Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 14, 1996 / Notices 24285

we use as BIA the higher of (a) the highest

rate (including the ‘‘all others’’ rate) ever

applicable to the firm for the same class or

kind of merchandise from either the LTFV

investigation or a prior administrative

review, or (b) the highest calculated rate in

this review for any firm for the class or kind

of merchandise from the same country of

origin.

See Antifriction Bearings (Other Than

Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts

Thereof From France, et al.; Final

Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Reviews, 57 FR 28360,

28379 (June 24, 1992); see also AlliedSignal Company v. United States, 996

F.2d 1185 (Fed. Cir. 1993). In this case,

we are using first-tier BIA because

CEMEX was uncooperative. The BIA

rate is the highest of the rates found for

any firm for the same class or kind of

merchandise in the same country of

origin in the LTFV investigation, as

amended, i.e., CEMEX’s rate of 61.85

percent. Thus, as a result of our review,

we preliminarily determine the

dumping margin for CEMEX for the

period August 1, 1993, through July 31,

1994, to be 61.85 percent.

Case briefs and/or written comments

from interested parties may be

submitted no later than 30 days after the

date of publication of this notice.

Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals to written

comments, limited to issues raised in

the case briefs and comments, may be

filed no later than 37 days after the date

of publication of this notice.

Within 10 days of the date of

publication of this notice, interested

parties to this proceeding may request a

disclosure and/or a hearing. The

hearing, if requested, will take place no

later than 44 days after publication of

this notice. Persons interested in

attending the hearing should ascertain

with the Department the date and time

of the hearing.

The Department will subsequently

publish the final results of this

administrative review, including the

results of its analysis of issues raised in

any such written comments or a

hearing.

The Department shall determine, and

the Customs Service shall assess,

antidumping duties on all appropriate

entries. The Department will issue

appropriate appraisement instructions

directly to the Customs Service upon

completion of this review.

Furthermore, the following deposit

requirements will be effective for all

shipments of the subject merchandise

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,

for consumption on or after the

publication date of the final results of

review, as provided by section 751(a)(1)

of the Tariff Act: (1) The cash deposit

rate for the reviewed company will be

the rate determined in the final results

of review; (2) for previously reviewed or

investigated companies not mentioned

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 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 be 59.91 percent, as

explained below.

On May 25, 1993, the CIT in Floral

Trade Council v. United States, 822 F.

Supp. 766 (CIT 1993), and FederalMogul v. United States, 839 F. Supp 864

(CIT 1993), determined that once an ‘‘all

others’’ rate is established for a

company, it can only be changed

through an administrative review. The

Department has determined that in

order to implement these decisions, it is

appropriate to reinstate the original ‘‘all

others’’ rate from the LTFV investigation

(or that rate as amended for correction

of clerical errors or as a result of

litigation) in proceedings governed by

antidumping duty orders for the

purposes of establishing cash deposits

in all current and future administrative

reviews.

Because this proceeding is governed

by an antidumping duty order, the ‘‘all

others’’ rate for this order will be 59.91

percent, which was the ‘‘all others’’ rate

established in the final notice of the

LTFV investigation by the Department

(55 FR 29244, July 18, 1990).

These deposit requirements, when

imposed, shall remain in effect until

publication of the final results of the

next administrative review.

This notice also serves as a

preliminary reminder to importers of

their responsibility under 19 CFR

353.26 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 double

antidumping duties.

This administrative review and notice

are in accordance with the Tariff Act (19

U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR 353.22.

Dated: April 26, 1996.

Paul L. Joffe,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 96–11939 Filed 5–13–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

[A–570–803]

Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or

Unfinished, With or Without Handles,

From the People’s Republic of China;

Amendment of Final Results of

Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of amendment of final

results of antidumping duty

administrative review.

SUMMARY: We are amending our final

results of administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on heavy forged

hand tools, finished or unfinished, with

or without handles (HFHTs), from the

People’s Republic of China published

on April 4, 1996, to reflect the

correction of a ministerial error made in

the margin calculation in those final

results. We are publishing this

amendment to the final results in

accordance with 19 CFR

353.28(c)(1995).

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 14, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom

Prosser or Maureen Flannery of the

Office of Antidumping Compliance,

Import Administration, International

Trade Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,

D.C. 20230; telephone (202) 482–4733.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The review covers two resellers of the

subject merchandise to the United

States, Fujian Machinery & Equipment

Import & Export Corporation (FMEC)

and Shandong Machinery Import &

Export Corporation (SMC), and the

period February 1, 1993 through January

31, 1994. The Department of Commerce

(the Department) published the

preliminary results on August 16, 1995

(60 FR 42516), and the final results on

April 4, 1996 (61 FR 15028).

