Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 146 /Thursday, July 30, 1998 / Notices 40699

1 Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair

Value: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate

from Belgium, 58 FR 37083 (July 9, 1993).

2Antidumping Duty Order and Amendment to

Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair

Value: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate

from Belgium, 58 FR 44164 (August 19, 1993).

3 Fabrique de Fer de Charleroi S.A. v. United

States, Slip Op. 98–4 (CIT January 16, 1998)

(‘‘Fabrique’’).

4 Fabrique at 8–9.

5 Id. at 12.

6 Id. at 13.

7 Fabrique de Fer de Charleroi S.A. v. United

States, Slip Op. 98–26 (CIT March 12, 1998).

8Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from

Belgium: Final Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review, 63 FR 2959 (January 20,

1998).

9The current ‘‘All-Others’’ rate is 6.84 percent.

affirmed the margin calculated for this

company in the final determination of

sales at less than fair value in certain

cut-to-length carbon steel plate from

Belgium. As there is now a final and

conclusive court decision in this action,

we are amending our final

determination of sales at less than fair

value and we will instruct the Customs

Service to change cash deposit rates,

where appropriate.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 30, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sanjay Mullick or Kris Campbell, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

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

telephone: (202) 482–0588 or 482–3813,

respectively.

Applicable Statute

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as

amended (the Act), are references to the

provisions in effect as of December 31,

1994. In addition, unless otherwise

indicated, all citations to the

Department of Commerce’s (the

Department’s) regulations are to the

regulations as codified at 19 CFR part

353 (April 1, 1997).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On July 9, 1993, the Department

published the final determination of

sales at less than fair value (LTFV) in

the investigation of certain cut-to-length

carbon steel plate from Belgium.1 The

antidumping duty rate calculated for

respondent Fabrique de Fer de Charleroi

S.A. (FFC) was 3.65 percent.

On August 19, 1993, the Department

published an amended final

determination, in which we corrected a

ministerial error by recalculating the

profit rate used in determining FFC’s

constructed value (CV).2 The

recalculation included profit on home

market sales of ‘Z-type’ steel, which is

within the general class or kind of

merchandise, but which was not sold in

the United States during the period of

investigation and was not used for

matching purposes. The amended final

determination rate for FFC was 13.31

percent.

On January 16, 1998, the Court of

International Trade (CIT) issued a

remand concerning this segment of the

proceeding, in which the CIT found the

Department’s calculation of the CV

profit rate for FFC in the amended final

determination to be erroneous. 3 The CIT

agreed with the Department that section

773(e)(1) of the Act requires the

calculation of CV profit based on sales

of the ‘‘general class or kind’’ of

merchandise, which includes Z-type

steel. 4 However, the Court held that, in

the Department’s amended

determination, the profits on Z-type

sales were ‘‘extrapolated out of realistic

and rational proportion.’’ 5 Accordingly,

the CIT issued the following

instructions:

The ITA may have 45 days from the date

hereof to consider and report whether, in the

exercise of its sound discretion, factoring

plaintiff’s (FFC) profit on home-market sales

of Z-type product in a manner more reflective

of the record leads to a weighted-average

margin percentage greater than the 3.65

reported at 58 Fed. Reg. 37,091 for FFC. If the

court does not receive an affirmative report

to this effect by the end of this period, that

original margin will be affirmed. 6

The Department did not issue an

affirmative report to the Court. On

March 12, 1998, the Court vacated the

amended final rate for FFC (13.31

percent) and affirmed the margin

calculated for this company in the final

determination (3.65 percent). 7 The

period to appeal has expired and no

appeal was filed. Therefore, as there is

now a final and conclusive court

decision in this action, we are amending

our final determination of sales at LTFV.

Amendment to Final Determination

Pursuant to section 516A(e) of the

Act, we are now amending the final

determination of sales at LTFV of

certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate

from Belgium with respect to exports by

FFC. In addition, as a result of the

change in FFC’s margin, we are

recalculating the ‘‘All-Others’’ rate. The

revised weighted-average percentage

dumping margins are as follows:

Manufacturer/exporter Percentage

Fabrique de Fer de Charleroi

S.A. ........................................ 3.65

All Others .................................. 6.75

The above rate listed for FFC will not

affect that company’s deposit or

assessment rates for any segment of this

proceeding. Since publication of the

first amended LTFV final determination

and order, the Department has

completed, pursuant to section 751 of

the Act, an administrative review of the

antidumping order covering FFC’s

entries for the period August 1, 1995

through July 31, 1996. 8 That review

established FFC’s assessment rates for

that period, and also established its

current weighted-average deposit rate.

