Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2001 / Notices 11255

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 15.16

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 the only

reminder to parties subject to

administrative protective order (APO) of

their responsibility concerning the

disposition of proprietary information

disclosed under APO in accordance

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

We are issuing and publishing this

determination and notice in accordance

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

Act.

Dated: February 16, 2001.

Timothy J. Hauser,

Acting Under Secretary for International

Trade.

Appendix—Issues in Decision Memo

Comments

1. Calculation of the CEP Ratio

2. Calculation of Credit Expenses

[FR Doc. 01–4534 Filed 2–22–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–570–822, A–583–820]

Continuation of Antidumping Duty

Orders on Helical Spring Lock

Washers From China and Taiwan

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Continuation of

Antidumping Duty Orders on Helical

Spring Lock Washers from China and

Taiwan.

SUMMARY: On June 5, 2000, the

Department of Commerce (‘‘the

Department’’), pursuant to sections

751(c) and 752 of the Tariff Act of 1930,

as amended (‘‘the Act’’), determined

that revocation of the antidumping duty

orders on helical spring lock washers

from China and Taiwan is likely to lead

to continuation or recurrence of

dumping (65 FR 35605). On January 31,

2001, the International Trade

Commission (‘‘the Commission’’),

pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act,

determined that revocation of the

antidumping duty orders on helical

spring lock washers from China and

Taiwan would be likely to lead to

continuation or recurrence of material

injury to an industry in the United

States within a reasonably foreseeable

time (66 FR 8424). Therefore, pursuant

to 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4), the Department

is publishing notice of the continuation

of the antidumping duty orders on

helical spring lock washers from China

and Taiwan.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 23, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Martha V. Douthit or James P. Maeder,

Office of Policy for Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20230;

telephone: (202) 482–5050 or (202) 482–

3330, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On November 2, 1999, the Department

initiated (64 FR 59160) and the

Commission instituted (64 FR 59204)

sunset reviews of the antidumping duty

orders on helical spring lock washers

from China and Taiwan pursuant to

section 751(c) of the Act. As a result of

its reviews, the Department found that

revocation of the antidumping duty

orders on helical spring lock washers

from China and Taiwan is likely to lead

to continuation or recurrence of

dumping and notified the Commission

of the magnitude of the margin likely to

prevail were the orders revoked. See

Helical Spring Lock Washers From the

People’s Republic of China and Taiwan;

Final Results of Expedited Sunset

Reviews, 65 FR 35605 (June 5, 2000).

On January 31, 2001, the Commission

determined, pursuant to section 751(c)

of the Act, that revocation of the

antidumping duty orders on helical

spring lock washers from China and

Taiwan would be likely to lead to

continuation or recurrence of material

injury to an industry in the United

States within a reasonably foreseeable

time. See Helical Spring Lock Washers

from China and Taiwan, 66 FR 8424

(January 31, 2001) and USITC

Publication. 3384, (January 2001),

Investigation Nos. 731–TA–624–625

(Review).

Scope

The products subject to these

antidumping duty orders include helical

spring lock washers of carbon steel, of

carbon alloy steel, or of stainless steel,

heat-treated or non-heat-treated, plated

or non-plated, with ends that are offline. Helical spring lock washers are

designed to: (1) Function as a spring to

compensate for developed looseness

between the component parts of a

fastened assembly; (2) distribute the

load over a larger area for screws or

bolts; and, (3) provide a hardened

bearing surface. The scope does not

include internal or external tooth

washers, nor does it include spring lock

washers made of other metals, such as

copper. Helical spring lock washers

subject to these orders are currently

classifiable under subheading

7318.21.0030 of the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule (‘‘HTS’’). Although the HTS

subheading is provided for convenience

and customs purposes, the written

description of the scope remains

dispositive.

Determination

As a result of the determinations by

the Department and the Commission

that revocation of the antidumping duty

orders would be likely to lead to

continuation or recurrence of dumping

and material injury to an industry in the

United States, pursuant to section

751(d)(2) of the Act, the Department

hereby orders the continuation of the

antidumping duty orders on helical

spring lock washers from China and

Taiwan. The Department will instruct

the Customs Service to continue to

collect antidumping duty deposits at the

rates in effect at the time of entry for all

imports of subject merchandise. The

effective date of continuation of these

11256 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2001 / Notices

orders will be the date of publication in

the Federal Register of this Notice of

Continuation. Pursuant to section

751(c)(2) and 751(c)(6) of the Act, the

Department intends to initiate the next

five-year review of these orders not later

than January 2006. This notice is

published pursuant to section 703(c)(2)

of the Act. Effective January 20, 2001,

Bernard T. Carreau is fulfilling the

duties of the Assistant Secretary for

Import Administration.

