54710 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Notices 

1Sunford Trading Limited, Room 2208, 22/F, 118 

Connaught Road West, Hong Kong, was included as 

a Respondent in the initial Order, but was not 

included in the request for renewal of the Order 

because of an unrelated three year denial order on 

the company that became effective on August 25, 

2005 (70 FR 49910 Aug. 25, 2005). 

of this addition or options that may be 

exercised under those contracts. 

Sheryl D. Kennerly, 

Director, Information Management. 

[FR Doc. E5–5088 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6353–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

Action Affecting Export Privileges; 

Gold Technology Ltd., Hero Peak Ltd., 

Joanna Liu. Oriental Trading Corp., 

Portson Trading Ltd., Zhenke 

International Trading 

In the Matters of: Gold Technology 

Limited, Flat 23C, 97 High Street, Hong 

Kong; Hero Peak Limited, Flat C, Block 

4, 11/F Golden Bldg, 145 Fuk Wa Street, 

Sham Shui, Po, Kowloon, Hong Kong, 

and, Room D, 11/F, Fui Nam Building, 

48–51 Connaught Road West, Hong 

Kong; Joanna Liu, Flat 23C, 97 High 

Street, Hong Kong; Oriental Trading 

Corporation, 1st Floor, Masco Plaza, 

Blue Area, P.O. Box 2879, Islamabad, 

Pakistan; Portson Trading Limited, 

Room D, 8/F, 217–223 Tung Choi Street, 

Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong Kong, and, 

Room 709 Wing Shan Tower, 173 Des 

Voeux Road Central, Hong Kong, and, 

Room 2208, 22/F, 118 Connaught Road 

West, Hong Kong, and, Zhenke 

International Trading Co. Ltd., Tianjin 

Port Free Trade Zone, Room 801, Gold 

Beauty Building No. 99, Haibain 9 Road, 

TPFTZ, Tianjin, Peoples Republic of 

China, Respondents; Order Renewing 

Temporary Denial Order As To 

Goldtechnology Limited, Hero Peak 

Limited, Joanna Liu, Oriental Trading 

Corporation, Portson Trading Limited, 

and Zhenke International Trading Co. 

Ltd. 

Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the 

Export Administration Regulations 

(‘‘EAR’’), the Bureau of Industry and 

Security (‘‘BIS’’), U.S. Department of 

Commerce, through its Office of Export 

Enforcement (‘‘OEE’’), has requested 

that I renew for 180 days an Order 

temporarily denying export privileges of 

the following: 

(1) GOLD TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, 

Flat 23C, 97 High Street, Hong Kong; 

(2) HERO PEAK LIMITED, Flat C, 

Block 4, 11/F Golden Bldg, 145 Fuk Wa 

Street, Sham Shui, Po, Kowloon, Hong 

Kong and Room D, 11/F, Fui Nam 

Building, 48–51 Connaught Road West, 

Hong Kong; 

(3) JOANNA LIU, Flat 23C, 97 High 

Street, Hong Kong; 

(4) ORIENTAL TRADING 

CORPORATION, 1st Floor, Masco Plaza, 

Blue Area, P.O. Box 2879, Islamabad, 

Pakistan; 

(5) PORTSON TRADING LIMITED, 

Room D, 8/F, 217–223 Tung Choi Street, 

Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong Kong and 

Room 709 Wing Shan Tower, 173 Des 

Voeux Road Central, Hong Kong, and 

Room 2208, 22/F, 118 Connaught Road 

West, Hong Kong; and 

(6) ZHENKE INTERNATIONAL 

TRADING CO. LTD. Tianjin Port Free 

Trade Zone, Room 801, Gold Beauty 

Building No. 99, Haibain 9 Road, 

TPFTZ, Tianjin, Peoples Republic of 

China (hereinafter collectively referred 

to as the ‘‘Respondents’’). 

On March 8, 2005, I found that the 

Respondents 1 had conspired to 

undertake acts that violated the EAR, 

that such violations had been deliberate 

and covert, and that there was a strong 

likelihood of future violations, 

particularly given the nature of the 

transactions and the elaborate steps that 

had been taken by the Respondents to 

avoid detection by the U.S. Government 

while knowing that their actions were in 

violation of the EAR. 70 FR 12442 (Mar. 

14, 2005). This finding was based on 

evidence presented by BIS that 

indicated that Respondents had 

conspired with others, known and 

unknown, to cause items subject to the 

EAR to be illegally exported to Pakistan, 

that they caused exports of items 

controlled for nuclear non-proliferation 

reasons to Pakistan with knowledge that 

violations of the EAR would occur, and 

they took actions intending to violate 

the EAR. 

