Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 246 / Friday, December 21, 2001 / Notices 65903

1The petitioners in these investigations are

USEC, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiary,

United States Enrichment Corporation (collectively

USEC), and the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical

and Energy Workers International Union, AFL–CIO,

CLC, Local 5–550 and Local 5–689 (collectively

PACE).

2 In accordance with section 777(h) of the Act of

the Ad Hoc Utilities Group, whose members

include: Arizona Public Service Co., Carolina Power

& Light Co., Dominion Generation, Duke Energy

Corp., DTE Energy, Entergy Services, Inc., Exelon

Corporation, First Energy Nuclear Orperting Co.,

Florida Power Corp., Florida Power and Light Co.,

Nebraska Public Power District, Nuclear

Management Co. LLC (on behalf of certain member

companies), PPL Susquehanna LLC, PSEG Nuclear

LLC, South Texas Project, Southern California

Edison, Southern Nuclear Operating Co., Union

Electric Company, and Wolf Creek Nuclear

Operating Corp., submitted comments as industrial

users of subject merchandise.

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[(C–428–829); (C–421–809); (C–412–821)]

Notice of Final Affirmative

Countervailing Duty Determinations:

Low Enriched Uranium From Germany,

the Netherlands, and the United

Kingdom

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Final Affirmative

Countervailing Duty Determinations.

SUMMARY: On May 14, 2001, the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) published in the Federal

Register its preliminary affirmative

determinations in the countervailing

duty investigations of low enriched

uranium (subject merchandise) from

Germany, the Netherlands, and the

United Kingdom for the period January

1, 1999 through December 31, 1999 (66

FR 24329).

The net subsidy rate in the Final

Determination differs from that of the

Preliminary Determination. The revised

final net subsidy rate for the

investigated company is listed below in

the ‘‘Suspension of Liquidation’’ section

of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 21, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Copyak (Germany) at 202–482–

2209, Stephanie Moore (the

Netherlands) at 202–482–3692, and Eric

B. Greynolds (United Kingdom) at 202–

482–6071, Office of AD/CVD

Enforcement VI, Group II, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, Room 4012, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,

DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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’s regulations are to the

regulations codified at 19 CFR Part 351

(2000).

Background

On May 14, 2001, the Department

published the preliminary

determinations of its investigations of

low enriched uranium from Germany,

the Netherlands, and the United

Kingdom. See Notice of Preliminary

Affirmative Countervailing Duty

Determinations and Alignment with

Final Antidumping Duty

Determinations: Low Enriched Uranium

from Germany, the Netherlands, and the

United Kingdom, 66 FR 24329 (May 14,

2001) (Preliminary Determinations).

These investigations cover low enriched

uranium (subject merchandise) from

Germany, the Netherlands, and the

United Kingdom for the period January

1, 1999, through December 31, 1999.

We invited interested parties to

comment on the Preliminary

Determinations. On October 22 and 23,

2001, the petitioners 1, the Ad Hoc

Utilities Group,2 and Urenco Ltd.,

Urenco (Capenhurst) Ltd., Urenco

Nederland BV, and Urenco Deutschland

GmbH (collectively, Urenco or the

respondents) filed briefs on common

scope issues in the antidumping and

countervailing duty investigations of

LEU from France, Germany, the

Netherlands and the United Kingdom.

Rebuttal briefs on these common scope

issues were filed on October 29, 2001,

and a public hearing on the common

scope issues was held on October 31,

2001. On October 26, 2001, we received

comments from the petitioners and the

respondents. On November 5, 2001, we

received rebuttal comments from

petitioners and respondents. A public

hearing was held at the Department of

Commerce on November 7, 2001. On or

about September 28, 2001, and on

November 22, 2001, we received letters

from the EC regarding certain issues in

these investigations. On November 7,

2001, Mr. Grant Aldonas, UnderSecretary for International Trade,

replied to the first letter. We invited

comments on these letters, which we

received from petitioners, respondents,

and the Ad Hoc Utilities Group, on

November 15, 2001, and November 29,

2001.

These final determinations were

originally due on November 26, 2001.

We subsequently tolled the final

determination deadline in these

investigations until December 13, 2001,

to accommodate certain verifications

and a delayed briefing and hearing

schedule that were delayed because of

the events of September 11, 2001.

Amended Scope of Investigation

For purposes of these investigations,

the product covered is all low enriched

uranium (LEU). LEU is enriched

uranium hexafluoride (UF6) with a U235

product assay of less than 20 percent

that has not been converted into another

chemical form, such as UO2, or

fabricated into nuclear fuel assemblies,

regardless of the means by which the

LEU is produced (including LEU

produced through the down-blending of

highly enriched uranium).

