Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 246 / Friday, December 21, 2001 / Notices 65899

As noted above, the final

determination will be issued within 135

days after the date of the publication of

the preliminary determination.

This determination is issued and

published pursuant to sections 733(f)

and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Dated: December 15, 2001.

Faryar Shirzad,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 01–31515 Filed 12–20–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–583–816]

Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe

Fittings From Taiwan: Final Results of

Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results in the

antidumping duty administrative review

of certain stainless steel butt-weld pipe

fittings from Taiwan.

SUMMARY: On July 12, 2001, the

Department of Commerce

(‘‘Department’’) published the

preliminary results of the administrative

review of the antidumping duty order

on certain stainless steel butt-weld pipe

fittings from Taiwan. This review covers

one manufacturer/exporter of the

subject merchandise. The period of

review (‘‘POR’’) is June 1, 1999 through

May 31, 2000.

We gave interested parties an

opportunity to comment on the

preliminary results. Based upon our

analysis of the comments received, we

have made changes in the margin

calculation. Therefore, the final results

differ from the preliminary results of

this review. The final weighted-average

dumping margin is listed below in the

section titled ‘‘Final Results of the

Review.’’

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 21, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James C. Doyle or Alex Villanueva,

Enforcement Group III, Office 9, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue,

NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone

202–482–0159 (Doyle) or 202–482–6412

(Villanueva), fax 202–482–1388.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the Tariff Act of 1930

(‘‘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

(‘‘URAA’’). In addition, unless

otherwise indicated, all citations to the

Department’s regulations are to the

regulations at 19 CFR part 351 (2000).

Background

On June 16, 1993, the Department

published the antidumping duty order

on certain stainless steel butt-weld pipe

fittings from Taiwan. See Certain

Welded Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe

Fittings From Taiwan: Final

Determination and Antidumping Order,

58 FR 33250 (June 16, 1993). On June

20, 2000, we published in the Federal

Register a notice of opportunity to

request an administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on certain

stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings

from Taiwan covering the period June 1,

1999 through May 31, 2000. See Notice

of Opportunity to Request

Administrative Review of Antidumping

or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding,

Or Suspended Investigation 65 FR

38242 (June 20, 2000). On June 20, 2000,

respondent, Ta Chen Stainless Steel

Pipe Ltd., (‘‘Ta Chen’’), requested that

the Department conduct an

administrative review of Ta Chen for the

period of June 1, 1999 through May 31,

2000. On June 30, 2000, Markovitz

Enterprises, Inc. (Flowline Division),

Alloy Piping Products Inc., Gerlin, Inc.,

and Taylor Forge, (collectively,

‘‘Petitioners’’) requested that the

Department conduct an administrative

review of Ta Chen for the period of June

1, 1999 through May 31, 2000. On July

31, 2000, in accordance with section

751(a) of the Act, the Department

published a notice of initiation of this

antidumping duty administrative review

for the period of June 1, 1999 through

May 31, 2000. See Notice of Initiation of

Antidumping or Countervailing Duty

Administrative Reviews and Requests

for Revocation in Part, 65 FR 46687

(July 31, 2000). On July 12, 2001, the

Department published the preliminary

results of the administrative review in

the Federal Register. See Certain

Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings

from Taiwan: Preliminary Results of

Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review, 66 FR 36555 (July 12, 2001)

(‘‘Preliminary Results’’). We gave

interested parties an opportunity to

comment on our Preliminary Results. Ta

Chen and Petitioners filed briefs on

August 21, 2001. On August 27, 2001,

Ta Chen and Petitioners filed rebuttal

briefs. No hearing was requested or

held. The date for issuing the final

results of the review was November 9,

2001. Because of complex issues in this

proceeding, the Department extended

the time limit for the final results by 30

days in accordance with section 751

(a)(3)(A) of the Act. See Notice of

Extension of Final Results of

Antidumping Duty Review: Certain

Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings

from Taiwan, 66 FR 55639 (November 2,

2001). The date for issuing the final

results was moved from November 9,

2001 to December 10, 2001. The

Department has conducted and

completed the administrative review in

accordance with section 751 of the Act.

