Notices. Notice of final results of antidumping duty administrative reviews

9,766 words·~44 min read·/register/2004/09/15/04-20741

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 3510-07-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-427-801, A-428-801, A-475-801, A-588-804, A-559-801, A 412-801] Antifriction Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Singapore, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Rescission of Administrative Reviews in Part, and Determination To Revoke Order in Part AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On February 9, 2004, 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 and of the antidumping duty order on spherical plain bearings and parts thereof from France. The reviews cover 173 manufacturers/exporters. The period of review is May 1, 2002, through April 30, 2003. 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.” DATES: Effective September 15, 2004. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: The Department of Commerce (the Department) received numerous requests for reviews of companies under multiple orders. Please contact the appropriate analyst as outlined in the following chart at AD/CVD Enforcement, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.

Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-4733. Company Country Analyst Ace Bearing and Transmission Co France, Germany, Italy Edythe Artman. Acorn Industrial Service Limited France, Germany, Italy Jeffrey Frank. Aeroengine Bearings U.K. United Kingdom Catherine Cartsos. Aktif Endustrie Malzemeleri France, Germany, Italy Lyn Johnson. Alphateam SPRL France, Germany, Italy Catherine Cartsos. Asahi Seiko Co., Ltd. Japan Thomas Schauer. Australian Bearing Pty Ltd. France, Germany, Italy Dmitry Vladimirov. Baltic Bearing Supply France, Germany, Italy Yang Jin Chun. Barden/FAG United Kingdom Jeffrey Frank. Bearing and Tool GmbH France, Germany, Italy Catherine Cartsos. Bearing Discount International GmbH France, Germany, Italy Fred Aziz. Bearing Dynamics France, Germany, Italy Janis Kalnins. Bearing Net France, Germany, Italy Susan Lehman. Bearing Sales Corporation France, Germany, Italy Jeffrey Frank. BTM Bearing Trade F.C. Miltner France, Germany, Italy, United Kingdom Hermes Pinilla. Cantoni and C.S.N.C. France, Germany, Italy Susan Lehman. CCVI Bearing Company France, Germany, Italy Kristin Case. Comal SNC France, Germany, Italy Dmitry Vladimirov. DCD Corporation France, Germany, Italy Dunyako Ahmadu. EuroLatin Ex. Services France, Germany, Italy Susan Lehman. Ever-on Corporation (formerly Taisho Kiko Co. Ltd.) France, Germany, Italy Kristin Case. FAG Italia S.p.A. Italy Minoo Hatten. Fair Friend Ent. Co. Ltd. France, Germany, Italy Kristin Case. Friedrich Picard GmbH France, Germany, Italy Susan Lehman. Frohlich and Dorken GmbH France, Germany, Italy Jeffrey Frank. Han Sol Tech Corp./Yoo Shin Co. France, Germany, Italy Janis Kalnins. Hayley Import/Export France, Germany, Italy Yang Jin Chun. Heinz Knust France, Germany, Italy Catherine Cartsos. Hergenhan GmbH France, Germany, Italy Catherine Cartsos. Hoens Industrieel BV France, Germany, Italy Dmitry Vladimirov. IBD Ltd. France, Germany, Italy Edythe Artman. INA Schaeffer KG and FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schaefer AG (INA/FAG) Germany Susan Lehman/Dmitry Vladmirov. International Bearing Pte. Ltd. France, Germany, Italy Susan Lehman. Interspecies Donath GmbH France, Germany, Italy Lyn Johnson. Italcuscinetti Group France, Germany, Italy Dunyako Ahmadu. Kian Ho Bearings, Ltd. France, Germany, Italy Edythe Artman. KIS Antriebs Technik GmbH France, Germany, Italy Dunyako Ahmadu. Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. Japan Tom Schauer. KSM, Minamiguchi/Bearing MFG. Co France, Germany, Italy Lyn Johnson. LTM Industrietechnik France, Germany, Italy Dmitry Vladimirov. M. Buchhalter Maschenmode/Hergenhan France, Germany, Italy Yang Jin Chun. Micaknowledge France, Germany, Italy Catherine Cartsos. Minetti SpA France, Germany, Italy Fred Aziz. Ming Hing Trading Company France, Germany, Italy Janis Kalnins. Motion Bearing Pte. Ltd. France, Germany, Italy Susan Lehman. Nankai Seiko Japan Catherine Cartsos. NMB/Pelmec Singapore Yang Jin Chun. Nippon Pillow Block Sales

(NPBS)Japan Yang Jin Chun. NSK Ltd.

(NSK)Japan Dunyako Ahmadu. NTN Corp.