Certain merchandise is outside the

scope of these investigations.

Specifically, these investigations do not

cover enriched uranium hexafluoride

with a U235 assay of 20 percent or

greater, also known as highly enriched

uranium. In addition, fabricated LEU is

not covered by the scope of these

investigations. For purposes of these

investigations, fabricated uranium is

defined as enriched uranium dioxide

(UO2), whether or not contained in

nuclear fuel rods or assemblies. Natural

uranium concentrates (U3O8) with a U235

concentration of no greater than 0.711

percent and natural uranium

concentrates converted into uranium

hexafluoride with a U235 concentration

of no greater than 0.711 percent are not

covered by the scope of these

investigations.

Also excluded from these

investigations is LEU owned by a

foreign utility end-user and imported

into the United States by or for such

end-user solely for purposes of

conversion by a U.S. fabricator into

uranium dioxide (UO2) and/or

fabrication into fuel assemblies so long

as the uranium dioxide and/or fuel

assemblies deemed to incorporate such

imported LEU (i) remain in the

possession and control of the U.S.

fabricator, the foreign end-user, or their

designed transporter(s) while in U.S.

customs territory, and (ii) are reexported within eighteen (18) months of

entry of the LEU for consumption by the

end-user in a nuclear reactor outside the

United States. Such entries must be

accompanied by the certifications of the

importer and end user.

The merchandise subject to these

investigations is classified in the

65904 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 246 / Friday, December 21, 2001 / Notices

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (HTSUS) at subheading

2844.20.0020. Subject merchandise may

also enter under 2844.20.0030,

2844.20.0050, and 2844.40.00. Although

the HTSUS subheadings are provided

for convenience and customs purposes,

the written description of the

merchandise is dispositive.

Scope Clarification

For further details, see Comment 1 of

the ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum

for the Antidumping Duty Investigation

of Low Enriched Uranium from

Germany, Netherlands and the United

Kingdom’’ (Decision Memorandum)

from Bernard T. Carreau, Deputy

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration, to Faryar Shirzad,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration, dated concurrently

with this notice.

Goods Versus Services

Parties in all eight concurrent

investigations of this product have

submitted comments on this issue. For

a full discussion see Notice of Final

Determination of Sales at Less Than

Fair Value: Low Enriched Uranium from

France which is published concurrently

with this notice.

Period of Investigation

The period of investigation (POI) for

which we are measuring subsidies is

January 1, 1999 through December 31,

1999.

Verification

As provided in section 782(i) of the

Act, we conducted verification of the

information submitted by Urenco from

June 11 through June 15, 2001, in the

Netherlands; June 18 through June 22,

2001, in Germany; and September 25

through October 2, 2001, in the United

Kingdom. We used standard verification

procedures, including meeting with

government and company officials and

examining relevant accounting records

and original source documents provided

by the respondents. Our verification

results are outlined in detail in the

public versions of the verification

reports, which are on file in the Central

Records Unit of the Department of

Commerce (Room B–099).

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the case and

rebuttal briefs by parties to these

investigations are addressed in the

‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’

(Decision Memorandum) dated

December 13, 2001, which is hereby

adopted by this notice. A list of issues

which parties have raised and to which

we have responded, all of which are in

the Decision Memorandum, is attached

to this notice as Appendix I. Parties can

find a complete discussion of all issues

raised in these investigations and the

corresponding recommendations in this

public memorandum which is on file in

room B–099 of the Main Commerce

Building. In addition, a complete

version of the Decision Memorandum

can be accessed directly on the World

Wide Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov, under

the heading ‘‘Federal Register Notices.’’

The paper copy and electronic version

of the Decision Memorandum are

identical in content.

Suspension of Liquidation

In accordance with sections 701(d)

and 703(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, we have

calculated a single rate for the Urenco

Group with respect to exports from each

of the three countries. The ‘‘all others’’

rate is the same as the rate for the

Urenco Group. These rates are

summarized in the table below:

Producer/exporter Net subsidy rate

Urenco Group Ltd. .... 2.26 percent ad valorem.

All Others .................. 2.26 percent ad valorem.

In accordance with our preliminary

affirmative determinations, we

instructed the U.S. Customs Service to

suspend liquidation of all entries of low

enriched uranium from Germany, the

Netherlands, and the United Kingdom,

which were entered or withdrawn from

warehouse, for consumption on or after

May 14, 2001, the date of the

publication of our preliminary

determinations in the Federal Register.

