Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2000 / Notices 6155

2.91 percent for Tupy for the period

May 1, 1998, through April 30, 1999.

Any interested party may request a

hearing within 30 days of publication of

this notice. Any hearing, if requested,

will be held 38 days after the date of

publication of this notice, or the first

workday thereafter. Issues raised in

hearings will be limited to those raised

in the respective case and rebuttal

briefs. Interested parties may submit

case briefs within 30 days of the date of

publication of this notice. Rebuttal

briefs, which must be limited to issues

raised in the case briefs, may be filed

not later than 35 days after the date of

publication.

Parties who submit argument are

requested to submit with the argument

(1) a statement of the issue, and (2) a

brief summary of the argument. The

Department will publish a notice of

final results of this administrative

review, which will include the results of

its analysis of issues raised in any such

comments or at a hearing.

The Department shall determine, and

the Customs Service shall assess,

antidumping duties on all appropriate

entries. In accordance with 19 CFR

351.212(b)(1), we have calculated an

exporter/customer-specific assessment

value for subject merchandise. Upon

completion of this review, the

Department will issue appraisement

instructions directly to the Customs

Service.

Furthermore, the following deposit

rates will be effective upon publication

of the final results of this administrative

review for all shipments of certain

malleable cast iron pipe fittings from

Brazil entered, or withdrawn from

warehouse, for consumption on or after

the publication date, as provided for by

section 751(a)(2)(c) of the Act: (1) The

cash deposit rate for Tupy will be the

rate established in the final results of

this review; (2) for previously reviewed

or investigated companies not listed

above, the cash-deposit rate will

continue to be the company-specific rate

published for the most recent period; (3)

if the exporter is not a firm covered in

this review, or the original less-thanfair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the

manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate

will be the rate established for the most

recent period for the manufacturer of

the merchandise; and (4) for all other

producers and/or exporters of this

merchandise, the cash deposit rate shall

be 5.64 percent, the all-others rate

established in the LTFV investigation.

The deposit rate, when imposed, shall

remain in effect until publication of the

final results of the next administrative

review.

This notice also serves as a

preliminary 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 this 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 double antidumping duties.

We are issuing and publishing this

determination in accordance with

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

Act.

Dated: January 31, 2000.

Holly A. Kuga,

Acting Assistant Secretary, Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–2847 Filed 2–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–588–845]

Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils

From Japan: Notice of Initiation and

Preliminary Results of Changed

Circumstance Antidumping Duty

Review, and Intent to Revoke Order in

Part

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of initiation and

preliminary results of changed

circumstance antidumping duty review,

and intent to revoke order in part.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 8, 2000.

SUMMARY: On August 13, 1999, the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) received a request on

behalf of Watanabe Trading Co., Ltd.

(Watanabe), and Byram Steel Trading

Co., (Byram) for a changed circumstance

antidumping (AD) duty review and an

intent to revoke in part the AD order

with respect to specific stainless steel

sheet and strip from Japan. The

Department received a letter on August

30, 1999, from petitioners (Allegheny

Ludlum Corporation, Armco, Inc., J&L

Specialty Steel, Inc., Washington Steel

Division of Bethlehem Steel Corporation

(formerly Lukens, Inc.), the United

Steelworkers of America, AFL–CIO/

CLC, the Butler Armco Independent

Union and the Zanesville Armco

Independent Organization, Inc. of CA)

not opposing the request of Watanabe

and Byram for revocation in part of the

order pursuant to a changed

circumstance review with respect to the

subject merchandise defined in the

Scope of the Review section below.

Interested parties are invited to

comment on these preliminary results.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Karla Whalen or Robert Bolling, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

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

telephone (202) 482–1391 and (202)

482–3434, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute and Regulations

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

(URAA). In addition, unless otherwise

indicated, all citations to the

Department’s regulations are to the

regulations at 19 CFR Part 351.

Background

On July 27, 1999, the Department

published the Notice of Amended Final

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair

Value and Antidumping Duty Order on

stainless steel sheet and strip from Japan

(64 FR 40565).

On August 13, 1999, Watanabe and

Byram requested revocation in part of

the Antidumping Duty (AD) order

pursuant to section 751(b) of the Act

and section 351.216 of the Department’s

regulations, with respect to specific

stainless steel sheet and strip in coils

from Japan as described below.

Scope of the Review

The products covered by this

exclusion request are stainless steel

welding electrode strips that are

manufactured in accordance with

American Welding Society (AWS)

specification ANSI/AWS A5.9–93. The

products are 0.5mm in thickness, 60

mm in width, and in coils of

approximately 60 pounds each. The

products are limited to the following

AWS grade classifications: ER308L, ER

309L, ER 316L and ER347, and a

modified ER 309L or 309LCb which

meets the following chemical

composition limits (by weight):

