21328 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2001 / Notices

1The Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports Executive

Committee is comprised of Hood Industries,

International Paper Company, Moose River Lumber

Company, New South Incorporated, Plum Creek

Timber Company, Polatch Corporation, Seneca

Sawmill Company, Shearer Lumber Products,

brokerage charges, insurance,

international freight and U.S. inland

freight.

Constructed Export Price

For certain sales, we used CEP

methodology in accordance with

sections 772(b), (c) and (d) of the Act,

because sales to the first unaffiliated

purchaser in the United States took

place after importation. Consistent with

these definitions, we found that some of

the respondent’s sales during the POI

were CEP sales. For these sales, we

calculated CEP based on prices charged

to the first unaffiliated customer in the

United States.

As the starting U.S. price, we relied

on the reported gross unit price. These

prices were delivered and FOB prices to

unaffiliated customers in the United

States. In accordance with section

772(c)(2) of the Act, we reduced the

CEP, where appropriate, by billing

adjustments and movement expenses,

including foreign inland freight, foreign

brokerage charges, insurance,

international freight and U.S. inland

freight. Also, where appropriate, we

deducted direct and indirect selling

expenses related to commercial activity

in the United States. Pursuant to section

772(d)(3) of the Act, where applicable,

we made an adjustment for CEP profit.

Currency Conversions

We made currency conversions in

accordance with section 773A(a) of the

Act.

Verification

In accordance with section 782(i) of

the Act, we intend to verify information

to be used in making our final

determination.

Suspension of Liquidation

In accordance with section 733(d)(2)

of the Act, we are directing the Customs

Service to suspend liquidation of all

imports of subject merchandise from

Israel entered, or withdrawn from

warehouse, for consumption on or after

the date of publication of this notice in

the Federal Register. We will instruct

the Customs Service to require a cash

deposit or the posting of a bond equal

to the weighted-average amount by

which the NV exceeds the EP or CEP, as

indicated in the chart below. These

suspension of liquidation instructions

will remain in effect until further notice.

The weighted-average dumping

margins are as follows:

Exporter/producer

Weighted-average margin

(in percent)

Dead Sea Magnesium .................. 12.68

All-others ....................................... 12.68

ITC Notification

In accordance with section 733(f) of

the Act, we have notified the ITC of our

determination. If our final

determination is affirmative, the ITC

will determine before the later of 120

days after the date of this preliminary

determination or 45 days after our final

determination whether these imports

are materially injuring, or threaten

material injury to, the U.S. industry.

Disclosure

We will disclose the calculations used

in our analysis to parties in this

proceeding within five days of the

publication of this notice. See 19 CFR

351.224(b).

Public Comment

Case briefs for this investigation must

be submitted no later than one week

after the issuance of the verification

reports. Rebuttal briefs must be filed

within five days after the deadline for

submission of case briefs. A list of

authorities used, a table of contents, and

an executive summary of issues should

accompany any briefs submitted to the

Department. Executive summaries

should be limited to five pages total,

including footnotes.

Section 774 of the Act provides that

the Department will hold a hearing to

afford interested parties an opportunity

to comment on arguments raised in case

or rebuttal briefs, provided that such a

hearing is requested by an interested

party. If a request for a hearing is made

in an investigation, the hearing will

tentatively be held two days after the

deadline for submission of the rebuttal

briefs at the U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.

Parties should confirm by telephone the

time, date, and place of the hearing 48

hours before the scheduled time.

Interested parties who wish to request

a hearing, or to participate if one is

requested, must submit a written

request to the Assistant Secretary for

Import Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, Room 1870, within 30

days of the publication of this notice.

Requests should contain: (1) The party’s

name, address, and telephone number;

(2) the number of participants; and (3)

a list of the issues to be discussed. Oral

presentations will be limited to issues

raised in the briefs.

If this investigation proceeds

normally, we will make our final

determination within 75 days of this

preliminary determination.

This determination is issued and

published in accordance with sections

733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Effective

January 20, 2001, Bernard T. Carreau is

fulfilling the duties of the Assistant

Secretary for Import Administration.

