuarial mathematics and methodology.

The Joint Board administers such

examinations in discharging its

statutory mandate to enroll individuals

who wish to perform actuarial services

with respect to pension plans subject to

the Employee Retirement Income

Security Act of 1974. The Committee’s

advisory functions will include, but will

not necessarily be limited to: (1)

Considering areas of actuarial

knowledge that should be treated on the

examinations; (2) developing

examination questions; (3)

recommending proposed examinations

and pass marks; and (4), as requested by

the Joint Board, making

recommendations relative to the

examination program.

Dated: September 29, 2000.

Paulette Tino,

Chairman, Joint Board for the Enrollment of

Actuaries.

[FR Doc. 00–25653 Filed 10–4–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–580–815]

Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat

Products From Korea: Initiation of New

Shipper Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of initiation of new

shipper antidumping administrative

review.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce

(‘‘the Department’’) has received a

request to conduct a new shipper

administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on certain coldrolled carbon steel flat products (‘‘coldrolled’’) from Korea, which has an

August anniversary date. In accordance

with 19 CFR 351.214 (d), we are

initiating this new shipper

administrative review.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 5, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Bolling or James Doyle, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;

telephone: (202) 482–4733.

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 Round Agreements Act.

In addition, unless otherwise indicated,

all citations to the Department’s

regulations are to the regulations as

codified at 19 CFR Part 351 (1999).

Background

On August 31, 2000, the Department

received a timely request from Hyundai

Pipe Co., Ltd. (‘‘HDP’’) in accordance

with 19 CFR 351.214(d), for a new

shipper review of the antidumping duty

order on certain cold-rolled carbon steel

flat products from Korea, which has an

August anniversary date. See

Antidumping Duty Order: Certain ColdRolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from

Korea, 58 FR 44159 (August 19, 1993).

Initiation of Review

In its request of August 31, 2000,

HDP, as required by 19 CFR

351.214(b)(2)(i) and (b)(2)(iii)(A),

certified that it did not export the

subject merchandise to the United

States during the period of investigation

(‘‘POI’’) January 1, 1992 through June

30, 1992, and that since the

investigation was initiated on July 20,

1992, (57 FR 33488, July 29, 1992), it

has not been affiliated with any

company which exported the subject

merchandise to the United States during

the POI. Pursuant to the Department’s

regulations at 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv),

HDP submitted documentation

establishing the date on which it first

entered the subject merchandise to the

United States, the volume of that first

shipment, and the date of its first sale

to an unaffiliated customer in the

United States.

In accordance with section

751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR

351.214(d), we are initiating a new

shipper review of the antidumping

order on cold-rolled steel from Korea. In

accordance with 19 CFR 351.214(h)(1),

we intend to issue preliminary results of

this review no later than 180 days after

the date of initiation.

In accordance with section

351.214(g)(1)(i)(A) of the Department’s

regulations, the period of review

(‘‘POR’’) for a new shipper review

initiated in the month immediately

following the annual anniversary month

is the twelve-month period preceding

the anniversary month. Therefore, the

POR for this new shipper is August 1,

1999 through July 31, 2000.

Concurrent with publication of this

notice and in accordance with 19 CFR

351.214(e), we will instruct the U.S.

Customs Service to allow, at the option

of the importer, the posting of a bond or

security in lieu of a cash deposit for

each entry of the merchandise exported

by the above listed company, until the

completion of this review.

The interested parties must submit

applications for disclosure under

administrative protective order in

accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 and

351.306.

This initiation and notice are in

accordance with section 751(a) of the

Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)) and 19 CFR

351.214.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 194 / Thursday, October 5, 2000 / Notices 59391

Dated: September 28, 2000.

Barbara E. Tillman,

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for AD/

CVD Enforcement Group III.

[FR Doc. 00–25619 Filed 10–4–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–580–812]

Dynamic Random Access Memory

Semiconductors (‘‘DRAMs’’) of One

Megabit and Above From the Republic

of Korea; Final Results of Full Sunset

Review and Revocation of Order

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of full

sunset review: Revocation of

antidumping duty order on DRAMs of

one megabit and above from the

Republic of Korea.

SUMMARY: On May 30, 2000, the

Department of Commerce (‘‘the

Department’’) published a notice of

preliminary results of the full sunset

review of the antidumping duty order

on DRAMs of one megabit and above

from the Republic of Korea (65 FR

34439) 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 both domestic and

respondent interested parties.