Scope of Review

Imports covered by this review are

shipments of HFHTs from the PRC

comprising the following classes or

kinds of merchandise: (1) hammers and

sledges with heads over 1.5 kg (3.33

pounds) (hammers/sledges); (2) bars
24286 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 14, 1996 / Notices

over 18 inches in length, track tools and

wedges (bars and wedges); (3) picks/

mattocks; and (4) axes/adzes.

HFHTs include heads for drilling,

hammers, sledges, axes, mauls, picks,

and mattocks, which may or may not be

painted, which may or may not be

finished, or which may or may not be

imported with handles; assorted bar

products and track tools including

wrecking bars, digging bars and

tampers; and steel woodsplitting

wedges. HFHTs are manufactured

through a hot forge operation in which

steel is sheared to required length,

heated to forging temperature, and

formed to final shape on forging

equipment using dies specific to the

desired product shape and size.

Depending on the product, finishing

operations may include shot-blasting,

grinding, polishing and painting, and

the insertion of handles for handled

products. HFHTs are currently provided

for under the following Harmonized

Tariff System (HTS) subheadings:

8205.20.60, 8205.59.30, 8201.30.00, and

8201.40.60. Specifically excluded are

hammers and sledges with heads 1.5 kg

(3.33 pounds) in weight and under, hoes

and rakes, and bars 18 inches in length

and under. This review covers two

exporters of HFHTs from the PRC,

FMEC and SMC. The review period is

February 1, 1993 through January 31,

1994.

Amended Final Results

On April 4, 1996, the respondents

alleged that the Department had

committed a ministerial error in

calculating the final antidumping duty

margin. The respondents alleged that

the Department had miscalculated the

wholesale price index (WPI) for India

for the period April 1993 through

December 1993. We have reviewed this

allegation, and agree with the

respondents. We have therefore

amended our final results for this

ministerial error.

Final Results of Review

Upon review of the allegation

submitted, the Department has

determined that the following margins

exist for the period February 1, 1993

through January 31, 1994:

Manufacturer/exporter Time period Margin

(percent)

Fujian Machinery & Equipment Import & Export Corporation:

Axes/Adzes ......................................................................................................................................................... 2/1/93–1/31/94 12.90

Bars/Wedges ...................................................................................................................................................... 2/1/93–1/31/94 30.36

Hammers/Sledges .............................................................................................................................................. 2/1/93–1/31/94 18.61

Shandong Machinery Import & Export Corporation:

Bars/Wedges ...................................................................................................................................................... 2/1/93–1/31/94 45.19

Hammers/Sledges .............................................................................................................................................. 2/1/93–1/31/94 16.49

Picks/Mattocks .................................................................................................................................................... 2/1/93–1/31/94 68.43

The Department shall determine, and

the Customs Service shall assess,

antidumping duties on all appropriate

entries. Individual differences between

United States price and foreign market

value may vary from the percentages

stated above. The Department will issue

appraisement instructions directly to

the Customs Service.

Furthermore, the following deposit

requirements will be effective upon

publication of this notice of final results

of reviews for all shipments of HFHTs

from the PRC entered, or withdrawn

from warehouse, for consumption on or

after the publication date, as provided

for by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1)

The cash deposit rates for the reviewed

companies named above which have

separate rates will be the rates for those

firms as stated above for the classes or

kinds of merchandise listed above; (2)

for picks/mattocks from FMEC and

axes/adzes from SMC, which are not

covered by this review, the cash deposit

rates will be the rates established in the

most recent review of those classes or

kinds of merchandise in which those

companies received separate rates—that

is, the February 1, 1992 through January

31, 1993 review; (3) for all other PRC

exporters, the cash deposit rates will be

the PRC rates established in the LTFV

investigation; and (4) the cash deposit

rates for non-PRC exporters of the

subject merchandise from the PRC will

be the rate applicable to the PRC

supplier of that exporter. The PRC rates

established in the LTFV investigations

are 45.42 percent for hammers/sledges,

31.76 percent for bars/wedges, 50.81

percent for picks/mattocks, and 15.02

percent for axes/adzes. 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 section 353.26 of the

Department’s regulations 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 double antidumping

duties.

This notice also serves as a reminder

to parties subject to administrative

protective order (APO) of their

responsibility concerning the

disposition of proprietary information

disclosed under APO in accordance

with section 353.34(d) of the

Department’s regulations. Timely

notification of return/destruction of

APO materials or conversion to judicial

protective order is hereby requested.

Failure to comply with the regulations

and the terms of an APO is a

sanctionable violation.

This administrative review and notice

is in accordance with section 751(a)(1)

of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and

section 353.22 of the Department’s

regulations.

Dated: May 6, 1996.

Paul L. Joffe,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 96–11942 Filed 5–13–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

[A–588–836, A–570–842, A–583–824]

Notice of Antidumping Orders:

Polyvinyl Alcohol From Japan, the

People’s Republic of China, and

Taiwan

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 14, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David J. Goldberger or Erik Warga,

Import Administration, International

Trade Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4136 or

(202) 482–0922, respectively.