In accordance with section 703(d) of the

Act, we instructed the U.S. Customs

Service to discontinue the suspension of

liquidation for merchandise entered on

or after September 11, 2001, but to

continue the suspension of liquidation

of entries made between May 14, 2001

and September 10, 2001.

We will reinstate suspension of

liquidation under section 706(a) of the

Act for all entries if the ITC issues a

final affirmative injury determination

and will require a cash deposit of

estimated countervailing duties for such

entries of merchandise in the amounts

indicated above. If the ITC determines

that material injury, or threat of material

injury, does not exist, this proceeding

will be terminated and all estimated

duties deposited or securities posted as

a result of the suspension of liquidation

will be refunded or canceled.

ITC Notification

In accordance with section 705(d) of

the Act, we will notify the ITC of our

determinations. In addition, we are

making available to the ITC all nonprivileged and non-proprietary

information related to these

investigations. We will allow the ITC

access to all privileged and business

proprietary information in our files,

provided that the ITC confirms that it

will not disclose such information,

either publically or under an

administrative protective order (APO),

without the written consent of the

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

If the ITC determines that material

injury, or threat of material injury, does

not exist, these proceedings will be

terminated. If however, the ITC

determines that such injury does exist,

we will issue countervailing duty

orders.

Return or Destruction of Proprietary

Information

In the event that the ITC issues a final

negative injury determination, this

notice will serve as the only reminder

to parties subject to APO of their

responsibility concerning the

destruction of proprietary information

disclosed under APO in accordance

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Failure to

comply is a violation of the APO.

These determinations are published

pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of

the Act.

Dated: December 13, 2001.

Faryar Shirzad,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

Appendix I—Issues and Decision

Memorandum

Summary

Methodology and Background Information

I. Subsidies Valuation Information

A. Allocation Period

B. Benchmarks for Loans and Discount

Rate

C. Treatment of the Ad Valorem Rate

Calculation and the Denominator

Analysis of Programs

I. Programs Determined to Confer Subsidies

from the Government of Germany

A. Enrichment Technology Research and

Development Program

B. Forgiveness of Centrifuge Enrichment

Capacity Subsidies

C. Investment Allowance Act

II. Program Determined To Confer Subsidies

From the Government of the Netherlands

A. Regional Investment Premium

III. Programs Determined Not to Confer a

Benefit from the Government of Germany

A. Regional Government Provision of

Industrial Site

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 246 / Friday, December 21, 2001 / Notices 65905

B. Regional Development Grants

IV. Programs Determined Not to Confer a

Benefit from the Government of the

Netherlands

A. Centrifuge Enrichment Technology

Research

B. 1981 Equity Conversion

V. Programs Determined Not to Confer a

Benefit from the Government of the

United Kingdom

A. Regional Development Grants

B. Centrifuge Development Grant

C. Fossil Fuel Levy

D. Forgiveness of Decommissioning Debt

VI. Programs Determined Not

Countervailable from the Government of

the Netherlands

A. Subordinated Shareholder Loan

Provided to Urenco Ltd. by UCN

B. 1998 Shareholder Loan

VII. Programs Determined Not

Countervailable from the Government of

the United Kingdom

A. Assumption of Debt: European

Investment Bank Loans

B. Loan-Stock Debt Forgiveness Program

C. Subordinated Shareholder Loan

Provided to Urenco Ltd. by INFL

D. Extraordinary Asset Write Downs Prior

to Transfer of BNFL Enrichment

Facilities

VIII. Programs Determined Not Used in the

Netherlands

A. Wet Investeringsrekening Law (WIR)

B. Subsidized Loan Forgiveness

IX. Program Determined Not Used in the

United Kingdom

A. Financial Assistance Under the

Electricity Act of 1989

X. Total Ad Valorem Rate

XI. Analysis of Comments

Comment 1: Scope Clarification

Comment 2: International Consortium

Provision

Comment 3: Average Useful Life

Comment 4: 1993 Equity Investment

Comment 5: EIB Loans

Comment 6: Regional Development Grants

Comment 7: Centrifuge Development Grant

(CDG)

Comment 8: Subordinated Shareholder

Loan Provided to Urenco Ltd. by INFL

and UCN

Comment 9: Loan Stock Debt Forgiveness

Comment 10: Regional Investment

Premiums (IPR)

Comment 11: Loan Forgiveness

Comment 12: 1981 Equity Conversion

Comment 13: Centrifuge Enrichment

Technology Research and Development

Programs

Comment 14: Sales Denominator of the

Urenco Group

Comment 15: Investment Allowance Act

Comment 16: City and State Government

Development Grants

Comment 17: Centrifuge Enrichment

Capacity Subsidies

Comment 18: Enrichment Technology R&D

Subsidies

Comment 19: WIR Program

[FR Doc. 01–31511 Filed 12–21–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

Export Trade Certificate of Review

ACTION: Notice of application to amend

an Export Trade Certificate of Review.