Subsequently, on September 27, 2000,

we received a letter from the petitioner,

Micron Technology, Inc. (‘‘Micron’’),

withdrawing its notice of intent to

participate in this sunset review,

originally filed on November 16, 1999.

Further, Micron withdrew its responses

from this review and stated its support

for revocation of the antidumping order

on DRAMs of One Megabit and Above

from the Republic of Korea (‘‘DRAMs

from Korea’’). Because no domestic

interested party is now participating in

this sunset review, the Department is

revoking the order.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 5, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

P. Maloney, Jr. or James Maeder, Office

of Policy for Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,

Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone:

(202) 482–1503 or (202) 482–3330,

respectively.

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 in 19 CFR Part 351

(1999) 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’’).

Background

On May 30, 2000, the Department

published in the Federal Register a

notice of preliminary results of the full

sunset review of the antidumping duty

order on DRAMs of one megabit and

above from the Republic of Korea

pursuant to the Act. In our preliminary

results, we determined that revocation

of the order would be likely to lead to

continuation or recurrence of dumping.

In addition, we preliminarily

determined that the following margins

are likely to prevail for respective

manufactures/exporters if the order

were revoked: Hyundai—20.88 percent

and All Others—4.55 percent.

On July 11, 2000, and on July 12,

2000, we received final versions of case

briefs from Hyundai and Micron

Technology, Inc. (‘‘Micron’’),

respectively, within the deadline

provided for in 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(i).

Also, on July 17, 2000, and on July 18,

2000, Micron and Hyundai,

respectively, submitted final versions of

rebuttal briefs within the deadline

provided for in 19 CFR 351.309(d). The

Department held a public hearing on

August 9, 2000. Subsequently, on

September 27, 2000, Micron withdrew

its interest in this sunset review and

withdrew its responses from the record.

Scope of Review

The products covered by this review

include DRAMs of one megabit and

above from Korea. Assembled DRAMs

include all package types. Unassembled

DRAMs include processed wafers, uncut

die, and cut die. Processed wafers

produced in Korea, but packaged or

assembled into memory modules in a

third country, are included in the scope;

wafers produced in a third country and

assembled or packaged in Korea are not

included in the scope.

The scope of this review includes

memory modules. A memory module is

a collection of DRAMs, the sole function

of which is memory. Modules include

single in-line processing modules

(‘‘SIPs’’), single in-line memory modules

(‘‘SIMMs’’), or other collections of

DRAMs, whether unmounted or

mounted on a circuit board. Modules

that contain other parts that are needed

to support the function of memory are

covered. Only those modules which

contain additional items which alter the

function of the module to something

other than memory, such as video

graphics adapter (‘‘VGA’’) boards and

cards, are not included in the scope.

The scope of this review also includes

video random access memory

semiconductors (‘‘VRAMS’’), as well as

any future packaging and assembling of

DRAMs, and removable memory

modules placed on motherboards, with

or without a central processing unit

(‘‘CPU’’), unless the importer of

motherboards certifies with the Customs

Service that neither it nor a party related

to it or under contract to it will remove

the modules from the motherboards

after importation. The scope of this

review does not include DRAMs or

memory modules that are re-imported

for repair or replacement.

The DRAMs and modules subject to

this review are classifiable under

subheadings 8471.50.0085,

8471.91.8085, 8542.11.0024,

8542.11.8026, 8542.13.8034,

8471.50.4000, 8473.30.1000,

8542.11.0026, 8542.11.8034,

8471.50.8095, 8473.30.4000,

8542.11.0034, 8542.13.8005,

8471.91.0090, 8473.30.8000,

8542.11.8001, 8542.13.8024,

8471.91.4000, 8542.11.0001,

8542.11.8024 and 8542.13.8026 of the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (‘‘HTSUS’’).

Although the HTSUS subheadings are

provided for convenience and customs

purposes, the Department’s written

description of the scope of this review

remains dispositive.

Final Results of Review

Determination To Revoke

Because it withdrew both its notice of

intent to participate in this sunset

review and its responses from the

record, the Department now determines

that Micron has not responded to the

Notice of Initiation as set out in section

751(c) of the Act. Without responses

from Micron or any other domestic

interested party on the record of this

sunset review, the Department no longer

finds that revocation of the order would