Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 87 / Friday, May 5, 1995 / Notices 22355

Benilda Group

Agricola Benilda

Agricola La Celestina

Agricola La Maria

Caicedo Group

Andalucia

Aranjuez S.A.

Exportaciones Bochica S.A.

Floral Ltda.

Flores del Cauca S.A.

Cantarrana Group

Agricola los Venados

Cantarrana Ltda.

Deer Field Flowers

Claveles Colombianos Group

Claveles Colombianos Ltda.

Fantasia Flowers Ltda.

Splendid Flowers Ltda.

Sun Flowers Ltda.

Claveles de los Alpes Ltda.

Colibri Flowers

Cultiflores

Cultivos Miramonte

Cultivos Tahami Ltda.

Daflor

Envy Farms Group

Envy Farms Ltda.

Flores Marandua Ltda.

Falcon Farms de Colombia S.A.

(formerly Flores de Cajibio Ltda.)

Floraterra Group

Flores San Mateo S.A.

Siete Flores S.A.

Flores Casablanca S.A.

Floreales Group

Floreales Ltda.

Kimbaya

Flores Aurora

Flores Calima S.A.

Flores Canelon

Flores Colon

Flores de Aposentos

Flores de Bojaca

Flores de Colombia

Flores de la Sabana S.A.

Flores de la Vega Ltda. (Vegaflor)

Flores de la Vereda S.A. (Flover)

Flores del Hato

Flores del Rio Group

Agricola Cardenal

Flores del Rio

Indigo S.A.

Flores del Salitre Ltda.

Flores de Oriente

Flores de Serrezuela

Flores de Suba Ltda.

Flores el Cipres

Flores el Lobo

Flores el Molino S.A.

Flores el Tandil

Flores el Zorro

Flores Jayvana

Flores Juanambu

Flores la Fragrancia

Flores la Mana

Flores la Union

Flores la Valvanera Ltda.

Flores Marvilla (of the Flores Tiba

Group)

Flores Mocari S.A.

Flores Monserrate Ltda.

Flores Sagaro

Flores San Juan

Flores Silvestres

Flores Tomine

Flores Tropicales Group

Flores Tropicales Ltda.

Happy Candy

Mercedes Ltda.

Rosas Colombianas Ltda.

Florex Group

Agricola Guacari

Flores Altamira

Flores de Exportacion

Santa Helena S.A.

Floricola la Gaitana S.A.

Funza Group

Flores Alborada

Flores de Funza

Flores del Bosque

Guacatay Group

Agricola Guacatay

Jardines Bacata

Agricola Cunday

Hosa Ltda.

Industrial Agricola

Ingro Ltda.

Inverpalmas

Inversiones Morrosquillo

Inversiones Supala S.A.

Jardines de Chia Ltda.

Jardines Fredonia

Las Amalias/Pompones

Manjui Ltda.

Maxima Farms Group

Agricola Los Arboles

Polo Flowers

Rainbow Flowers

M.G. Consultores Ltda.

Monteverde Ltda.

Natuflora

Papagayo Group

Inversiones Calypso S.A.

Agricola Papagayo

Queens Flowers de Colombia

Rosas Sabanilla Group

Agricola la Capilla

Flores la Colmena

Inversiones la Serena

Rosas Sabanilla

San Martin Bloque B Ltda.

Santa Helena S.A.

Santana Flowers Group

Santana Flowers Ltda.

Hacienda Curubital Ltda.

Inversiones Istra Ltda.

Santa Rosa Group

Agropecuaria Sierra Loma

Flores Santa Rosa

Floricola la Ramada

Senda Brava Ltda.

Soagro Group

Agricola el Mortino

Flores Aguaclara Ltda.

Flores del Monte Ltda.

Flores la Estancia

Jaramillo y Daza

Tecnica Agricola Ganadera (TAG)

Tinzuque Group

Tinzuque Ltda.

Catu S.A.

Toto Flowers

Tuchany Group

Flores Munya

Flores Sibate

Flores Tikiya

Tuchany S.A.

Uniflor Ltda.