SUMMARY: The Office of Export Trading

Company Affairs (‘‘OETCA’’),

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce, has received

an application to amend an Export

Trade Certificate of Review

(‘‘Certificate’’). This notice summarizes

the proposed amendment and requests

comments relevant to whether the

Certificate should be issued.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vanessa M. Bachman, Acting Director,

Office of Export Trading Company

Affairs, International Trade

Administration, (202) 482–5131 (this is

not a toll-free number) or E-mail at

oetca@ita.doc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title III of

the Export Trading Company Act of

1982 (15 U.S.C. 4001–21) authorizes the

Secretary of Commerce to issue Export

Trade Certificates of Review. An Export

Trade Certificate of Review protects the

holder and the members identified in

the Certificate from state and federal

government antitrust actions and from

private treble damage antitrust actions

for the export conduct specified in the

Certificate and carried out in

compliance with its terms and

conditions. Section 302(b)(1) of the

Export Trading Company Act of 1982

and 15 CFR 325.6(a) require the

Secretary to publish a notice in the

Federal Register identifying the

applicant and summarizing its proposed

export conduct.

Request for Public Comments

Interested parties may submit written

comments relevant to the determination

whether an amended Certificate should

be issued. If the comments include any

privileged or confidential business

information, it must be clearly marked

and a nonconfidential version of the

comments (identified as such) should be

included. Any comments not marked

privileged or confidential business

information will be deemed to be

nonconfidential. An original and five (5)

copies, plus two (2) copies of the

nonconfidential version, should be

submitted no later than 20 days after the

date of this notice to: Office of Export

Trading Company Affairs, International

Trade Administration, Department of

Commerce, Room 1800H, Washington,

DC 20230. Information submitted by any

person is exempt from disclosure under

the Freedom of Information Act (5

U.S.C. 552). However, nonconfidential

versions of the comments will be made

available to the applicant if necessary

for determining whether or not to issue

the Certificate. Comments should refer

to this application as ‘‘Export Trade

Certificate of Review, application

number 88–5A012.’’

The National Tooling and Machining

Association’s (‘‘NTMA’’) original

Certificate was issued on October 18,

1988 (53 FR 43140, October 25, 1988)

and previously amended on December

4, 1989 (54 FR 51914, December 19,

1989); September 2, 1993 (58 FR 47868,

September 13, 1993); May 3, 2000 (65

FR 30073, May 10, 2000); and April 5,

2001 (66 FR 21335, April 30, 2001). A

summary of the application for an

amendment follows.

Summary of the Application

Applicant: National Tooling and

Machining Association, 9300 Livingston

Road, Ft. Washington, Maryland 20744.

Contact: Thomas H. Garcia, Manager,

Marketing Programs, Telephone: (301)

248–6200.

Application No.: 88–5A012.

Date Deemed Submitted: December

12, 2001.

Proposed Amendment: NTMA seeks

to amend its Certificate so that the

attached list will constitute the

‘‘Members’’ of the Certificate within the

meaning of section 325.2(1) of the

Regulations (15 CFR 325.2(1)).

Dated: December 18, 2001.

Vanessa M. Bachman,

Acting Director, Office of Export Trading

Company Affairs.

21st Century Tool & Die, Inc.,

Waynesboro, TN

3 M MTC, Petaluma, CA

4 Axis Machining, Inc., Denver, CO

A–1 Precision Metal Products, Phoenix,

AZ

A & A Industries, Inc., Peabody, MA

A & A Machine Company, Inc.,

Southampton, PA

A & A Machine Shop, Inc., La Marque,

TX

A & B Machine, Van Nuys, CA

A & B Machine Shop, Rockford, IL

A & B Tool & Manufacturing Corp.,

Toledo, OH

A & D Precision, Fremont, CA

A & E Custom Manufacturing,

Technologies, Inc., Kansas City, KS

A & E Machine Shop, Inc., Lone Star,

TX

A & G Machine, Inc., Auburn, WA

A & S Tool & Die Company, Inc.,

Kernersville, NC

A A Precisioneering, Inc., Meadville, PA

A B A Division, A B A—P G T, Inc.,

Manchester, CT