BIS continues to investigate this 

matter and believes that all of the facts 

found in the original Order continue to 

justify the renewal of the Order, 

especially given the nature of the 

transactions and the steps that have 

been taken by Respondents to avoid 

detection by the U.S. Government while 

knowing their actions were in violation 

of the EAR. BIS believes evidence 

described in the initial request for the 

Order, including evidence that indicates 

the Respondents intend to continue 

acquiring or purchasing significant 

amounts of U.S. origin items, supports 

this Order. 

Based on the evidence submitted by 

BIS, I find that renewal of the Order 

naming Respondents is necessary, in the 

public interest, to prevent an imminent 

violation of the EAR. A copy of the 

request for renewal of this Order was 

served upon Respondents in accordance 

with the requirements of 15 CFR 

§ 766.24 of the EAR, and no responses 

were received in opposition to this 

request within the applicable time 

period described in that section. 

It Is Therefore Ordered: 

First, that the Respondents, at the 

address listed above, and their 

successors and assigns and when acting 

on behalf of any of the Respondents, 

their officers, employees, agents or 

representatives, (collectively, the 

‘‘Denied Persons’’) may not, directly or 

indirectly, participate in any way in any 

transaction involving any commodity, 

software or technology (hereinafter 

collectively referred to as ‘‘item’’) 

exported or to be exported from the 

United States that is subject to the 

Export Administration Regulations 

(‘‘EAR’’), or in any other activity subject 

to the EAR including, but limited to: 

A. Applying for, obtaining, or using 

any license, License Exception, or 

export control document; 

B. Carrying on negotiations 

concerning, or order, buying, receiving, 

using, selling, delivering, storing, 

disposing of, forwarding, transporting, 

financing, or otherwise servicing in any 

way, any transaction involving any item 

exported or to be exported from the 

United States that is subject to the EAR, 

or in any other activity subject to the 

EAR; or 

C. Benefitting in any way from any 

transaction involving any item exported 

or to be exported from the United States 

that is subject to the EAR, or in any 

other activity subject to the EAR. 

Second, that no person may, directly 

or indirectly, do any of the following: 

A. Export or reexport to or on behalf 

of the Denied Persons any item subject 

to the EAR; 

B. Take any action that facilitates the 

acquisition or attempted acquisition by 

the Denied Person of the ownership, 

possession, or control of any item 

subject to the EAR that has been or will 

be exported from the United States, 

including financing or other support 

activities related to a transaction 

whereby the Denied Persons acquires or 

attempts to acquire such ownership, 

possession or control; 

C. Take any action to acquire from or 

to facilitate the acquisition or attempted 

acquisition from the Denied Persons of 

any item subject to the EAR that has 

been exported from the United States; 

D. Obtain from the Denied Persons in 

the United States any item subject to the 

EAR with knowledge or reason to know 

that the item will be, or is intended to 

be, exported from the United States; or 

E. Engage in any transaction to service 

any item subject to the EAR that has 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Notices 54711 

been or will be exported from the 

United States and which is owned, 

possessed or controlled by the Denied 

Persons, or service any item, of 

whatever origin, that is owned, 

possessed or controlled by the Denied 

Persons if such service involves the use 

of any item subject to the EAR that has 

been or will be exported from the 

United States. For purposes of this 

paragraph, servicing means installation, 

maintenance, repair, modification or 

testing. 

Third, that after notice and 

opportunity for comment as provided in 

section 766.23 of the EAR, any other 

person, firm, corporation, or business 

organization related to any of the 

Respondents by affiliation, ownership, 

control, or position of responsibility in 

the conduct of trade or related services 

may also be made subject to the 

provisions of this Order. 

Fourth, that this Order does not 

prohibit any export, reexport, or other 

transaction subject to the EAR where the 

only items involved that are subject to 

the EAR are the foreign-produced direct 

product of U.S.-origin technology. 

In accordance with the provisions of 

Section 766.24(e) of the EAR, the 

Respondents may, at any time, appeal 

this Order by filing a full written 

statement in support of the appeal with 

the Office of the Administrative Law 

Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing 

Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21202–4022. 

In accordance with the provisions of 

Section 766.24(d) of the EAR, BIS may 

seek renewal of this Order by filing a 

written request not later than 20 days 

before the expiration date. The 

Respondents may oppose a request to 

renew this Order by filing a written 

submission with the Assistant Secretary 

for Export Enforcement, which must be 

received not later than seven days 

before the expiration date of the Order. 