Velez De Monchaux e Hijos y Cia

Victoria Flowers

Vuelven Ltda.

We have received requests for

revocation from the antidumping duty

order for the following exporters/

growers:

Agricola Circasia

Agrodex Group

Cultivos Miramonte

Flores Aurora

Flores de Serrezuela

Flores el Zorro

Flores Mocari

Funza Group

Flores Funza

Flores del Bosque

Flores Alborada

Hosa Ltda.

Inverpalmas

Maxima Farms Group

Agricola Los Arboles

Polo Flowers

Rainbow Flowers

Santana Flowers Group

Santana Flowers, Ltda.

Hacienda Curubital Ltda.

Inversiones Istra Ltda.

Tinzuque Group

Tinzuque Ltda.

Catu S.A.

Uniflor

Interested parties must submit

applications for administrative

protective orders in accordance with 19

CFR 353.34(b) of the Department’s

regulations.

This initiation and notice are in

accordance with section 751(a) of the

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19

U.S.C. 1675(a) and 19 CFR 353.22(c).

Dated: April 28, 1995.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Compliance.

[FR Doc. 95–11159 Filed 5–4–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

National Institute of Standards and

Technology

[Docket No. 950317076–5076–01]

RIN 0693–ZA05

Manufacturing Extension Partnership

Program

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards

and Technology (NIST), Commerce.
22356 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 87 / Friday, May 5, 1995 / Notices

ACTION: Notice of availability of funds.

SUMMARY: The National Institute of

Standards and Technology invites

proposals from qualified organizations

for funding projects to conduct the

planning and coordination of

manufacturing extension efforts at the

state and local level under the

Manufacturing Extension Partnership

(MEP). These projects correspond to the

State Technology Extension Program

(STEP) component of MEP.

Program Planning project proposals

can be submitted by all states or not-forprofit organizations designated by the

state as responsible for manufacturing

extension programs. States which have

not received a planning award within

the past two years from the National

Institute of Standards and Technology

under the State Technology Extension

Program of the Manufacturing Extension

Partnership are eligible. States that have

received previous planning grants more

than two years ago remain eligible for

additional Program Planning projects.

State which are performing planning on

a regional basis within the state and

which have recently received a regional

planning award may apply for

additional awards for planning in other

regions. For further information, see

Eligibility Criteria section.

DATES: Proposals from qualified

organizations will be accepted from May

5, 1995, with a total of $3,000,000 of

funding available.

ADDRESSES: Applicants should submit

proposals to the Manufacturing

Extension Partnership, Bldg. 301, Room

C121, National Institute of Standards

and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD

20899–0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For information regarding this

announcement, contact the

Manufacturing Extension Partnership at

(301) 975–5020, or at: Manufacturing

Extension Partnership, Bldg. 301, Room

C121, National Institute of Standards

and Technology, Gaithersburg,

Maryland 20899–0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

The catalog number for the award of State

Technology Extension Program funds in the

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance is

11.613.

Background

In accordance with the provisions of

the National Institute of Standards and

Technology Act (15 U.S.C. § 272 (b)(1)

and (c)(7) and § 278l), as amended, NIST

will provide assistance to help states

develop manufacturing assistance

programs aimed at small- and mediumsized manufacturers and help bring

those state programs to a level of

performance where they can provide the

full range of manufacturing extension

services required by their

manufacturers.

Under the NIST Manufacturing

Extension Partnership (MEP), a

cooperative effort to link and strengthen

the nation’s manufacturing extension

programs and activities, NIST will make

merit-based awards to states to help

improve their planning, coordination,

and implementation of their technology

extension activities.

Funding Availability

Approximately $3,000,000 will be

available to support cooperative

agreements under this program. This is

sufficient to fund all states which have

not received a STEP planning award

within the past two years. Proposals

must request less than $100,000 in

Federal funds.

Invitation for Proposals

Proposals will be accepted from

qualified organizations from May 5,

1995, with a total of $3,000,000 of

funding available.