Dated: April 23, 2001.

Bernard T. Carreau,

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 01–10686 Filed 4–27–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–122–838]

Notice of Initiation of Antidumping

Duty Investigation: Certain Softwood

Lumber Products From Canada

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 30, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Valerie Ellis or Charles Riggle at (202)

482–2336 and (202) 482–0650,

respectively; Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,

Washington, DC 20230.

Initiation of Investigation

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 the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) regulations are references

to the provisions codified at 19 CFR part

351 (2001).

The Petition

On April 2, 2001, the Department

received a petition filed in proper form

by the Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports

Executive Committee,1 the United

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2001 / Notices 21329

Shuqualak Lumber Company, Sierra Pacific

Industries, Swift Lumber Incorporated, TempleInland Forest Products, and Tolleson Lumber

Company, Incorporated.

2See Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd., v. United States,

688 F. Supp. 639, 642–44 (CIT 1988); High

Information Content Flat Panel Displays and

Display Glass from Japan: Final Determination;

Rescission of Investigation and Partial Dismissal of

Petition, 56 FR 32376, 32380–81 (July 16, 1991).

Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners,

and the Paper, Allied-Industrial,

Chemical and Energy Workers

International Union (collectively, the

petitioners). On April 20, 2001, the

petition was amended to include the

following four companies individually

as petitioners: Moose River Lumber Co.,

Shearer Lumber Products, Shuqualak

Lumber Co. and Tolleson Lumber Co.,

Inc. The Department received

information supplementing the petition

during the twenty-day initiation period.

In accordance with section 732(b) of the

Act, the petitioners allege that imports

of certain softwood lumber products

from Canada are being, or are likely to

be, sold in the United States at less than

fair value within the meaning of section

731 of the Act, and that such imports

are materially injuring an industry in

the United States.

The Department finds that the

petitioners have standing to file this

petition on behalf of the domestic

industry because they are interested

parties as defined in sections 771(9)(C),

(D) and (E) of the Act and have

demonstrated sufficient industry

support with respect to the antidumping

investigation that they are requesting

the Department to initiate. See

Determination of Industry Support for

the Petition, below.

Scope of the Investigation

The products covered by this

investigation are softwood lumber,

flooring and siding (softwood lumber

products). Softwood lumber products

include all products classified under

headings 4407.1000, 4409.1010,

4409.1090, and 4409.1020, respectively,

of the HTSUS, and any softwood

lumber, flooring and siding described

below. These softwood lumber products

include:

(1) Coniferous wood, sawn or chipped

lengthwise, sliced or peeled, whether or

not planed, sanded or finger-jointed, of

a thickness exceeding six millimeters;

(2) Coniferous wood siding (including

strips and friezes for parquet flooring,

not assembled) continuously shaped

(tongued, grooved, rabbeted, chamfered,

V-jointed, beaded, molded, rounded or

the like) along any of its edges or faces,

whether or not planed, sanded or fingerjointed;

(3) Other coniferous wood (including

strips and friezes for parquet flooring,

not assembled) continuously shaped

(tongued, grooved, rabbeted, chamfered,

V-jointed, beaded, molded, rounded or

the like) along any of its edges or faces

(other than wood mouldings and wood

dowel rods) whether or not planed,

sanded or finger-jointed; and (4)

Coniferous wood flooring (including

strips and friezes for parquet flooring,

not assembled) continuously shaped

(tongued, grooved, rabbeted, chamfered,

V-jointed, beaded, molded, rounded or

the like) along any of its edges or faces,

whether or not planed, sanded or fingerjointed.

Although the HTSUS subheadings are

provided for convenience and U.S.

Customs purposes, the written

description of the merchandise under

investigation is dispositive.

During our review of the petition, we

discussed the scope with the petitioners

to ensure that it accurately reflects the

products for which the domestic

industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as

discussed in the preamble to the

Department’s regulations (62 FR 27323),

we are setting aside a period for parties

to raise issues regarding product

coverage. The Department encourages

all interested parties to submit such

comments within twenty days after the

date of publication of this notice in the

Federal Register. Comments should be

addressed to Import Administration’s

Central Records Unit at Room 1870, U.S.