A copy of this Order shall be served 

on the Respondents, and shall be 

published in the Federal Register. 

This Order is effective on September 

11, 2005 and shall remain in effect for 

180 days. 

Entered this 9th day of September, 2005. 

Wendy Wysong, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 

Export Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 05–18375 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DT–M 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–427–801, A–428–801, A–475–801, A–588–

804, A–559–801, A 412–801] 

Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from 

France, Germany, Italy, Japan, 

Singapore, and the United Kingdom: 

Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Reviews 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On May 13, 2005, the 

Department of Commerce published the 

preliminary results of the administrative 

reviews of the antidumping duty orders 

on ball bearings and parts thereof from 

France, Germany, Italy, Japan, 

Singapore and the United Kingdom. The 

reviews cover 19 manufacturers/ 

exporters. The period of review is May 

1, 2003, through April 30, 2004. 

Based on our analysis of the 

comments received, we have made 

changes, including corrections of certain 

programming and other clerical errors, 

in the margin calculations. Therefore, 

the final results differ from the 

preliminary results. The final weighted–

average dumping margins for the 

reviewed firms are listed below in the 

section entitled ‘‘Final Results of the 

Reviews.’’

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 16, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas Schauer or Kristin Case, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 5, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–4733. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 30, 2004, in accordance with 

19 CFR 351.213(b), we published a 

notice of initiation of administrative 

reviews of these orders (68 FR 39055). 

The companies for which we are 

conducting administrative reviews are 

as follows: 

France: 

❉ SKF France S.A. or Sarma (SKF 

France) 

❉ SNR Roulements or SNR Europe 

(SNR) 

Germany: 

❉ Gebru ̈der Reinfurt GmbH & Co., KG, 

Wurzberg, Germany (GRW) 

❉ INA–Schaeffler KG; INA 

Vermogensverwaltungsgesellschaft 

GmbH; INA Holding Schaeffler KG; 

FAG Kugelfischer Georg–Schaefer 

AG; FAG Automobiltechnik AG; 

FAG OEM und Handel AG; FAG 

Komponenten AG; FAG Aircraft/ 

Super Precision Bearings GmbH; 

FAG Industrial Bearings AG; FAG 

Sales Europe GmbH; FAG 

International Sales and Service 

GmbH (collectively FAG/INA) 

❉ SKF GmbH (SKF Germany) 

Italy: 

❉ FAG Italia S.p.A.; FAG 

Automobiltechnik AG; FAG OEM 

und Handel AG (collectively FAG 

Italy) 

❉ SKF Industrie S.p.A.; SKF RIV–SKF 

Officine di Villas Perosa S.p.A.; 

RFT S.p.A.; OMVP S.p.A. 

(collectively SKF Italy) 

Japan: 

❉ Asahi Seiko Co., Ltd. (Asahi) 

❉ Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. (Koyo) 

❉ NSK Ltd. (NSK) 

❉ NTN Corporation (NTN) 

❉ Nankai Seiko Co., Ltd. (SMT) 

❉ Nippon Pillow Block Company, 

Ltd. (NPB) 

❉ Osaka Pump Co., Ltd. (Osaka Pump) 

❉ Sapporo Precision Inc., Kitanihon 

Seiko Co., Ltd., and Sanbi Co., Ltd. 

(collectively Sapporo) 

❉ Takeshita Seiko Co., Ltd. 

(Takeshita) 

Singapore: 

❉ NMB Singapore Ltd.; Pelmec 

Industries (Pte.) Ltd.; NMB 

Technologies Corporation 

(collectively NMB/Pelmec) 

United Kingdom: 

❉ The Barden Corporation (UK) 

Limited; FAG (U.K.) Limited 

(collectively Barden/FAG) 

❉ SKF Aeroengine Bearings UK 

(formerly known as Aeroengine 

Bearings UK or NSK Aerospace) 

(SKF UK) 

On May 13, 2005, the Department 

published the preliminary results of the 

administrative reviews of the 

antidumping duty orders on ball 

bearings and parts thereof from France, 

Germany, Italy, Japan, Singapore, and 

the United Kingdom (70 FR 25538). The 

period of review is May 1, 2003, through 

April 30, 2004. We invited interested 

parties to comment on the preliminary 

results. At the request of certain parties, 

we held hearings for general issues on 

June 28, 2005, and for Japan–specific 

issues on July 1, 2005. The Department 

has conducted these administrative 

reviews in accordance with section 751 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(the Act). 

Scope of Orders 

The products covered by these orders 

are ball bearings (other than tapered 

roller bearings) and parts thereof. These