Award Period

The cooperative agreements entered

into under this program will have a

performance period of one year. If an

application is selected for funding, NIST

has no obligation to provide any

additional future funding in connection

with that award. Renewal of an award

to increase funding or extend the period

of performance is at the total discretion

of NIST.

Cost Share Requirements

A cost sharing contribution from each

applicant is required. NIST may provide

financial support up to 50% of the total

budget for the project, however, the

federal share must be less than

$100,000. The applicant’s share of the

budget may include cash contributions

from state, county, industrial or other

non-federal sources and in-kind

contributions which are directly related

to the task to be accomplished.

Proposal Content

The proposal must, at a minimum,

include the following:

A. An executive summary of the

proposed project, consistent with the

Evaluation Criteria stated in this notice.

B. A description of the proposed

project, sufficient to permit evaluation

of the proposal, in accordance with the

proposal Evaluation Criteria stated in

this notice.

C. A budget for the proposed project

which identifies all sources of funds,

and details expenses.

D. A description of the qualifications

of key personnel who will be assigned

to work on the proposed project.

E. A statement of work that discusses

the specific tasks to be carried out,

including a schedule of measurable

events and milestones.

F. A letter from the Governor’s office

(not considered part of the page count)

indicating that the applicant is the lead

organization for conducting the

proposed activities and acknowledging

that there is only one proposal from that

proposed activities and acknowledging

that there is only one proposal from that

state or region for Program Planning.

G. A Standard Form 424, 424–A, and

424–B (Rev 4–92) prescribed by OMB

circular A–102, and Form CD–511,

Certification Regarding Debarment,

Suspension and Other Responsibility

Matters; Drug-Free Workplace

Requirements and Lobbying. The 424

series of forms and form CD–511 will

not be considered part of the page count

of the proposal.

Proposal Format

The proposal must not exceed 20

typewritten pages in length. The

proposal must contain both technical

and cost information. The proposal page

count shall include every page,

including pages that contain words,

table of contents, executive summary,

management information and

qualifications, resumes, figures, tables,

and pictures. All proposals shall be

printed such that pages are single-sided,

with no more than fifty-five (55) lines

per page. Use 21.6×27.9 cm (81⁄2′′×11′′)

paper or A4 metric paper. Use an easyto-read font of not more than about 5

characters per cm (fixed pitch font of 12

or fewer characters per inch or

proportional font of point size 10 or

larger). Smaller type may be used in

figures and tables, but must be clearly

legible. Margins on all sides (top,

bottom, left and right) must be at least

2.5 cm. (1′′). The applicant may submit

a separately bound document of

appendices, containing letters of

support for the proposal. The proposal

should be self-contained and not rely on

the appendices for meeting criteria.

Excess pages in the proposal will not be

considered in the evaluation.

Applicants must submit one signed

original plus six copies of the proposal.

Program Planning Projects

a. Project Objective

The purpose of Program Planning

projects will be to create plans for state-
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 87 / Friday, May 5, 1995 / Notices 22357

wide, coordinated, manufacturing

extension programs in order to enhance

the competitiveness of small- and

medium-sized manufacturers by

increasing their rate of adoption of

improved technologies and techniques.

These projects will plan for the

development and coordination of

existing and/or newly formed services,

such as state industrial assistance

programs; university-based industrial

assistance programs; and business

systems assistance programs, into a

unified state-wide program. Plans will

include methods for providing access to

a wide range of technical services and

access to related services for small- and

medium-sized manufacturers in the

state or region.

Applicants may conduct planning

activities on an intrastate regional basis

when regions are defined by the state.

Regions should be clearly defined by the

proposing organizations and it must be

clear why the program is regionally

oriented, versus state-wide.

Applicants may include small pilot

testing activities as part of their

planning process. If pilot testing of the

proposed extension plan is included in

the project, it should include methods

of evaluating the pilot test’s success in

implementing the proposed extension

plan. Any pilot activity must be

consistent with the program plan

developed for the state.

b. Program Planning Projects Evaluation

Criteria

Proposals will be evaluated and rated

on the basis of the following criteria by

an impartial review panel. Each

proposal should address all five

evaluation criteria. Evaluation criteria

are individually weighted. Selection

will be based upon the total evaluation

score of eligible proposals.