Department of Commerce, 14th Street

and Constitution Avenue, NW,

Washington, DC 20230. The period for

scope comments is intended to provide

the Department with ample opportunity

to consider all comments and consult

with parties prior to the issuance of the

preliminary determination.

Determination of Industry Support for

the Petition

Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines

the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers of a

domestic like product. Thus, when

determining the degree of industry

support, the statute directs the

Department to look to producers and

workers who produce the domestic like

product. The International Trade

Commission (ITC), which is responsible

for determining whether ‘‘the domestic

industry’’ has been injured, must also

determine what constitutes a domestic

like product in order to define the

industry. While both the Department

and the ITC must apply the same

statutory definition regarding the

domestic like product (section 771(10)

of the Act), they do so for different

purposes and pursuant to separate and

distinct authority. In addition, the

Department’s determination is subject to

limitations of time and information.

Although this may result in different

definitions of the like product, such

differences do not render the decision of

either agency contrary to the law.2

Section 771(10) of the Act defines the

domestic like product as ‘‘a product

which is like, or in the absence of like,

most similar in characteristics and uses

with, the article subject to an

investigation under this subtitle.’’ Thus,

the reference point from which the

domestic like product analysis begins is

‘‘the article subject to an investigation,’’

i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to

be investigated, which normally will be

the scope as defined in the petition.

The petition covers softwood lumber

as defined in the Scope of the

Investigation section, above, a single

class or kind of merchandise. The

petitioners define the domestic like

product as the class or kind of

merchandise covered by the scope of the

investigation. The Department has no

basis on the record to find the

petitioners’ definition of the domestic

like product to be inaccurate.

The Department, therefore, has

adopted the domestic like product

definition set forth in the petition.

Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires

that a petition be filed on behalf of the

domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A)

of the Act provides that a petition meets

this requirement if the domestic

producers or workers who support the

petition account for: (1) At least 25

percent of the total production of the

domestic like product; and (2) more

than 50 percent of the production of the

domestic like product produced by that

portion of the industry expressing

support for, or opposition to, the

petition. Finally, section 732(c)(4)(D) of

the Act provides that if the petition does

not establish support of domestic

producers or workers accounting for

more than 50 percent of the total

production of the domestic like product,

the administering agency shall: (i) poll

the industry or rely on other

information in order to determine if

there is support for the petition as

required by subparagraph (A), or (ii)

determine industry support using a

statistically valid sampling method.

In this case, the Department has

determined that the petition (and

subsequent amendments) contain

adequate evidence of industry support;

therefore, polling is unnecessary. See

Attachment I to AD Investigation

Initiation Checklist: Certain Softwood

Lumber Products from Canada (April

23, 2001) (Initiation Checklist). To

21330 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2001 / Notices

3Random Lenths is a weekly newsletter that is

received by subscribers int he U.S., Canada, and

forty-one other countries. The publication reports

prices, analyzes markets, and examines issues

affecting markets for the North American softwood

lumber industry.

4The margins calculated using these prices,

revised by the Department as described in the

Initiation Checklist, would range from 31.52–49.44

percent.

5The petitioners chose Tembec because it is one

of the largest softwood lumber producers within

Canada and operates mills in british Columbis,

Quebec, and Ontario.

estimate total domestic production of

softwood lumber products, the

petitioners relied on year 2000

production figures published by the

American Forest and Paper Association

(AF&PA). The petitioners also made an

upward adjustment to this figure to

account, conservatively, for flooring and

siding that may or may not otherwise be

included in the AF&PA total production

figure, but which is included in the

definition of domestic like product. In a

letter dated April 20, 2001, the

Government of Canada attempted to

show that this upward adjustment to the

year 2000 total production figure was

inadequate, and argued that numerous

other product categories should also be

added to the total production figure. We

analyzed the claim made by the

Government of Canada and have

concluded that it would result in

significant double-counting. Further, we

have found no other evidence through

independent research that would

indicate that the petitioners’ figure for

total U.S. production is in any way

understated. We therefore conclude that

67 percent of the U.S. softwood lumberproducing industry supports the

petition. Because the petition has

support from more than 50 percent of

the entire domestic industry, we are not

required to consider any expression of

opposition in our determination to

initiate this investigation. Accordingly,

the Department determines that this

petition is filed on behalf of the

domestic industry within the meaning

of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.