(NTN)Japan Hermes Pinilla. Osaka Pump Co. Ltd. Japan Edythe Artman. Paul Mueller Germany Dave Dirstine. Ringball Corporation France, Germany, Italy Dave Dirstine. Rodamietos Rovi France, Germany, Italy Jeffrey Frank. Roeirasa France, Germany, Italy Susan Lehman. Rolling Bearing Co. Pty. Ltd. France, Germany, Italy Kristin Case. Rovi-Marcay France, Germany, Italy Tom Schauer. Rovi-Valencia France, Germany, Italy Minoo Hatten. Sapporo Precision Bearings, Inc. (Sapporo) Japan Jeffrey Frank. SKF France S.A. and Sarma France Dunyako Ahmadu. SKF GmbH Germany Kristin Case. SKF Industrie S.p.A. Italy Dunyako Ahmadu. SKF (U.K.) Ltd. United Kingdom Kristin Case. SNR Roulements France Fred Aziz. Sprint Engineering France, Germany, Italy Susan Lehman. Takeshita Seiko Co. Ltd. Japan Janis Kalnins. Taninaka Ltd. France, Germany, Italy Susan Lehman. Timken Germany Kristin Case. Top G Trading Pte Ltd. France, Germany, Italy Catherine Cartsos. Weber Kugellager International France, Germany, Italy Fred Aziz. Withus Technology Corp. France, Germany, Italy Janis Kalnins. Wyko Export France, Germany, Italy Yang Jin Chun. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On February 9, 2004, the Department published the preliminary results of the administrative reviews of the antidumping duty orders on antifriction bearings and parts thereof (antifriction bearings) from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Singapore, and the United Kingdom (69 FR 5949) ( *Preliminary Results for France, et al.* ). The period of review

(POR)is May 1, 2002, through April 30, 2003. We invited interested parties to comment on the preliminary results. At the request of certain parties, we held hearings for Japan-specific issues on May 21, 2004, and for general issues on June 25, 2004. On May 3, 2004, and August 12, 2004, the Department published notices extending the date for issuing the final results of these reviews. *See Antifriction Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Singapore, and the United Kingdom: Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews* , 69 FR 24121 and 69 FR 49861, respectively. The Department has conducted these administrative reviews in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Scope of Reviews The products covered by these reviews are antifriction bearings (other than tapered roller bearings) and parts thereof

(AFBs)and constitute the following merchandise: 1. *Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof:* These products include all AFBs that employ balls as the rolling element. Imports of these products are classified under the following categories: Antifriction balls, ball bearings with integral shafts, ball bearings (including radial ball bearings) and parts thereof, and housed or mounted ball bearing units and parts thereof. Imports of these products are classified under the following *Harmonized Tariff Schedules* (HTSUS) subheadings: 3926.90.45, 4016.93.00, 4016.93.10, 4016.93.50, 6909.19.5010, 8431.20.00, 8431.39.0010, 8482.10.10, 8482.10.50, 8482.80.00, 8482.91.00, 8482.99.05, 8482.99.2580, 8482.99.35, 8482.99.6595, 8483.20.40, 8483.20.80, 8483.50.8040, 8483.50.90, 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30, 8483.90.70, 8708.50.50, 8708.60.50, 8708.60.80, 8708.70.6060, 8708.70.8050, 8708.93.30, 8708.93.5000, 8708.93.6000, 8708.93.75, 8708.99.06, 8708.99.31, 8708.99.4960, 8708.99.50, 8708.99.5800, 8708.99.8080, 8803.10.00, 8803.20.00, 8803.30.00, 8803.90.30, and 8803.90.90. 2. *Spherical Plain Bearings, Mounted and Unmounted, and Parts Thereof:* These products include all spherical plain bearings that employ a spherically-shaped sliding element and include spherical plain rod ends. Imports of these products are classified under the following HTS subheadings: 3926.90.45, 4016.93.00, 4016.93.10, 4016.93.50, 6909.50.10, 8483.30.80, 8483.90.30, 8485.90.00, 8708.93.5000, 8708.99.50, 8803.10.00, 8803.20.00, 8803.30.00, 8803.90.30, and 8803.90.90. Although the HTSUS item numbers above are provided for convenience and customs purposes, written descriptions of the scope of these proceedings remain dispositive. The size or precision grade of a bearing does not influence whether the bearing is covered by one of the orders. These orders cover all the subject bearings and parts thereof (inner race, outer race, cage, rollers, balls, seals, shields, etc.) outlined above with certain limitations. With regard to finished parts, all such parts are included in the scope of the these orders. For unfinished parts, such parts are included if