1. Market Research and Assessment

(20 points): Potential applicants should

specify a methodology for defining the

demographics of the smaller

manufacturers in the region (the

customers for the extension system) and

their technical assistance-related needs.

Factors that will be considered include:

(a) Methodology for defining the size

and demographic characteristics of the

customer base to be served by the

extension system.

(b) Methodology for determining the

customer base’s technical assistance

needs.

(c) Methodology to ensure that the

plan is appropriate for addressing

identified industry needs.

2. Resource Identification and

Assessment (20 points): Applicants

should describe the methodology for

collecting information about the

number, size, technical sophistication,

type, and relevance of existing

industrial assistance activities that will

be part of the coordination effort.

Factors that will be considered include:

(a) Methodology for identifying

relevant assistance programs and other

sources of expertise outside applicant’s

organization.

(b) Methodology for assessing

relevance and effectiveness of resources

in addressing identifying industry

needs.

3. Coordination with Existing

Resources (20 points): Applicants

should set forth a plan for interacting or

coordinating with appropriate existing

and/or newly-formed state and local

industrial assistance services, potential

industry partners, and appropriate

federal services, to develop a

coordinated state-wide delivery system.

Factors that will be considered include:

(a) Methodology and adequacy of

plans for forming effective linkages and

partnerships necessary to plan for and

provide a coordinated range of services

to meet the needs of the customer base.

(b) Safeguards to ensure that planned

activity does not duplicate existing

services or resources.

4. Management (25 points):

Applicants should specify plans for

proper organization, staffing, and

management of the planning process.

Factors that will be considered include:

(a) Appropriateness and authority of

the governing or managing organization

to conduct a state-wide (or regional)

planning process.

(b) Qualifications and demonstrated

leadership of the project manager and

any project team to conduct a state-wide

(or regional) planning process.

(c) Appropriateness of the

organizational approach for carrying out

the planning activity.

(d) Evidence of significant

involvement and support by the state.

(e) Degree of leadership and control of

the planning process by representatives

from the private sector and especially

smaller manufacturers.

5. Financial Plan (15 points):

Applicants should show the relevance

and cost effectiveness of the financial

plan for meeting the objectives of the

project; the firmness and level of the

applicant’s total financial support for

the project; and the plan to implement

the program after the cooperative

agreement has expired. Factors that will

be considered include:

(a) Cost effectiveness of the budget.

(b) The strength of commitment of the

proposer’s cost share, and the

percentage of cost share that is cash.

Cash cost share is considered to

demonstrate a stronger commitment

than in-kind.

(c) Effectiveness of management plans

for control of budget.

(d) The portion of cost sharing that is

in-kind must be appropriate and

directly related to performing the tasks

described in the statement of work.

c. Eligibility Criteria

• Eligible applicants for these projects

are state governments or non-profit

organizations.

• All states or regions which have not

received a planning award within the

past two years from the National

Institute of Standards and Technology

under the State Technology Extension

Program of the Manufacturing Extension

Partnership are eligible.

• States that have received previous

planning grants more than two years ago

remain eligible for additional Program

Planning projects.

• States which are performing

planning on a regional basis within the

state and which have recently received

a regional planning award may apply for

additional awards for planning in other

regions.

• Applicants will be able to propose

conducting the planning activities

themselves or arranging for some or all

of the planning activities to be carried

out by a second party.

• One proposal for Program Planning

will be accepted per state or region

within a state.

d. Required Letters

A letter will be required from the

Governor of the proposing state

indicating that the eligible applicant is

the lead organization in that state or

region for the proposed Program

Planning activities, and acknowledging

that there is only one proposal from that

state or region for a Program Planning

project. Where more than one such

otherwise qualified Program Planning

proposal per state is submitted, all such

proposals from that state may be

disqualified.

e. Cost Share Requirements

A cost sharing contribution from each

applicant is required. NIST may provide

financial support up to 50% of the total

budget for the project, however, the

federal share must be less than

$100,000. The applicant’s share of the

budget may include cash contributions

from state, county, industrial or other

non-federal sources and in-kind

contributions which are directly related

to the task to be accomplished.