Scope of the Review

The merchandise subject to this

administrative review is certain

stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings

(‘‘SSBWPF’’) whether finished or

unfinished, under 14 inches inside

diameter. Certain SSBWPF are used to

connect pipe sections in piping systems

where conditions require welded

connections. The subject merchandise is

used where one or more of the following

conditions is a factor in designing the

piping system: (1) Corrosion of the

piping system will occur if material

other than stainless steel is used; (2)

contamination of the material in the

system by the system itself must be

prevented; (3) high temperatures are

present; (4) extreme low temperatures

are present; and (5) high pressures are

contained within the system.

Pipe fittings come in a variety of

shapes, with the following five shapes

the most basic: ‘‘elbows’’, ‘‘tees’’,

‘‘reducers’’, ‘‘stub-ends’’, and ‘‘caps.’’

The edges of finished pipe fittings are

beveled. Threaded, grooved, and bolted

fittings are excluded from this review.

The pipe fittings subject to this review

are classifiable under subheading

7307.23.00 of the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule of the United States

(‘‘HTSUS’’).

Although the HTSUS subheading is

provided for convenience and customs

purposes, our written description of the

scope of the review is dispositive. Pipe

fittings manufactured to American

Society of Testing and Materials

specification A774 are included in the

scope of this order.

During this administrative review, the

Department received a scope ruling

request on April 12, 2001 and in

accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(k)(2)

from Allegheny Bradford Corporation d/

b/a Top Line Process Equipment

Company (‘‘Top Line’’), for a scope

ruling on whether stainless steel buttVerDate 11<MAY>2000 18:41 Dec 20, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21DEN1.SGM pfrm11 PsN: 21DEN1
65900 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 246 / Friday, December 21, 2001 / Notices

weld tube fittings it plans to import are

covered by the antidumping duty order

on stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings

from Taiwan. On November 15, 2001,

the Department issued its preliminary

scope ruling. See Memorandum from

Edward C. Yang, Director, Enforcement,

Group III, Office 9, to Joseph A. Spetrini,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration, Group III: Preliminary

Scope Ruling on the Antidumping Duty

Order on Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe

Fittings: Allegheny Bradford

Corporation d/b/a Top Line Process

Equipment (‘‘Preliminary Scope

Ruling’’), dated November 15, 2001,

which is on file at the U.S. Department

of Commerce, in the Central Records

Unit, in room B–099. We gave interested

parties an opportunity to comment on

our Preliminary Scope Ruling. Top Line

and Petitioners filed briefs on November

21, 2001. On November 26, 2001, Top

Line and Petitioners filed rebuttal briefs.

On December 10, 2001, the Department

issued its final scope ruling that Top

Line’s stainless steel butt-weld tube

fittings are within the scope of the

Order. See Memorandum from Edward

C. Yang, Director, Enforcement, Group

III, Office 9, to Joseph A. Spetrini,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration, Group III: Final Scope

Ruling on the Antidumping Duty Order

on Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe

Fittings: Allegheny Bradford

Corporation d/b/a Top Line Process

Equipment, dated December 10, 2001,

which is also on file at the U.S.

Department of Commerce, in the Central

Records Unit, in room B–099.

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the case briefs, as

well as the Department’s findings, in

this administrative review are addressed

in the Issues and Decision

Memorandum for the Administrative

Review of Certain Stainless Steel ButtWeld Pipe Fittings from Taiwan: June 1,

1999, through May 31, 2000 from Joseph

A. Spetrini, Deputy Assistant Secretary,

Import Administration, to Faryar

Shirzad, Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration (‘‘Decision

Memorandum’’), dated December 10,

2001, which is hereby adopted by this

notice. A list of the issues raised and to

which we have responded, all of which

are in the Decision Memorandum, and

a list of our changes, is attached to this

notice as an Appendix. Parties can find

a complete discussion of all issues

raised in this review and the

corresponding recommendations in this

public memorandum which is on file at

the U.S. Department of Commerce, in

the Central Records Unit, in room B–

099. In addition, a complete version of

the Decision Memorandum can be

accessed directly on the Web at

www.ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper copy and

electronic version of the public version

of the Decision Memorandum are

identical in content.