Carbon—0.03% maximum

Chromium—20.0–22.0%

Nickel—10.0–12.0%

Molybdenum—0.75% maximum

Manganese—1.0–2.5%

Silicon—0.65% maximum

Phosphorus—0.03% maximum

Sulphur—0.03% maximum

6156 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2000 / Notices

Copper—0.75% maximum

Columbium—8 times the carbon level

minimum—1.0% maximum

Initiation and Preliminary Results of

Changed Circumstance AD Review, and

Intent To Revoke Order in Part

At the request of Watanabe and

Byram, in accordance with sections

751(d)(1) and 751(b)(1) of the Act and

section 351.216 of the Department’s

regulations, the Department is initiating

a changed circumstance review of

stainless steel sheet and strip from Japan

to determine whether partial revocation

of the AD order is warranted with

respect to the stainless steel sheet and

strip subject to this request. Section

782(h)(2) of the Act and section

351.222(g)(1)(i) of the Department’s

regulations provide that the Department

may revoke an order (in whole or in

part) if it determines that producers

accounting for substantially all of the

production of the domestic like product

have no further interest in the order, in

whole or in part. In addition, in the

event the Department determines that

expedited action is warranted, section

351.221(c)(3)(ii) of the regulations

permits the Department to combine the

notices of initiation and preliminary

results.

In accordance with section 751(b) of

the Act and sections 351.222(g)(l)(i) and

351.221(c)(3) of the Department’s

regulations, we are initiating this

changed circumstance review and have

determined that expedited action is

warranted. Our decision to expedite this

review stems from the domestic

industry’s lack of interest in applying

the AD order to the specific stainless

steel sheet and strip covered by this

request. Additionally, in accordance

with section 351.216(a) we find that the

petitioners’ affirmative statement of no

interest constitutes good cause for the

conduct of this review.

Based on the expression of no interest

by petitioners and absent any objection

by any other domestic interested parties,

we have preliminarily determined that

substantially all of the domestic

producers of the like product have no

interest in continued application of the

AD order to the stainless steel sheet and

strip subject to this request. Therefore,

we are notifying the public of our intent

to revoke, in part, the AD order as it

relates to imports of the merchandise

described above from Japan.

Public Comment

Interested parties may submit case

briefs and/or written comments no later

than 14 days after the date of

publication of these preliminary results.

Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals to written

comments, limited to issues raised in

such briefs or comments, may be filed

no later than 21 days after the date of

publication. The Department will issue

the final results of this changed

circumstance review, which will

include the results of its analysis raised

in any such written comments, no later

than 270 days after the date on which

this review was initiated, or within 45

days if all parties agree to our

preliminary determination. See section

351.216(e) of the Department’s

regulations.

If final revocation occurs, we will

instruct the U.S. Customs Service to end

the suspension of liquidation and to

refund, with interest, any estimated AD

duties collected for all unliquidated

entries of the specific stainless steel

sheet and strip covered by this request

from Japan. The current requirement for

a cash deposit of estimated AD duties

on all subject merchandise will

continue unless and until it is modified

pursuant to the final results of this

changed circumstance review.

This initiation of review and notice

are in accordance with sections 751(b)

of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(b)) and 19

CFR 351.216, 351.221, and 351.222.

Dated: January 24, 2000.

Robert S. LaRussa,

Assistant Secretary, Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–2853 Filed 2–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–533–806, A–570–815]

Final Results of Expedited Sunset

Reviews: Sulfanilic Acid From India

and The People’s Republic of China

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Final Results of

Expedited Sunset Reviews: Sulfanilic

Acid from India and The People’s

Republic of China.

SUMMARY: On October 1, 1999, the

Department of Commerce (‘‘the

Department’’) initiated sunset reviews of

the antidumping duty orders on

sulfanilic acid from India and The

People’s Republic of China (‘‘China’’)

(64 FR 53320) pursuant to section 751(c)

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended

(‘‘the Act’’). On the basis of a notice of

intent to participate and an adequate

response filed on behalf of a domestic

interested party and an inadequate

response (in these cases no response)

from respondent interested parties in

each of these reviews, the Department

decided to conduct expedited reviews.

As a result of these reviews, the

Department finds that revocation of the

antidumping duty orders would likely

lead to the continuation or recurrence of

dumping at the levels indicated in the

Final Results of Reviews section of this

notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark D. Young 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, D.C. 20230;

telephone: (202) 482–3207 or (202) 482–

1560, respectively.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 8, 2000.

Statute and Regulations

These reviews were conducted

pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752 of

the Act. The Department’s procedures

for conducting sunset reviews are set

forth in Procedures for Conducting Fiveyear (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews of

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty

Orders, 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 1998)

(‘‘Sunset Regulations’’), and 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 Fiveyear (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews of

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty

Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871

(April 16, 1998) (‘‘Sunset Policy

Bulletin’’).

Scope

The products covered by these orders

are all grades of sulfanilic acid, which

include technical (or crude) sulfanilic

acid, refined (or purified) sulfanilic acid

and sodium salt of sulfanilic acid

(sodium sulfanilate). The principal

differences between the grades are the

undesirable quantities of residual

aniline and alkali insoluble materials

present in the sulfanilic acid. All grades

are available as dry free flowing

powders. Technical sulfanilic acid

contains 96 percent minimum sulfanilic

acid, 1.0 percent maximum aniline, and

1.0 percent maximum alkali insoluble

materials. Refined sulfanilic acid

contains 98 percent minimum sulfanilic

acid, 0.5 percent maximum aniline, and

0.25 percent maximum alkali insoluble

materials. Sodium salt of sulfanilic acid

(sodium sulfanilate) is a granular or

crystalline material containing 75

percent minimum sulfanilic acid, 0.5

percent maximum aniline, and 0.25