Proposal Selection Process

Proposal evaluation and selection

process will be performed from the date
22358 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 87 / Friday, May 5, 1995 / Notices

of publication of this document until

further notice and will consist of three

principal phases: proposal qualification,

proposal review and award

determination.

a. Proposal Qualification

All proposals will be reviewed by

NIST to assure compliance with the

proposal content and other basic

provisions of this notice. Proposals

which satisfy these requirements will be

designated as qualified proposals. Nonqualified proposals will be returned to

the proposer and may be resubmitted

after addressing the omissions.

b. Proposal Review

NIST will appoint an evaluation

panel, composed of at least three (3)

reviewers, to review and evaluate all

qualified proposals in accordance with

the evaluation criteria and values set

forth in this notice. After scoring, the

panel will determine which proposals

will be accepted and recommended for

funding. For those proposals not

recommended for funding at this stage,

a NIST staff person not involved in the

review of the proposal will contact the

proposer and provide comments and

feedback based upon the evaluation

panel review. Proposals may then be

modified and resubmitted for review.

c. Award Determination

The Director of NIST, or a designee,

shall make final determination of

whether an award should be made to

the proposing organization based on the

review of the panel’s recommendations.

Additional Requirements

(a) Federal policies and procedures.

Recipients and sub-recipients are

subject to all Federal laws and Federal

and NIST policies, regulations, and

procedures applicable to Federal

financial assistance awards.

(b) Indirect Costs. The total dollar

amount of the indirect costs proposed in

an application under this program must

not exceed the indirect cost rate

negotiated and approved by a cognizant

Federal agency prior to the proposed

effective date of the award or 100

percent of the total proposed direct

costs dollar amount in the application,

whichever is less.

(c) Pre-award activities. If applicants

incure any costs prior to an award being

made, they do so solely at their own risk

of not being reimbursed by the

Government. Notwithstanding any

written or verbal assurance that may

have been received, there is no

obligation on the part of NIST to cover

pre-award costs.

(d) Delinquent federal debts. No

award of Federal funds shall be made to

an applicant who has an outstanding

delinquent Federal debt until either:

(1) The delinquent account is paid in

full;

(2) A negotiated repayment schedule

is established and at least one payment

is received; or

(3) Other arrangements satisfactory to

NIST are made.

(e) Past Performance. Unsatisfactory

performance under prior Federal awards

may result in an application not being

considered for funding.

(f) Name check review. All non-profit

applicants are subject to a name check

review process. Name checks are

intended to reveal if any key individuals

associated with the applicant have been

convicted of or are presently facing

criminal charges such as fraud, theft,

perjury, or other matters which

significantly reflect on the applicant’s

management honesty or financial

integrity.

(g) Primary applicant certification. All

primary applicants must submit a

completed Form CD–511,

‘‘Certifications Regarding Debarment,

Suspension and Other Responsibility

Matters; Drug-Free Workplace

Requirements and Lobbying,’’ and the

following explanations are hereby

provided.

(1) Non procurement debarment and

suspension. Prospective participants (as

defined at 15 CFR Part 26, Section 105)

are subject to 15 CFR Part 26, ‘‘Non

procurement Debarment and

Suspension’’ and the related section of

the certification form prescribed above

applies;

(2) Drug-free workplace. Recipients

(as defined at 15 CFR Part 26, Section

605) are subject to 15 CFR Part 26,

Supart F, ‘‘Government-wide

Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace

(Grants)’’ and related section of the

certification form prescribed above

applies;

(3) Anti-lobbying. Persons (as defined

at 15 CFR Part 28, Section 105) are

subject to the lobbying provisions of 31

U.S.C. 1352, ‘‘Limitation on use of

appropriated funds to influence certain

Federal contracting and financial

transactions,’’ and the lobbying section

of the certification form prescribed

above applies to applications/bids for

grants, cooperative agreements, and

contracts for more than $100,000, and

loans and loan guarantees for more than

$150,000, or the single family maximum

mortgage limit for affected programs,

whichever is greater; and

(4) Anti-lobbying disclosures. Any

applicant that has paid or will pay for

lobbying using any funds must submit

an SF–LLL, ‘‘Disclosure of Lobbying

Activities,’’ as required under 15 CFR

Part 28, Appendix B.