(1)they have been heat-treated, or

(2)heat treatment is not required to be performed on the part. Thus, the only unfinished parts that are not covered by these orders are those that will be subject to heat treatment after importation. The ultimate application of a bearing also does not influence whether the bearing is covered by the orders. Bearings designed for highly specialized applications are not excluded. Any of the subject bearings, regardless of whether they may ultimately be utilized in aircraft, automobiles, or other equipment, are within the scope of these orders. For a listing of scope determinations which pertain to the orders, see the Memorandum from the Antifriction Bearings Team to Laurie Parkhill regarding the placement of scope information from the 2001-02 administrative review record on the record of these administrative reviews, dated January 14, 2004. This memorandum is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Main Commerce Building, Room B-099, in the General Issues record (A-100-001) for the 02/03 reviews. Analysis of the Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to the concurrent administrative reviews of the orders on antifriction bearings are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum” (Decision Memo) from Jeffrey May, Deputy Assistant Secretary, to James Jochum, Assistant Secretary, dated September 8, 2004, 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 Memo, is attached to this notice as an Appendix. This Decision Memo, which is a public document, is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Main Commerce Building, Room B-099, and is accessible on the Web at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/index.html* . The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Sales Below Cost in the Home Market The Department disregarded home-market sales that failed the cost-of-production test for the following firms for these final results of reviews: Country Company Class or kind of merchandise France SKF Ball. Germany SKF, Paul Mueller, and INA/FAG Ball. Italy FAG, SKF Ball. Japan Asahi Seiko, Koyo, NSK, NPBS, and NTN Ball. Singapore NMB/Pelmec Ball. United Kingdom Barden Ball. Use of Adverse Facts Available Section 776(b) of the Act provides that, if the Department finds that an interested party “has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with a request for information,” the Department may use information that is adverse to the interests of that party as facts otherwise available. Section 776(b) of the Act further provides that the Department may use as adverse facts available information derived from the petition, a final determination in an antidumping investigation, any previous review, or any other information placed on the record. The statute does not provide a clear obligation or preference for relying on a particular source in choosing information to use as adverse facts available, but the Department may use as facts available a final determination in a less-than-fair-value proceeding even if the less-than-fair-value determination is based on the best information available. *See Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Sweden: Final Results of Administrative Review* , 62 FR 18396, 18402 (April 15, 1997), and *Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Mexico: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 63 FR 48181, 48183 (September 9, 1998). In the *Preliminary Results for France, et al.* , we determined that the use of facts available as the basis for the weighted-average dumping margin was appropriate for the following companies: Ace Bearing and Tool (France, Germany, and Italy) Acorn Industrial Services Limited (Germany) Aeroengine Bearings (United Kingdom) Aktif Endustrie (France, Germany, and Italy) Alphateam SPRL (France, Germany, and Italy) Australian Bearing Pty Ltd. (France, Germany, and Italy) Baltic Bearing Supply (France, Germany, and Italy) Bearing Dynamics (France, Germany, and Italy) Bearing Sales Corp. (France, Germany, and Italy) Bearing and Tool GmbH (France, Germany, and Italy) Budapesti Sved Csapagy Ltd. (France, Germany, and Italy) Cantoni and C.S.N.C (France, Germany, and Italy) CCVI Bearing Co. (France, Germany, and Italy) DCD Corporation (France, Germany, and Italy) Delta Export (France, Germany, and Italy) EuroLatin Services (France, Germany, and Italy) Fair Friend Ent. Co. Ltd. (France, Germany, and Italy) Friedrich Picard GmbH (France, Germany, and Italy) Frohlich and Dorken GmbH (France, Germany, and Italy) Han Sol Technology Corporation (France, Germany, and Italy) Hayley Import and Export (France, Germany, and Italy) Heinz Knust (France, Germany, and Italy) Hergenhan GmbH (France, Germany, and Italy) Hoens Industrieel BV (France, Germany, and Italy) IBD Ltd. (France, Germany, and Italy) International Bearing Pte. Ltd. (France, Germany, and Italy) Italcuscinetti Group (France, Germany, and Italy) Kian Ho Bearings (France, Germany, and Italy) KIS Antriebs Technik GmbH (France, Germany, and Italy) KSM Minamiguchi/Bearing Manufacturing Co. (France, Germany, and Italy) LTM Industrietechnik (France, Germany, and Italy) M. Buchhalter Maschenmode/Hergenhan (France, Germany, and Italy) Micaknowledge (France, Germany, and Italy) Minetti SPA (France, Germany, and Italy) Ming Hing Trading Co. (France, Germany, and Italy) Motion Bearing Pte. Ltd. (France, Germany, and Italy) Rodamietos Rovi (France, Germany, and Italy) Roeirasa (France, Germany, and Italy) Rovi-Marcay (France, Germany, and Italy) Rovi-Valencia (France, Germany, and Italy) Taninaka Ltd. (France, Germany, and Italy) Top G Trading Company (France, Germany, and Italy) Withus Technology Corporation (France, Germany, and Italy) Wyko Export (France, Germany, and Italy) These companies did not submit adequate responses to our antidumping duty questionnaire. 1 Consequently, we found that they withheld “information that has been requested by the administering authority” under section 776(a)(2) of the Act. 1 See memoranda from analysts to the file, “Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Antifriction Bearings and Parts Thereof from Germany—Responses to Questionnaire (December 11, 2003), Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Antifriction Bearings and Parts Thereof from Italy—Responses to Questionnaire (December 11, 2003), and Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Antifriction Bearings and Parts Thereof from France—Responses to Questionnaire (December 11, 2003).” In addition to the above firms, Weber Kugellager International (Weber) did not provide information that was essential for the Department to calculate antidumping margins for the firm (see Section 3 of the concurrent Issues and Decision Memorandum to this notice). Although Weber received a neutral facts available rate in the *Preliminary Results for France, et al.* (69 FR 5952), the company's failure to provide this information resulted in our use of adverse facts available in these final results of reviews. We also rejected a submission made by Weber on August 3, 2004, as being untimely within the deadlines established by our regulations. See 19 CFR 351.302(d). In accordance with section 776(b) of the Act, we made an adverse inference in our application of the facts available. This is appropriate because the companies identified above did not provide appropriate responses to our requests for information and, even following the issuance of our preliminary results, did not provide any acceptable rationale for their non-responses. Therefore, we found and continue to find that they have not acted to the best of their ability in providing us with relevant information which is under their control. As adverse facts available for these firms, we have applied the highest rate which we have calculated for any company in any segment of the relevant proceeding on ball bearings from the countries for which these firms have been reviewed. We have selected these rates because they are sufficiently high as to reasonably assure that these firms do not obtain a more favorable result by failing to cooperate. Specifically, the rates are as follows: 66.42 percent for France, 70.41 percent for Germany, 68.29 percent for Italy, and 61.14 percent for the United Kingdom. Section 776(c) of the Act provides that the Department shall, to the extent practicable, corroborate secondary information used for facts available by reviewing independent sources reasonably at its disposal. Information from a prior segment of the proceeding or from another company in the same proceeding constitutes secondary information. The Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H.R. Doc. 103-316, at 870

