22214 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2001 / Notices

conduct a changed circumstances

review and revoke the antidumping

duty order on vector supercomputers

from Japan, retroactive to October 1,

2000. In its February 27, 2001 request,

Cray claims that it is the only U.S.

producer of vector supercomputers and

was the sole petitioner in the

antidumping investigation that led to

the antidumping order. Further, Cray

states that it no longer has an interest in

maintaining this order. As noted above,

we gave interested parties an

opportunity to comment on the

Initiation and Preliminary Results. We

received no comments from interested

parties. On March 26, 2001 we received

a submission from Skymoon Ventures

(‘‘Skymoon’’) in support of revocation of

the order. Skymoon identified itself as

being part of the ‘‘high technology

industry.’’ However, Skymoon produced

no evidence that it was an interested

party within the meaning of section

771(9)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR

351.102(b). Therefore, we have not

considered its comments in these final

results.

Scope of Review

The scope of this order consists of all

vector supercomputers, whether new or

used, and whether in assembled or

unassembled form, as well as vector

supercomputer spare parts, repair parts,

upgrades, and system software, shipped

to fulfill the requirements of a contract

entered into on or after October 16,

1997, for the sale and, if included,

maintenance of a vector supercomputer.

A vector supercomputer is any

computer with a vector hardware unit as

an integral part of its central processing

unit boards.

In general, the vector supercomputers

imported from Japan, whether

assembled or unassembled, covered by

this order are classifiable under heading

8471 of the Harmonized Tariff

Schedules of the United States (‘‘HTS’’).

Merchandise properly classified under

HTS numbers 8471.10 and 8471.30,

however, is excluded from the scope of

this order. Although, these references to

the HTS are provided for convenience

and customs purposes, our written

description of the scope of this order is

dispositive.

Final Results of Review; Revocation of

Antidumping Duty Order

The affirmative statement of no

interest by petitioners concerning vector

supercomputers, as described herein,

constitutes changed circumstances

sufficient to warrant revocation of this

order. Furthermore, no interested party

commented on the Initiation and

Preliminary Results. Therefore, the

Department is revoking the order on

certain vector supercomputers from

Japan, in accordance with sections

751(b) and (d) and 782(h) of the Act and

19 CFR 351.216(d) and 351.222(g),

effective October 1, 2000.

We will instruct the U.S. Customs

Service (‘‘Customs’’) to end the

suspension of liquidation effective

October 1, 2000, and to liquidate

without regard to antidumping duties,

as applicable, and to refund any

estimated antidumping duties collected

for all unliquidated entries of certain

vector supercomputers meeting the

specifications indicated above entered

or withdrawn from warehouse for

consumption on or after October 1,

2000. We will also instruct Customs to

pay interest on such refunds in

accordance with section 778 of the Act.

This notice also serves as a reminder

to parties subject to administrative

protective orders (‘‘APOs’’) of their

responsibility concerning the

disposition of proprietary information

disclosed under APO in accordance

with 19 CFR 351.306. Timely written

notification of the return/destruction of

APO materials or conversion to judicial

protective order is hereby requested.

Failure to comply with the regulations

and terms of an APO is a sanctionable

violation.

This changed circumstances

administrative review, revocation of the

antidumping duty order and notice are

in accordance with sections 751(b) and

(d) and 782(h) of the Act and sections

351.216 and 351.222(g) of the

Department’s regulations.

Dated: April 27, 2001.

Timothy J. Hauser,

Acting Under Secretary for International

Trade.

[FR Doc. 01–11272 Filed 5–1–01; 2:32 pm]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

North American Free-Trade

Agreement, Article 1904 NAFTA Panel

Reviews; Request for Panel Review

AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United

States Section, International Trade

Administration, Department of

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of first request for panel

review.

SUMMARY: On April 6, 2001, CEMEX,

S.A. de C.V. (‘‘CEMEX’’) filed a First

Request for Panel Review with the

United States Section of the NAFTA

Secretariat pursuant to Article 1904 of

the North American Free Trade

Agreement. Panel review was requested

of the 9th Administrative review of the

antidumping duty order made by the

International Trade Administration,

respecting Gray Portland Cement and

Clinker from Mexico. This

determination was published in the

Federal Register (66 Fed. Reg. 14889) on

March 14, 2001. The NAFTA Secretariat

has assigned Case Number USA–MEX–

2001–1904–04 to this request.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Caratina L. Alston, United States

Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite

2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue,

Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter

19 of the North American Free-Trade

Agreement (‘‘Agreement’’) establishes a

mechanism to replace domestic judicial

review of final determinations in

antidumping and countervailing duty

cases involving imports from a NAFTA

country with review by independent

binational panels. When a Request for

Panel Review is filed, a panel is

established to act in place of national

courts to review expeditiously the final

determination to determine whether it

conforms with the antidumping or

countervailing duty law of the country

that made the determination.

Under Article 1904 of the Agreement,

which came into force on January 1,

1994, the Government of the United

States, the Government of Canada and

the Government of Mexico established

Rules of Procedure for Article 1904

Binational Panel Reviews (‘‘Rules’’).

These Rules were published in the

Federal Register on February 23, 1994

(59 FR 8686).

A first Request for Panel Review was

filed with the United States Section of

the NAFTA Secretariat, pursuant to

Article 1904 of the Agreement, on April

6, 2001, requesting panel review of the

9th administrative review of the

antidumping duty order described

above.