Any entries made prior to that review

period were subject to automatic

liquidation pursuant to 19 C.F.R. 353.22

(e). However, the Department will

instruct the Customs Service to change

the cash deposit requirements for

producers/exporters subject to the ‘‘AllOthers’’ rate to 6.75 percent. 9

This notice is published in

accordance with section 735(d) of the

Act and 19 CFR 353.21.

Dated: July 23, 1998.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 98–20416 Filed 7–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–337–803]

Notice of Amended Final

Determination of Sales at Less Than

Fair Value and Antidumping Duty

Order: Fresh Atlantic Salmon From

Chile

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 30, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gabriel Adler or Kris Campbell, Office

of AD/CVD Enforcement 2, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;

telephone: (202) 482–1442 or (202) 482–

3813, respectively.

The 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 Department of
40700 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 146 /Thursday, July 30, 1998 / Notices

Commerce (the Department) regulations

refer to the regulations last codified at

19 CFR part 353 (April 1, 1997).

Amended Final Determination

On June 1, 1998, in accordance with

section 735(a) of the Act, the

Department made a final determination

that fresh Atlantic salmon from Chile is

being, or is likely to be, sold in the

United States at less than fair value. See

Notice of Final Determination of Sales

at Less Than Fair Value: Fresh Atlantic

Salmon from Chile, 63 FR 31411 (June

9, 1998) (final determination). On June

9, 1998, the Coalition for Fair Atlantic

Salmon Trade (the petitioners) and the

Association of Salmon and Trout

Producers of Chile (the respondents)

filed timely allegations that the

Department had made ministerial errors

in its final determination. On June 16,

1998, the petitioners and respondents

each filed comments addressing the

other party’s ministerial error

allegations.

We have determined, in accordance

with 19 CFR 353.28, that certain

ministerial errors were made in the final

determination. For a detailed discussion

of the Department’s analysis of the

parties’ allegations of ministerial errors,

see Memorandum to Richard W.

Moreland from the Team, Regarding

Clerical Error Allegations, dated July 1,

1998; see also Memorandum from

Gabriel Adler to the File, dated July 24,

1998.

Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR

353.28(c), we are amending the final

determination of the antidumping duty

investigation of fresh Atlantic salmon

from Chile. The revised final weightedaverage dumping margins are as follows:

Exporter/Manufacturer Original

margin

Revised

margin

Aguas Claras ................ 8.27 5.44

Camanchaca ................. 0.21 0.16

Eicosal ........................... 10.91 10.69

Mares Australes ............ 2.24 2.23

Marine Harvest .............. 1.36 1.36

All Others ...................... 5.19 4.57

Scope of Order

The scope of this order covers fresh,

farmed Atlantic salmon, whether

imported ‘‘dressed’’ or cut. Atlantic

salmon is the species Salmo salar, in the

genus Salmo of the family salmoninae.

Dressed Atlantic salmon refers to

salmon that has been bled, gutted, and

cleaned. Dressed Atlantic salmon may

be imported with the head on or off;

with the tail on or off; and with the gills

in or out. All cuts of fresh Atlantic

salmon are included in the scope of the

investigation. Examples of cuts include,

but are not limited to: crosswise cuts

(steaks), lengthwise cuts (fillets),

lengthwise cuts attached by skin

(butterfly cuts), combinations of

crosswise and lengthwise cuts

(combination packages), and Atlantic

salmon that is minced, shredded, or

ground. Cuts may be subjected to

various degrees of trimming, and

imported with the skin on or off and

with the ‘‘pin bones’’ in or out.

Excluded from the scope are (1) fresh

Atlantic salmon that is ‘‘not farmed’’

(i.e., wild Atlantic salmon); (2) live

Atlantic salmon; and (3) Atlantic

salmon that has been subject to further

processing, such as frozen, canned,

dried, and smoked Atlantic salmon, or

processed into forms such as sausages,

hot dogs, and burgers.