Dated: February 6, 2001.

Bernard T. Carreau,

Deputy Assistant Secretary, AD/CVD

Enforcement II.

[FR Doc. 01–4533 Filed 2–22–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A–351–806]

Silicon Metal From Brazil; Final

Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review and

Determination Not To Revoke in Part

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of

antidumping duty administrative

review.

SUMMARY: On August 4, 2000, the

Department of Commerce (the

‘‘Department’’) published the

preliminary results of administrative

review of the antidumping duty order

on silicon metal from Brazil. The

merchandise covered by this order is

silicon metal from Brazil. The review

covers five manufacturers/exporters:

Rima Industrial SA (‘‘RIMA’’),

Companhia Ferroligas Minas Gerais—

Minasligas (‘‘Minasligas’’), Ligas de

Aluminia S.A. (‘‘LIASA’’), Companhia

Carbureto de Calcio (‘‘CBCC’’),

Eletrosilex S.A. (‘‘Eletrosilex’’). The

period of review (‘‘POR’’) is July 1,

1998, through June 30, 1999.

Based on our analysis of the

comments received, we have made

changes 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

Review.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 23, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Maisha Cryor (RIMA), telephone: (202)

482–5831; Nova Daly (Eletrosilex and

Minasligas), 482–0989; Mark Manning

(LIASA), 482–3936, and Zev Primor

(CBCC), 482–4114; AD/CVD

Enforcement, Office IV, Group II, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The 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 (‘‘URAA’’). In addition,

unless otherwise indicated, all citations

to the Department’s regulations are to 19

CFR part 351 (2000).

Background

On August 4, 2000, the Department

published the preliminary results of

administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on silicon

metal from Brazil. See Silicon Metal

From Brazil: Preliminary Results of

Antidumping Duty Administrative

Review and Notice of Intent Not To

Revoke Order in Part, 65 FR 47960

(August 4, 2000). The review covers five

manufacturers/exporters, RIMA, LIASA,

CBCC, Minasligas and Eletrosilex. The

POR is July 1, 1998, through June 30,

1999. We invited parties to comment on

our preliminary results of review. We

received comments on October 2, 2000,

from RIMA, LIASA, CBCC, Eletrosilex

and from American Silicon

Technologies (‘‘AST’’), Elkem Metals

Company (‘‘Elkem’’) and Globe

Metallugical Inc. (‘‘Globe’’) (collectively

‘‘petitioners’’). On October 16, 2000, we

received a rebuttal brief from

petitioners, RIMA, LIASA, and CBCC.

We held a public hearing on October 25,

2000, to give interested parties the

opportunity to express their views

directly to the Department. The

Department has conducted this

administrative review in accordance

with section 751 of the Act.

Scope of Review

The merchandise covered by this

administrative review is silicon metal

from Brazil containing at least 96.00

percent but less than 99.99 percent

silicon by weight. Also covered by this

administrative review is silicon metal

from Brazil containing between 89.00

and 96.00 percent silicon by weight but

which contains more aluminum than

the silicon metal containing at least

96.00 percent but less than 99.99

percent silicon by weight. Silicon metal

is currently provided for under

subheadings 2804.69.10 and 2804.69.50

of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule

(‘‘HTS’’) as a chemical product, but is

commonly referred to as a metal.

Semiconductor grade silicon (silicon

metal containing by weight not less than

99.99 percent silicon and provided for

in subheading 2804.61.00 of the HTS) is

not subject to the order. Although the

HTS item numbers are provided for

convenience and for U.S. Customs

purposes, the written description

remains dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the case and

rebuttal briefs by parties to this

administrative review are addressed in

the ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’

(‘‘Decision Memorandum’’), dated

January 31, 2001, which is hereby

adopted by this notice. 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 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 in the Central Records Unit, room

B–099 (‘‘B–099’’) of the main

Department building. 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

Decision Memorandum are identical in

content.

Determination Not To Revoke CBCC

and LIASA

LIASA

After review of the criteria outlined at

sections 351.222(b) and 351.222(d) of

the Department’s regulations, the

Department’s practice, the comments of

the parties, and the evidence on the

record, we have determined that the

requirements for revocation have not

been met. For the reasons outlined in

the Decision Memorandum, we have

determined not to revoke the

antidumping duty order with respect to

subject merchandise produced and also

exported by LIASA because its sales

were not made in commercial quantities

in accordance with 19 CFR 351.222(e).

See, Memorandum Regarding ‘‘Eighth

Administrative Review: Commercial

Quantities,’’ dated July 30, 2000.

CBCC

After review of the record, the

Department determines that although

CBCC has had zero or de minimis

dumping margins for the previous two

review periods, during the current

review CBCC’s weight-averaged