Export Price and Normal Value

The petitioners based export price

(EP) on affidavits containing price

quotes from Canadian lumber producers

in British Columbia and Quebec. These

quotes reflect prices to unaffiliated U.S.

purchasers for different types and sizes

of the subject merchandise commonly

exported to the United States. In

addition, the petitioners provided prices

contained in the industry publication

Random Lengths.3 Both POI-average and

week-specific prices were provided

from Random Lengths. Because the

terms of these prices are delivered, the

petitioners calculated a net U.S. price by

subtracting an estimated amount for

international freight. In addition, for the

price quote from British Columbia, the

petitioners deducted a trading company

mark-up.

For initiation purposes, we relied

only on the estimated margins based on

the POI-average Random Lengths prices

and actual price quotes from Canadian

producers. The petitioners argue that

the week-specific Random Lengths

prices should be used by the

Department because they are indicative

of actual sales that occurred during that

week for a specific product with

identical sales terms, and they are akin

to an individual-price transaction.4

However, since the POI-average prices

from Random Lengths and price quotes

from Canadian lumber producers are

sufficient for the purposes of this

initiation, it is not necessary to consider

the petitioners’ alternative methodology

at this time.

With respect to normal value (NV),

the petitioners provided a home-market

price that was obtained from Random

Lengths for the eastern-spruce-pine-fir

(ESPF) commonly produced in Quebec,

and from the British Columbia Ministry

of Forest’s published market pricing

system (MPS) lumber values for

western-spruce-pine-fir (WSPF). Inland

freight was deducted from the delivered

price for ESPF. The prices for WSPF

were considered by the petitioners to be

ex-mill prices and no deductions were

made. For a more detailed discussion of

the deductions and adjustments relating

to home market price, U.S. price and

sources of data, see Initiation Checklist.

Should the need arise to use any of this

information in our preliminary or final

determinations as facts available under

section 776 of the Act, we may reexamine the information and revise the

margin calculations, if appropriate.

Although the petitioners provided

information on home market prices,

they also provided information

demonstrating reasonable grounds to

believe or suspect that sales of softwood

lumber in Canada were made at prices

below the fully absorbed cost of

production (COP), within the meaning

of section 773(b) of the Act, and

requested that the Department conduct

a country-wide sales-below-cost

investigation.

We note that the WSPF prices

provided appear not to be Canadaspecific prices. The MPS lumber values

are obtained by the British Columbia

Ministry of Forests from B.C. lumber

producers. However, the petition does

not indicate that these prices are in any

way restricted to sales in Canada. The

petitioners acknowledge this, but

contend the MPS lumber values

represent conservative prices based on

anecdotal evidence that a Canadaspecific price would be lower. For

purposes of examining the below-cost

allegation, we have not considered the

WSPF prices. However, we note that

they are unnecessary, as the petitioners

were able to demonstrate sales below

cost using other domestic prices

contained in the petition.

Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the

Act, cost of production (COP) includes

cost of manufacturing, selling, general

and administrative expenses, and

packing. The petitioners based the cost

of materials, fabrication and packing on

the experience of certain petitioning

companies, adjusted for known

differences in costs between the United

States and Canada, and publicly

available Canadian industry data. The

petitioners estimated per-unit selling,

general and administrative expenses

using data from Tembec Industries

Inc.’’s (Tembec) 2000 financial

statements.5 The petitioners estimated

the per-unit financial expense using

data from the 2000 financial statements

of Tembec’s parent company, Tembec

Inc. We adjusted the petitioners’

calculation of depreciation by using the

amount from Tembec’s forest products

line of business rather than the

company as a whole, which includes

results from non-subject merchandise

such as pulp, publishing paper,

paperboard products, and chemicals.

