27938 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 98 / Monday, May 21, 2001 / Notices

all citations to the Department’s

regulations are to the provisions

codified at 19 CFR part 351 (2000).

Background

On March 8, 2001, the Department

published the preliminary results of

review for the period February 1, 1999

through January 31, 2000 (66 FR 13891).

We invited parties to comment on our

preliminary results of review. On April

9, 2001, Komatsu submitted a case brief

alleging that the Department had

erroneously omitted home market

indirect selling expenses from its

analysis, and that the preliminary

results as published in the Federal

Register contained an error. On April

12, 2001, Komatsu withdrew its

allegation regarding home market

indirect selling expenses, but

maintained its allegation of an error in

the Federal Register notice. The

Department has conducted this

administrative review in accordance

with section 751 of the Act.

Scope of Review

Imports covered by this review

include MTPs currently classifiable

under Harmonized Tariff Schedule

(HTS) item numbers 8462.99.0035 and

8466.94.5040. The HTS subheadings are

provided for convenience and Customs

purposes only. The written description

of the scope of this order is dispositive.

The term ‘‘mechanical transfer presses’’

refers to automatic metal-forming

machine tools with multiple die stations

in which the work piece is moved from

station to station by a transfer

mechanism designed as an integral part

of the press and synchronized with the

press action, whether imported as

machines or parts suitable for use solely

or principally with these machines.

These presses may be imported

assembled or unassembled. This review

does not cover certain parts and

accessories, which were determined to

be outside the scope of the order. (See

‘‘Final Scope Ruling on Spare and

Replacement Parts,’’ U.S. Department of

Commerce, March 20, 1992; and ‘‘Final

Scope Ruling on the Antidumping Duty

Order on Mechanical Transfer Presses

(MTPs) from Japan: Request by

Komatsu, Ltd.,’’ U.S. Department of

Commerce, October 3, 1996.) This

review covers one manufacturer of

MTPs, and the period February 1, 1999

through January 31, 2000.

Comments From Interested Parties and

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

Komatsu has alleged that the Federal

Register notice publishing the

Department’s preliminary results did

not accurately state Komatsu’s margin.

Komatsu alleged that, while the notice

stated that its margin was 0.99 percent,

the Department had calculated its

margin to be 0.00 percent. We agree

with Komatsu. The Department

calculated a preliminary margin of 0.00

percent for Komatsu, as can be seen in

the Memorandum to the File from Mark

Hoadley through Sally Gannon;

Analysis of Komatsu, Ltd. (Feb. 14,

2001), and as can also be inferred from

the surrounding context of the

preliminary notice. Therefore, as there

are no other allegations or comments

from interested parties regarding our

preliminary results of review, we find a

margin of 0.00 percent for Komatsu for

purposes of these final results.

Final Results of Review

We determine that the following

percentage weighted-average margin

exists for the period February 1, 1999

through January 31, 2000:

Manufacturer/

exporter Time period Marginpercent

Komatsu, Ltd. ... 02/01/99–

01/31/00

0.00

Because the weighted-average

dumping margin is zero, we will

instruct the U.S. Customs Service to

liquidate entries made during this

review period without regard to

antidumping duties for the subject

merchandise that Komatsu exported.

Cash Deposit Requirements

The following deposit requirements

will be effective upon publication of

this notice of final results of

administrative review for all shipments

of MTPs from Japan entered, or

withdrawn from warehouse, for

consumption on or after the date of

publication, as provided by section

751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit

rate for the reviewed company will be

the rate shown above; (2) for previously

reviewed or investigated companies not

listed above, the cash deposit rate will

continue to be the company-specific rate

published for the most recent period; (3)

if the exporter is not a firm covered in

this review, a prior review, or the

original less-than-fair-value (LTFV)

investigation, but the manufacturer is,

the cash deposit rate will be the rate

established for the most recent period

for the manufacturer of the

merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit

rate for all other manufacturers or

exporters will continue to be 14.51

percent. This rate is the ‘‘All Others’’

rate from the LTFV investigation. These

deposit requirements shall remain in

effect until publication of the final

results of the next administrative

review.

This notice serves as a final reminder

to importers of their responsibility

under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a

certificate regarding the reimbursement

of antidumping duties prior to

liquidation of the relevant entries

during this review period. Failure to

comply with this requirement could

result in the Secretary’s presumption

that reimbursement of antidumping

duties occurred and the subsequent

assessment of doubled antidumping

duties.

This notice also serves as a reminder

to parties subject to administrative

protective orders (APO) of their

responsibility concerning the return or

destruction of proprietary information

disclosed under APO in accordance

with 19 CFR 351.305. 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 violation

which is subject to sanction.

We are issuing and publishing this

determination and notice in accordance

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

Act.

Dated: May 14, 2001.

Faryar Shirzad,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 01–12751 Filed 5–18–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–580–825]

Oil Country Tubular Goods From the

Republic of Korea; Preliminary Results

of Changed Circumstances

Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of

changed circumstances antidumping

duty administrative review.

SUMMARY: On March 1, 2001, the

Department of Commerce published a

notice of initiation in the above-named

case. As a result of this review, the

Department of Commerce preliminarily

finds for the purposes of this proceeding

that Hyundai Steel Company (‘‘Hyundai

Hysco’’) is the successor-in-interest to

Hyundai Pipe Company, Ltd. (‘‘HDP’’).

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 21, 2001.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 98 / Monday, May 21, 2001 / Notices 27939

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mike Strollo or Scott Lindsay, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;

telephone (202) 482–5255 and (202)

482–3782, respectively.