(h) Lower tier certifications.

Recipients shall require applicants/

bidders for subgrants, contacts, or other

lower tier covered transactions at any

tier under the award to submit, if

applicable, a completed Form CD–512,

‘‘Certifications Regarding Debarment,

Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary

Exclusion-Lower Tier Covered

Transactions and Lobbying’’ and

disclosure form, SF–LLL, ‘‘Disclosure of

Lobbying Activities.’’ Form CD–512 is

intended for the use of recipients and

should not be transmitted to NIST. SF–

LLL submitted by any tier recipient or

subrecipient should be submitted to

NIST in accordance with the

instructions contained in the award

document.

(i) False statements. A false statement

on an application is grounds for denial

or termination of funds and grounds for

possible punishment by a fine or

imprisonment as provided in 18 U.S.C.

1001.

(j) American-made equipment and

products. Applicants are hereby notified

that they are encouraged, to the greatest

extent practicable, to purchase

American-made equipment and

products with the funding provided

under this program in accordance with

Congressional intent as set forth in the

resolution contained in Public Law 103–

317, Section 607 (a) and (b).

(k) Intergovernmental review.

Applicants under this program are

subject to the requirements of Executive

Order 12372, ‘‘Intergovernmental

Review of Federal Programs’’ to the

extent permitted by law.

(l) Classification. This notice relating

to public property, loans, grants,

benefits, or contracts is exempt from all

requirements of section 553 of the

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.

553(a)(2)) including notice and

opportunity for comment. Therefore, a

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not

required and was not prepared for this

notice for purpose of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604).

The program is not a major Federal

action requiring an environmental

assessment under the National

Environmental Policy Act. This notice

does not contain policies with

Federalism implications sufficient to

warrant preparation of a Federalism

assessment under Executive Order

12612. This notice contains collection of

information requirements subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act which have

been approved by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB Control
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 87 / Friday, May 5, 1995 / Notices 22359

Number 0693–0010, 0348–0043, and

0348–0044).

It has been determined that this rule

is not significant for purposes of EO

12866.

Program Execution

(a) Cooperative Agreement. The

formal agreement between NIST and the

applicant will be in the form of a

Cooperative Agreement.

(b) Project Work Plan. All recipients

of awards are required to submit a Work

Plan within thirty (30) days of the

project start date. The work plan is a

more detailed statement of work based

on project objectives and activities the

recipient will undertake to achieve the

objectives and incorporates

recommendations provided by the

evaluation panel and the NIST Program

Officer. The Work Plan must be

reviewed and approved by NIST and

will be incorporated into the

cooperative agreement by amendment.

Work Plan guidelines will be distributed

to award recipients.

(c) Project Reporting. Quarterly

reports will be submitted to the NIST

Program Manager no later than thirty

(30) days after the end of each quarter

of the award year. The information

provided is used to characterize the

projects, develop detailed case studies,

and evaluate individual examples of

outcomes. Quarterly reporting

instructions will be distributed to award

recipients.

(d) Program Plan. A Program Plan will

be submitted to the NIST Program

Manager no later than thirty (30) days

after the end of the award period. The

Program Plan will discuss how the state

will work with industry to develop a

program that coordinates and

supplements state resources for

industrial modernization. The Plan

must, at a minimum: characterize the

industry in the state and survey their

needs; identify and assess the relevance

and sophistication of existing

modernization resources; and develop a

plan for a state-wide industrial

modernization infrastructure that

coordinates and complements existing

relevant services and eliminates

duplication. Program plans must be

driven by industry needs. Program Plan

guidelines will be distributed to award

recipients.

Dated: May 1, 1995.