See Initiation of Cost Investigation

section, below.

Based upon the comparison of the

home market prices of the foreign like

product to the calculated COP of the

product, we find reasonable grounds to

believe or suspect that sales of the

foreign like product were made below

the COP, within the meaning of section

773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Because the

NV petitioners used for the softwood

lumber sales is below the COP, the

petitioners based NV on CV. The

petitioners calculated CV incorporating

the same costs used for the COP. We

made the same depreciation adjustment

for CV that was made for COP. The

petitioners included an amount for CV

profit which was based on the profit of

the Canadian producer’s financial

statements. We adjusted the petitioner’s

calculation of profit by using profit from

the forest products line of business

rather than the company as a whole,

which includes results from non-subject

merchandise such as pulp, publishing

paper, paperboard products, and

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2001 / Notices 21331

chemicals. Based upon the comparison

of EP to CV, the estimated dumping

margins, as adjusted by the Department,

range from 0.60 to 37.64 percent.

Initiation of Cost Investigation

As noted above, pursuant to section

773(b) of the Act, the petitioners

provided specific factual information

demonstrating reasonable grounds to

believe or suspect that sales in the

Canadian home market were made at

prices below the fully absorbed COP

and, accordingly, requested that the

Department conduct a country-wide

sales-below-COP investigation. The

Statement of Administrative Action

accompanying the URAA, H.R.

Doc.103–412 (SAA), states that an

allegation of sales below COP need not

be specific to individual exporters or

producers. The SAA states that

‘‘Commerce will consider allegations of

below-cost sales in the aggregate for a

foreign country, just as Commerce

currently considers allegations of sales

at less than fair value on a country-wide

basis for purposes of initiating an

antidumping investigation.’’ See SAA at

833.

Further, the SAA provides that ‘‘new

section 773(b)(2)(A) retains the current

requirement that Commerce have

‘reasonable grounds to believe or

suspect’ that below cost sales have

occurred before initiating such an

investigation. ‘Reasonable grounds’

* * * exist when an interested party

provides specific factual information on

costs and prices, observed or

constructed, indicating that sales in the

foreign market in question are at belowcost prices.’’ Id. Based upon the

comparison of the adjusted prices from

the petition for the representative

foreign like products to their costs of

production, we find the existence of

‘‘reasonable grounds to believe or

suspect’’ that sales of the foreign like

product in Canada were made below the

COP within the meaning of section

773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly,

the Department is initiating the

requested country-wide cost

investigation.

Fair Value Comparisons

Based on the data provided by the

petitioners, there is reason to believe

that imports of certain softwood lumber

products from Canada are being, or are

likely to be, sold at less than fair value.

Critical Circumstances

In their submission, the petitioners

claim that, following the March 31,

2001, expiration of the U.S.-Canada

Softwood Lumber Agreement (SLA),

there is a reasonable basis to believe or

suspect that critical circumstances will

exist with regard to imports of softwood

lumber from Canada.

Section 733(e)(1) of the Act states

that, if a petitioner alleges critical

circumstances, the Department will find

that such circumstances exist, at any

time after the date of initiation, when

there is a reasonable basis to believe or

suspect that under subparagraph (A)(i)

there is a history of dumping and

material injury by reason of dumped

imports in the United States or

elsewhere of the subject merchandise, or

(ii) the person by whom, or for whose

account, the merchandise was imported

knew or should have known that the

exporter was selling the subject

merchandise at less than its fair value

and that there was likely to be material

injury by reason of such sales, and (B)

there have been massive imports of the

subject merchandise over a relatively

short period. Section 351.206(h) of the

Department’s regulations defines

‘‘massive imports’’ as imports that have

increased by at least 15 percent over the

imports during an immediately

preceding period of comparable

duration. Section 351.206(i) of the

regulations states that ‘‘relatively short

period’’ will normally be defined as the

period beginning on the date the

proceeding begins and ending at least

three months later.