The merchandise subject to this order

is classifiable as item numbers

0302.12.0003 and 0304.10.4093 of the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (HTSUS). Although the

HTSUS statistical reporting numbers are

provided for convenience and customs

purposes, the written description of the

merchandise is dispositive.

Antidumping Duty Order

On July 22, 1998, pursuant to section

735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, the

International Trade Commission (ITC)

notified the Department of its final

determination that the fresh Atlantic

salmon industry in the United States is

materially injured or threatened by

material injury by reason of imports of

the subject merchandise from Chile.

In accordance with section 736(a)(1)

of the Act, the Department will direct

the Customs Service to assess, upon

further advice by the administering

authority, antidumping duties equal to

the amount by which the normal value

of the merchandise exceeds the export

price or constructed export price of the

merchandise for all entries of fresh

Atlantic salmon from Chile.

For purposes of determining which

entries are subject to assessment of

duties, the Department must consider

whether the ITC’s determination is

based on material injury or the threat of

material injury. Per section 736(b)(2) of

the Act, if the ITC’s determination is

threat-based, and is not accompanied by

a finding that injury would have

resulted but for the imposition of

suspension of liquidation of entries

since the Department’s preliminary

determination, then the Department will

assess duties on entries made on or after

the date of the publication of the ITC’s

notice of final determination, and will

refund any bonds or deposits of

estimated antidumping duties posted

since the Department’s preliminary

antidumping determination.

In this case, the ITC’s notification did

not indicate whether its determination

should be considered a material injury

determination or a threat determination.

The vote by the three ITC

Commissioners was as follows: one vote

finding material injury, one vote finding

threat of injury (without an

accompanying ‘‘but for’’ injury finding),

and one vote finding neither material

injury nor threat of injury. The

Department must therefore interpret

whether section 736(b)(2) of the Act is

triggered by such votes.

In making this determination, the

Department has been guided by

applicable judicial precedent. See MBL

(USA) Corp. v. United States, 787 F.

Supp. 202 (CIT 1992). According to the

CIT’s ruling in that case, inherent in

non-material injury votes (i.e.,

‘‘negative’’ votes and ‘‘threat’’ votes) ‘‘is

the realization that antidumping duties

will not be imposed, just as affirmative

views can signify imposition of such

duties from the date of a preliminary

less-than-fair-value determination rather

than from the date of a final decision on

material injury.’’ 787 F. Supp. at 208.

Therefore, in accordance with MBL,

the Department has determined that

section 736(b)(2) of the Act is applicable

to this case. Therefore, the Department

will direct the Customs Service to

assess, upon further advice,

antidumping duties on all unliquidated

entries of fresh Atlantic salmon from

Chile entered, or withdrawn from

warehouse, for consumption on or after

the date on which the ITC published its

final determination of threat of material

injury in the Federal Register, and to

terminate the suspension of liquidation

for entries of fresh Atlantic salmon from

Chile, entered, or withdrawn from

warehouse, prior to that date.

On or after the date of publication of

this notice in the Federal Register, the

Customs Service will require, at the

same time as importers would normally

deposit estimated duties on this

merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the

corrected weighted-average ad valorem

dumping margins noted above.

This notice constitutes the

antidumping duty order with respect to

fresh Atlantic salmon from Chile,

pursuant to section 736(a) of the Act.

Interested parties may contact the

Central Records Unit, at Room B–099 of

the Main Commerce Building, for an upto-date list of antidumping duty orders

currently in effect.

This notice also serves as a reminder

to parties subject to administrative

protective orders (APO) of their

responsibility concerning the return or
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 146 /Thursday, July 30, 1998 / Notices 40701

destruction of proprietary information

disclosed under APO in accordance

with 19 CFR 353.34(d). Failure to

comply with the regulations and terms

of an APO is subject to sanction.

This order is published pursuant to

section 736(a) of the Act and 19 CFR

353.21.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 98–20518 Filed 7–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D.072198A]

ICCAT Advisory Committee; Public

Meetings

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meetings.

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee to

the U.S. Section to the International

Commission for the Conservation of

Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), in conjunction

with the Highly Migratory Species

(HMS) Management Division of NMFS,

announces the schedule of regional

public meetings to be held this fall.

DATES: The meetings are scheduled from

August to November 1998. See

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific

dates and times of the meetings.

ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held

in South Carolina, Florida, U.S. Virgin

Islands, Maryland, Massachusetts, New

York. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

for specific addresses of the meetings.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jonathon Krieger (international issues)

301–713-2276 or Rachel Husted

(domestic issues) 301–713–2347.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

meetings are scheduled as follows:

Thursday, August 13, 1998, 7 pm to

10 pm - Marine Research Institute

Auditorium, 217 Fort Johnson Road,

Charleston, South Carolina 29412;

Friday, August 14, 1998, 7 pm to 10

pm - Best Western Bayside Inn, 711

West Beach Drive, Panama City, Florida

32401;

Thursday, September 3, 1998, 7 pm to

10 pm - Buccaneer Hotel, Estate Shoyes,

St. Croix, Virgin Islands 00824;

Tuesday, October 6, 1998, 7 pm to 10

pm - Holiday Inn, 2625 North Salisbury

Boulevard, Salisbury, Maryland 21801;

Wednesday, October 7, 1998, 7 pm to

10 pm - Cape Ann Marina Resort, 75

Essex Avenue, Gloucester,

Massachusetts 01930.

Thursday, October 8, 1998, 7 pm to 10

pm - Crown Plaza La Guardia, 104-04

Ditmars Boulevard, East Elmhurst, New

York 11369;

Additionally, the annual fall meeting

of the Advisory Committee will be held

in Silver Spring, Maryland, November

1–3, 1998. There will be an opportunity

for public comment on international

issues on Sunday, November 1, from 2–

6 p.m.

The meeting location is the Holiday

Inn Silver Spring, 8777 Georgia Avenue,

Silver Spring, Maryland 20910.

Domestic issues will not be discussed at

this meeting.

The following topics may be

presented to the public for discussion at

the regional meetings:

International Issues

1. Background on ICCAT

2. Information on the Advisory

Committee and Commissioners

3. Status of Highly Migratory Species

Managed by ICCAT

4. Topics for the 1998 ICCAT Annual

Meeting

Domestic Issues

1. HMS Rulemaking Actions

2. HMS Activities Under the

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act

3. Regional Concerns/Issues

Representatives from the Advisory

Committee to the U.S. section to ICCAT

and NMFS will be in attendance at the

regional meetings. There will be an

opportunity for public comment on each

issue. The length of the meetings may be

adjusted based on the progress of the

discussions.

Special Accommodation

The meeting locations are physically

accessible to people with disabilities.

Requests for sign language

interpretation or other auxiliary aids

should be directed to Jonathon Krieger

at (301) 713–2276 at least 5 days prior

to the meeting date.

Dated: July 24, 1998.

Richard W. Surdi,

Acting Office Director, Office of Sustainable

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 98–20392 Filed 7–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D. 072398C]

Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative

Management Act Provisions; Atlantic

Coast Weakfish Fishery; Exempted

Fishing Permits (EFPs)

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Applications for Exempted

Fishing Permits (EFPs); request for

comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces the receipt

of four applications for EFPs. If granted,

these EFPs would authorize a Flynet

Characterization Study to be conducted

by the North Carolina Division of

Marine Fisheries in a closed area south

of Cape Hatteras. The four participating

flynet vessels, each with its own EFP

and observer aboard, would conduct up

to 12 trips over a 4-month period for a

total of up to 64 trips.

DATES: Written comments on the

applications must be received on or

before August 14, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Richard

H. Schaefer, Chief, Staff Office for

Intergovernmental and Recreational

Fisheries (Fx2), NMFS, 8484 Georgia

Avenue, Suite 425, Silver Spring, MD

20910. The applications, related

documents and copies of the regulations

under which EFPs are subject may also

be requested from this address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas Meyer, 301–427–2014; FAX:

301–427–2014.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These

EFPs are requested under the Atlantic

Coastal Fisheries Cooperative

Management Act (Atlantic Coastal Act),

16 U.S.C. 5101 et seq., and regulations

at 50 CFR 697.6 concerning the

acquisition of information and data

activities that are otherwise prohibited

by the regulations in this part. Since

regulations under the Atlantic Coastal

Act must be consistent with the national

standards set forth in section 301 of the

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act

(Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1801

et seq., EFPs requested under the

Atlantic Coastal Act need to be

addressed in the same manner as EFPs

requested under the Magnuson-Stevens

Act, and regulations at 50 CFR 600.745

concerning scientific research activity,

exempted fishing, and exempted

educational activity.