Samuel Kramer,

Associate Director.

[FR Doc. 95–11123 Filed 5–4–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–13–M

International Trade Administration

[A–570–834]

Notice of Final Determination of Sales

at Less Than Fair Value: Disposable

Pocket Lighters From the People’s

Republic of China

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 5, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie

Anne Osgood or Todd Hansen, Office of

Countervailing Investigations, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

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

telephone: (202) 482–0167 or (202) 482–

1276, respectively.

Final Determination

We determine that disposable pocket

lighters from the People’s Republic of

China (‘‘PRC’’) are being, or are likely to

be, sold in the United States at less than

fair value (‘‘LTFV’’), as provided in

section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as

amended (‘‘the Act’’). The estimated

margins are shown in the ‘‘Continuation

of Suspension of Liquidation’’ section of

this notice. The U.S. Department of

Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) also

determines that critical circumstances

exist for all exporters except Gao Yao

(HK) Hua Fa Industrial Company Ltd.

(‘‘Gao Yao’’), Guangdong Light

Industrial Products Import & Export

Corporation (‘‘GLIP’’) and PolyCity

Industrial Limited (‘‘PolyCity’’).

Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the statute and to the

Department’s regulations are references

to the provisions as they existed on

December 31, 1994.

Case History

Since the preliminary determination

on December 5, 1994, (Notice of

Preliminary Determination of Sales at

Less Than Fair Value: Disposable Pocket

Lighters from the People’s Republic of

China, 59 FR 64191 (December 13,

1994)), the following events have

occurred:

On December 23, 1994, we issued our

preliminary determination of critical

circumstances with respect to the

subject merchandise (60 FR 436, January

4, 1995).

On December 9 and December 19,

1994, Cli-Claque Company Limited

(‘‘Cli-Claque’’), China National Overseas

Trading Corporation (‘‘COTCO’’), Gao

Yao and GLIP, requested a

postponement of the final

determination, pursuant to 19 CFR

353.20. Accordingly, on January 20,

1995, the deadline for the final

determination was extended to April 27,

1995 (60 FR 5899, January 31, 1995).

From February 28 through March 17,

1995, we verified the responses of the

exporters and producers of disposable

lighters.

Petitioner and respondents filed case

briefs on April 6, 10, 11, and 12, and

rebuttal briefs on April 13 and 14, 1995.

A public hearing was held on April 17,

1995.

Scope of Investigation

The products covered by this

investigation are disposable pocket

lighters (‘‘lighters’’), whether or not

refillable, whose fuel is butane,

isobutane, propane, or other liquefied

hydrocarbon, or a mixture containing

any of these, whose vapor pressure at 75

degrees fahrenheit (24 degrees Celsius)

exceeds a gauge pressure of 15 pounds

per square inch. Non-refillable pocket

lighters are imported under subheading

9613.10.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule of the United States

(‘‘HTSUS’’). Refillable, disposable

pocket lighters would be imported

under subheading 9613.20.0000.

Although the HTSUS subheadings are

provided for convenience and Customs

purposes, our written description of the

scope of this proceeding is dispositive.

Certain windproof refillable lighters,

as described in memoranda to Barbara

R. Stafford, dated December 5, 1994,

and April 25, 1995, are excluded from

the scope of this investigation. Also,

excluded from the scope of this

investigation are electric lighters (as

described in the April 25, 1995 memo)

which use two AA batteries to heat a

coil for purposes of igniting smoking

materials, rather than using butane,

isobutane, propane, or other liquefied

hydrocarbon to fuel a flame for purposes

of igniting smoking materials.

Period of Investigation

The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is

December 1, 1993 through May 31,

1994.

Non-market Economy Status

The PRC has been treated as a nonmarket economy country (‘‘NME’’) in

past antidumping investigations (see,

e.g., Final Determination of Sales at Less

Than Fair Value: Saccharin from the

People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 58818

(November 15, 1994) (‘‘Saccharin’’). No

information has been provided in this

proceeding that would lead us to

overturn our former determinations.

Therefore, in accordance with section