The petitioners allege that importers

knew, or should have known, that

lumber was being sold at less than its

fair value. Specifically, the petitioners

allege margins, as adjusted by the

Department, as high as 37.64 percent, a

level high enough to impute importer

knowledge that merchandise was being

sold at less than its fair value.

Additionally, they state that there is

likely to be material injury by reason of

such sales, and have submitted

numerous documents, including news

articles in the lumber trade press

published over the past several months,

that warn of antidumping and

countervailing duty cases and discuss

the threat of additional price declines

and substantial material injury to the

U.S. industry.

The petitioners request that the

Department immediately begin

reviewing import data of the subject

merchandise and that the Department

request the U.S. Customs Service to

compile information on an expedited

basis regarding entries of subject

merchandise. We note that section

732(e) of the Act states that when there

is a reasonable basis to believe or

suspect (1) there is a history of dumping

in the United States or elsewhere of the

subject merchandise, or (2) the person

by whom, or for whose account, the

merchandise was imported knew, or

should have known, that the exporter

was selling the subject merchandise at

less than its fair value, the Department

may request the Commissioner of

Customs to compile information on an

expedited basis regarding entries of the

subject merchandise.

Taking into consideration the

foregoing, we will analyze this matter

further and continue to monitor imports

of softwood lumber from Canada. If, at

any time, the criteria for a finding of

critical circumstances are established,

we will issue a critical circumstances

finding at the earliest possible date. See

Policy Bulletin 98/4, 63 FR 55364,

(October 15, 1998) (determination of

critical circumstances may be made any

time after initiation).

Allegations and Evidence of Material

Injury, Causation and Threat of

Material Injury

The petitions allege that the U.S.

industry producing the domestic like

product is being materially injured, or is

threatened with material injury, by

reason of the imports of the subject

merchandise sold at less than NV. The

petitioners contend that the industry’s

injured condition is evident in the

declining trends in production,

employment, sales, and income. The

allegations of injury and causation are

supported by relevant evidence

including U.S. Customs import data,

lost sales and revenues, and pricing

information. The petitioners also allege

the imminent threat of material injury,

based on the likely increases in

production volume of Canadian

softwood lumber and the inventory

levels of such merchandise, the

likelihood of substantially increased

imports, and the prices of these imports

having the likely effect of depressing or

suppressing domestic prices of softwood

lumber. We have assessed the

allegations and supporting evidence

regarding material injury, causation, and

the threat of material injury, and we

have determined that these allegations

are properly supported by accurate and

adequate evidence and meet the

statutory requirements for initiation. See

Attachment II of the Initiation Checklist.

Initiation of Antidumping Investigation

Based upon our examination of the

petition on certain softwood lumber

products from Canada, and the

petitioners’ response to our

supplemental questionnaire clarifying

the petition, we have found that the

petition meets the requirements of

section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are

initiating an antidumping duty

investigation to determine whether

21332 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2001 / Notices

1The Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports Executive

Committee is comprised of Hood Industries,

International Paper Company, Moose River Lumber

Company, New South Incorporated, Plum Creek

Timber Company, Polatch Corporation, Seneca

Sawmill Company, Shearer Lumber Products,

Shuqualak Lumber Company, Sierra Pacific

Industries, Swift Lumber Incorporated, TempleInland Forest Products, and Tolleson Lumber

Company, Incorporated.

imports of certain softwood lumber

products from Canada are being, or are

likely to be, sold in the United States at

less than fair value. Unless this deadline

is extended, we will make our

preliminary determination no later than

140 days after the date of this initiation.

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

In accordance with section

732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, a copy of the

public version of the petition has been

provided to the representatives of the

Government of Canada.

International Trade Commission

Notification

We have notified the ITC of our

initiation, as required by section 732(d)

of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

The ITC will determine, no later than

May 17, 2001, whether there is a

reasonable indication that imports of

certain softwood lumber products from

Canada are causing material injury, or

threatening to cause material injury, to

a U.S. industry. A negative ITC

determination will result in the

investigation being terminated;

otherwise, the investigation will

proceed according to statutory and

regulatory time limits.