The Rules provide that:

(a) A Party or interested person may

challenge the final determination in

whole or in part by filing a Complaint

in accordance with Rule 39 within 30

days after the filing of the first Request

for Panel Review (the deadline for filing

a Complaint is May 7, 2001);

(b) a Party, investigating authority or

interested person that does not file a

Complaint but that intends to appear in

support of any reviewable portion of the

final determination may participate in

the panel review by filing a Notice of

Appearance in accordance with Rule 40

within 45 days after the filing of the first

Request for Panel Review (the deadline

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2001 / Notices 22215

for filing a Notice of Appearance is May

21, 2001); and

(c) the panel review shall be limited

to the allegations of error of fact or law,

including the jurisdiction of the

investigating authority, that are set out

in the Complaints filed in the panel

review and the procedural and

substantive defenses raised in the panel

review.

Dated: April 10, 2001.

Caratina L. Alston,

United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat.

[FR Doc. 01–11042 Filed 5–2–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

North American Free-Trade

Agreement, Article 1904 NAFTA Panel

Reviews; Request for Panel Review

AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United

States Section, International Trade

Administration, Department of

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of first request for panel

review.

SUMMARY: On April 6, 2001, Tubos de

Acero de Mexico, S.A. (‘‘TAMSA’’) filed

a First Request for Panel Review with

the United States Section of the NAFTA

Secretariat pursuant to Article 1904 of

the North American Free Trade

Agreement. Panel review was requested

of the five-year sunset review of the

antidumping duty order made by the

International Trade Administration,

respecting Oil Country Tubular Goods

from Mexico. This determination was

published in the Federal Register (66

FR 14131) on March 9, 2001. The

NAFTA Secretariat has assigned Case

Number USA–MEX–2001–1904–03 to

this request.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Caratina L. Alston, United States

Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite

2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue,

Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter

19 of the North American Free-Trade

Agreement (‘‘Agreement’’) establishes a

mechanism to replace domestic judicial

review of final determinations in

antidumping and countervailing duty

cases involving imports from a NAFTA

country with review by independent

binational panels. When a Request for

Panel Review is filed, a panel is

established to act in place of national

courts to review expeditiously the final

determination to determine whether it

conforms with the antidumping or

countervailing duty law of the country

that made the determination.

Under Article 1904 of the Agreement,

which came into force on January 1,

1994, the Government of the United

States, the Government of Canada and

the Government of Mexico established

Rules of Procedure for Article 1904

Binational Panel Reviews (‘‘Rules’’).

These Rules were published in the

Federal Register on February 23, 1994

(59 FR 8686).

A first Request for Panel Review was

filed with the United States Section of

the NAFTA Secretariat, pursuant to

Article 1904 of the Agreement, on April

6, 2001, requesting panel review of the

five-year sunset review of the

antidumping duty order described

above.

The Rules provide that:

(a) A Party or interested person may

challenge the final determination in

whole or in part by filing a Complaint

in accordance with Rule 39 within 30

days after the filing of the first Request

for Panel Review (the deadline for filing

a Complaint is May 7, 2001);

(b) A Party, investigating authority or

interested person that does not file a

Complaint but that intends to appear in

support of any reviewable portion of the

final determination may participate in

the panel review by filing a Notice of

Appearance in accordance with Rule 40

within 45 days after the filing of the first

Request for Panel Review (the deadline

for filing a Notice of Appearance is May

21, 2001); and

(c) The panel review shall be limited

to the allegations of error of fact or law,

including the jurisdiction of the

investigating authority, that are set out

in the Complaints filed in the panel

review and the procedural and

substantive defenses raised in the panel

review.

Dated: April 10, 2001.

Caratina L. Alston,

United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat.

[FR Doc. 01–11043 Filed 5–2–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

North American Free-Trade

Agreement, Article 1904; NAFTA Panel

Reviews; Request for Panel Review

AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United

States Section, International Trade

Administration, Department of

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of first request for panel

review.

SUMMARY: On April 20, 2001, Tubos de

Acero de Mexico, S.A. (‘‘TAMSA’’) filed

a First Request for Panel Review with

the United States Section of the NAFTA

Secretariat pursuant to Article 1904 of

the North American Free Trade

Agreement. Panel review was requested

of the fourth administrative review of

the antidumping duty order and

determination not to revoke made by the

International Trade Administration,

respecting Oil Country Tubular Goods

from Mexico. This determination was

published in the Federal Register (66

FR 15832) on March 21, 2001. The

NAFTA Secretariat has assigned Case

Number USA–MEX–2001–1904–05 to

this request.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Caratina L. Alston, United States

Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite

2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue,

Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter

19 of the North American Free-Trade

Agreement (‘‘Agreement’’) establishes a

mechanism to replace domestic judicial

review of final determinations in

antidumping and countervailing duty

cases involving imports from a NAFTA

country with review by independent

binational panels. When a Request for

Panel Review is filed, a panel is

established to act in place of national

courts to review expeditiously the final

determination to determine whether it

conforms with the antidumping or

countervailing duty law of the country

that made the determination.

Under Article 1904 of the Agreement,

which came into force on January 1,

1994, the Government of the United

States, the Government of Canada and

the Government of Mexico established

Rules of Procedure for Article 1904

Binational Panel Reviews (‘‘Rules’’).

These Rules were published in the

Federal Register on February 23, 1994

(59 FR 8686).

A first Request for Panel Review was

filed with the United States Section of

the NAFTA Secretariat, pursuant to

Article 1904 of the Agreement, on April

6, 2001, requesting panel review of the

five-year sunset review of the

antidumping duty order described

above.

The Rules provide that:

(a) A Party or interested person may

challenge the final determination in

whole or in part by filing a Complaint

in accordance with Rule 39 within 30

days after the filing of the first Request

for Panel Review (the deadline for filing

a Complaint is May 21, 2001);

(b) A Party, investigating authority or

interested person that does not file a

Complaint but that intends to appear in