Sales Below Cost in the Home Market

As discussed in more detail in the

Preliminary Results, the Department

disregarded home market below-cost

sales that failed the cost test in the final

results of review.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

Based on our analysis of the

comments received, we have made

certain changes in the margin

calculation, as discussed in the Decision

Memorandum, accessible in B–099. A

list of the 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.

Final Results of the Review

We determine that the following

percentage weighted-average margin

exists for the period June 1, 1999

through May 31, 2000:

CERTAIN WELDED STAINLESS STEEL

PIPE

Producer/manufacturer/exporter

Weightedaverage

margin

(percent)

Ta Chen .................................... 6.11

The Department shall determine, and

the U.S. Customs Service (‘‘Customs’’)

shall assess, antidumping duties on all

appropriate entries. In accordance with

19 CFR 351.212(b), we have calculated

importer-specific assessment rates. With

respect to the constructed export price

sales, we divided the total dumping

margins for the reviewed sales by the

total entered value of those reviewed

sales for each importer. We will direct

Customs to assess any resulting non-de

minimis percentage margins against the

entered Customs values for the subject

merchandise on each of that importer’s

entries during the review period.

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 certain SSBWPF from Taiwan

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 Ta Chen 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 shall

continue to be 51.01 percent.

These deposit requirements shall

remain in effect until publication of the

final results of the next administrative

review.

This notice also 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 the only

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: December 10, 2001.

Faryar Shirzad,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

Appendix

Discussion of the Issues

Comment 1: Intra-Warehouse Transfer

Expenses

Comment 2: Level of Trade (‘‘LOT’’)/CEP

Offset

Comment 3: CEP Profit

Comment 4: CEP Sales Expenses

Comment 5: U.S. Short-Term Interest Rate

Comment 6: U.S. Inventory Carrying Period

Comment 7: U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses

Comment 8: United States Indirect Selling

Expenses

Comment 9: General and Administrative

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 246 / Friday, December 21, 2001 / Notices 65901

1The petitioners in this investigation 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 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 Operating 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, 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.

Expenses

Comment 10: Reclassification of EP sales to

CEP sales

[FR Doc. 01–31399 Filed 12–20–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C–427–819]

Notice of Final Affirmative

Countervailing Duty Determination:

Low Enriched Uranium From France

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final affirmative

countervailing duty determination.

SUMMARY: On May 14, 2001, the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) published in the Federal

Register its preliminary affirmative

determination in the countervailing

duty investigation on low enriched

uranium (subject merchandise) from

France for the period January 1, 1999

through December 31, 1999.

The net subsidy rate in the final

determination differs from that of the

Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing

Duty Determination and Alignment with

Final Antidumping Duty Determination:

Low Enriched Uranium from France, 66

FR 24325 (May 14, 2001) (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:

Michael Grossman at (202) 482–3146 or

Richard Herring at (202) 482–4149,

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 results of

investigation on low enriched uranium

from France. See Notice of Preliminary

Affirmative Countervailing Duty

Determination and Alignment with

Final Antidumping Duty Determination:

Low Enriched Uranium from France, 66

FR 24325 (May 14, 2001) (Preliminary

Determination). This investigation

covers low enriched uranium (subject

merchandise) from France for the period

January 1, 1999, through December 31,

1999.

We invited interested parties to

comment on the Preliminary

Determination. On October 22 and 23,

2001, the petitioners,1 the Ad Hoc

Utilities Group,2 and respondent

producers/exporters Eurodif, S.A. and

Compagnie Generale des Matieres

Nucleaires (COGEMA) 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

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.

This final determination was

originally due on November 26, 2001.

We subsequently tolled the final

determination deadline in this

investigation 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 this investigation, 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 this investigation. Specifically,

this investigation does 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 this investigation. For

purposes of this investigation, 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 this

investigation.

Also excluded from this investigation

is LEU owned by a foreign utility enduser 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 this

investigation is classified in the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (HTSUS) at subheading