This notice is published pursuant to

section 777(i) of the Act. Effective

January 20, 2001, Bernard T. Carreau is

fulfilling the duties of the Assistant

Secretary for Import Administration.

April 23, 2001.

Bernard T. Carreau,

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 01–10688 Filed 4–27–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C–122–839]

Notice of Initiation of Countervailing

Duty Investigation: Certain Softwood

Lumber Products from Canada

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 30, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric

B. Greynolds at (202) 482–6071 or James

Terpstra at (202) 482–3965, Office of

AD/CVD Enforcement VI, Group II,

Import Administration, International

Trade Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, Room 1870, 14th Street

and Constitution Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20230.

Initiation of Investigation

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 the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) regulations are references

to the provisions codified at 19 CFR part

351 (2001).

The Petition

On April 2, 2001, the Department

received a petition filed in proper form

by the Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports

Executive Committee,1 the United

Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners,

and the Paper, Allied-Industrial,

Chemical and Energy Workers

International Union (collectively, the

petitioners). On April 20, 2001, the

petition was amended to include the

following four companies individually

as petitioners: Moose River Lumber Co.,

Shearer Lumber Products, Shuqualak

Lumber Co. and Tolleson Lumber Co.,

Inc. The Department received

information supplementing the petition

during the twenty-day initiation period.

In accordance with section 702(b) of the

Act, petitioners allege that Canadian

producers of softwood lumber products

received countervailable subsidies

within the meaning of section 701 of the

Act, and that such imports are

materially injuring an industry in the

United States.

The Department finds that the

petitioners have standing to file this

petition on behalf of the domestic

industry because they are interested

parties as defined in sections 771(9)(C),

(D) and (E) of the Act and have

demonstrated sufficient industry

support with respect to the

countervailing duty investigation that

they are requesting the Department to

initiate. See Determination of Industry

Support for the Petition, below.

Scope of Investigation

The products covered by this

investigation are softwood lumber,

flooring and siding (softwood lumber

products). Softwood lumber products

include all products classified under

headings 4407.1000, 4409.1010,

4409.1090, and 4409.1020, respectively,

of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of

the United States (HTSUS), and any

softwood lumber, flooring and siding

described below. These softwood

lumber products include:

(1) Coniferous wood, sawn or chipped

lengthwise, sliced or peeled, whether or

not planed, sanded or finger-jointed, of

a thickness exceeding six millimeters;

(2) Coniferous wood siding (including

strips and friezes for parquet flooring,

not assembled) continuously shaped

(tongued, grooved, rabbeted, chamfered,

V-jointed, beaded, molded, rounded or

the like) along any of its edges or faces,

whether or not planed, sanded or fingerjointed;

(3) Other coniferous wood (including

strips and friezes for parquet flooring,

not assembled) continuously shaped

(tongued, grooved, rabbeted, chamfered,

V-jointed, beaded, molded, rounded or

the like) along any of its edges or faces

(other than wood mouldings and wood

dowel rods) whether or not planed,

sanded or finger-jointed; and

(4) Coniferous wood flooring

(including strips and friezes for parquet

flooring, not assembled) continuously

shaped (tongued, grooved, rabbeted,

chamfered, V-jointed, beaded, molded,

rounded or the like) along any of its

edges or faces, whether or not planed,

sanded or finger-jointed.

Although the HTSUS subheadings are

provided for convenience and U.S.

Customs purposes, the written

description of the merchandise under

investigation is dispositive.

During our review of the petition, we

discussed the scope with the petitioners

to ensure that it accurately reflects the

products for which the domestic

industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as

discussed in the preamble to the

Department’s regulations (62 FR 27323),

we are setting aside a period for parties

to raise issues regarding product

coverage. The Department encourages

all interested parties to submit such

comments within twenty days after the

date of publication of this notice in the

Federal Register. Comments should be

addressed to Import Administration’s

Central Records Unit at Room 1870, U.S.

Department of Commerce, 14th Street

and Constitution Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20230. The period for

scope comments is intended to provide

the Department with ample opportunity

to consider all comments and consult

with parties prior to the issuance of the

preliminary determination.