Applicable Statute

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as

amended (the ‘‘Act’’), are references to

the provisions effective January 1, 1995,

the effective date of the amendments

made to the Act by the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act. In addition, unless

otherwise indicated, all citations to the

Department of Commerce’s

(‘‘Department’’) regulations are to 19

CFR part 351 (2000).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On March 1, 2001, the Department

published a notice of initiation in this

changed circumstances review (see

Notice of Initiation of Changed

Circumstances Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review, 66 FR 12925).

On March 20, 2001, the Department

conducted a verification of Hyundai

Hysco at its headquarters in Seoul. See

Memorandum to the File: Verification of

Hyundai Hysco in the Changed

Circumstance Review of Oil Country

Tubular Goods and Circular Welded

Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from South Korea,

dated April 13, 2001. Verification

results are outlined in the public

version of the verification report on file

in Room B–099 of the main Commerce

building.

Scope of the Review

The products covered by this order

are oil country tubular goods (‘‘OCTG’’),

hollow steel products of circular crosssection, including only oil well casing

and tubing, of iron (other than cast iron)

or steel (both carbon and alloy), whether

seamless or welded, whether or not

conforming to American Petroleum

Institute (‘‘API’’) or non-API

specifications, whether finished or

unfinished (including green tubes and

limited service OCTG products). This

scope does not cover casing or tubing

pipe containing 10.5 percent or more of

chromium, or drill pipe. The products

subject to this order are currently

classified in the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule of the United States

(‘‘HTSUS’’) under item numbers:

7304.29.10.10, 7304.29.10.20,

7304.29.10.30, 7304.29.10.40,

7304.29.10.50, 7304.29.10.60,

7304.29.10.80, 7304.29.20.10,

7304.29.20.20, 7304.29.20.30,

7304.29.20.40, 7304.29.20.50,

7304.29.20.60, 7304.29.20.80,

7304.29.30.10, 7304.29.30.20,

7304.29.30.30, 7304.29.30.40,

7304.29.30.50, 7304.29.30.60,

7304.29.30.80, 7304.29.40.10,

7304.29.40.20, 7304.29.40.30,

7304.29.40.40, 7304.29.40.50,

7304.29.40.60, 7304.29.40.80,

7304.29.50.15, 7304.29.50.30,

7304.29.50.45, 7304.29.50.60,

7304.29.50.75, 7304.29.60.15,

7304.29.60.30, 7304.29.60.45,

7304.29.60.60, 7304.29.60.75,

7305.20.20.00, 7305.20.40.00,

7305.20.60.00, 7305.20.80.00,

7306.20.10.30, 7306.20.10.90,

7306.20.20.00, 7306.20.30.00,

7306.20.40.00, 7306.20.60.10,

7306.20.60.50, 7306.20.80.10, and

7306.20.80.50. Although the HTSUS

item numbers are provided for

convenience and Customs purposes, the

written description remains dispositive

of the scope of this review.

Preliminary Results

In making successor-in-interest

determinations, the Department

examines several factors including, but

not limited to, changes in: (1)

Management; (2) production facilities;

(3) supplier relationships; and (4)

customer base. See e.g., Brass Sheet and

Strip from Canada; Final Results of

Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review, 57 FR 20460, 20461 (May 13,

1992). While no single factor, or

combination of factors, will necessarily

prove dispositive, the Department will

generally consider the new company to

be the successor to its predecessor

company if the resulting operations are

essentially the same as the predecessor

company. See e.g., Id. and Industrial

Phosphoric Acid from Israel; Final

Results of Changed Circumstances

Review, 59 FR 6944, 6945 (February 14,

1994). Thus, if the evidence

demonstrates that, with respect to the

production and sale of the subject

merchandise, the new company

operates as the same business entity as

its predecessor, the Department will

assign the new company the cashdeposit rate of its predecessor.

Based on the information submitted

by Hyundai Hysco during the initiation

stages of this changed circumstances

review and the information examined

during verification, we preliminarily

determine that Hyundai Hysco is the

successor-in-interest to HDP. We find

the company’s organizational structure,

senior management, production

facilities, supplier relationships, and

customers have remained essentially

unchanged. Furthermore, Hyundai

Hysco has provided sufficient internal

and public documentation of the name

change. Based on all the evidence

reviewed, we find that Hyundai Hysco

operates as the same business entity as

HDP. Thus, we preliminarily determine

that Hyundai Hysco should be excluded

from the antidumping duty order as was

it’s predecessor company, HDP.

Public Comment

Any interested party may request a

hearing within 10 days of publication of

this notice. Any hearing, if requested,

will be held no later than 28 days after

the date of publication of this notice, or

the first workday thereafter. Case briefs

and/or written comments from

interested parties may be submitted not

later than 14 days after the date of

publication of this notice. Rebuttal

briefs and rebuttals to written

comments, limited to the issues raised

in those comments, may be filed not

later than 21 days after the date of

publication of this notice. All written

comments shall be submitted in

accordance with 19 CFR 351.303.

Persons interested in attending the

hearing, if one is requested, should

contact the Department for the date and

time of the hearing. The Department

will publish the final results of this

changed-circumstances review,

including the results of its analysis of

issues raised in any written comments.

We are issuing and publishing this

determination and notice in accordance

with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of

the Act and §§ 351.216 and 351.222 of

the Department’s regulations.

Faryar Shirzad,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 01–12749 Filed 5–18–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and

Technology

Visiting Committee on Advanced

Technology

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards

and Technology, Department of

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of partially closed

meeting.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal

Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app.

2, notice is hereby given that the

Visiting Committee on Advanced

Technology, National Institute of

Standards and Technology (NIST), will

meet Tuesday, June 5, 2001 from 8:15

a.m. to 5:15 p.m. and Wednesday, June