(1994)(SAA), provides that the word “corroborate” means that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information to be used has probative value. As explained in *Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, from Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, from Japan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews* , 61 FR 57391, 57392 (November 6, 1996) *(Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof from Japan)* , in order to corroborate secondary information, the Department will examine, to the extent practicable, the reliability and relevance of the information used. Unlike other types of information, however, such as input costs or selling expenses, there are no independent sources for calculated dumping margins. The only source for margins is administrative determinations. Thus, with respect to an administrative review, if the Department chooses as facts available a calculated dumping margin from a prior segment of the proceeding, it is not necessary to question the reliability of the margin for that time period. With respect to the relevance aspect of corroboration, however, the Department will consider information reasonably at its disposal as to whether there are circumstances that would render a margin not relevant. Where circumstances indicate that the selected margin is not appropriate as adverse facts available, the Department will disregard the margin and determine an appropriate margin. See *Fresh Cut Flowers from Mexico; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 61 FR 6812, 6814 (February 22, 1996), where the Department disregarded the highest dumping margin as best information available because the margin was based on another company's uncharacteristic business expense resulting in an unusually high margin. Further, in accordance with *F.LII De Cecco Di Filippo Fara S. Martino S.p.A.* v. *United States* , 216 F.3d 1027 (CAFC June 16, 2000), we also examine whether information on the record would support the selected rates as reasonable facts available. We find that the rates which we are using for these final results have probative value. We compared the selected margins to margins calculated on individual sales of the merchandise in question made by the French, German, Italian, and U.K. companies covered by the instant review. We found that a number of sales in commercial quantities had dumping margins near or exceeding the rates under consideration. The details of this analysis are contained in the memoranda from the case analysts to Mark Ross or Laurie Parkhill. 2 This evidence supports an inference that the selected rates reflect the actual dumping margins for the firms in question. 2 See the memorandum entitled *The Use of Adverse Facts Available and Corroboration of Secondary Information for Italy* (September 8, 2004), *The Use of Facts Available and Corroboration of Secondary Information for France* (February 2, 2004), and *The Use of Adverse Facts Available and Corroboration of Secondary Information for Germany* (September 8, 2004). Also, see the memorandum on the United Kingdom review record entitled *The Use of Facts Available and Corroboration of Secondary Information for Aeroengine Bearings* (September 8, 2004), and the memoranda on the review records for France, Germany, and the United Kingdom entitled *The Use of Adverse Facts Available and Corroboration of Secondary Information for Weber Kugellager International* (September 8, 2004) (collectively, Corroboration Memoranda). These rates are the current cash-deposit rates for a number of firms ( *e.g.* , in the Germany proceeding, 70.41 percent is the current deposit rate for, among other firms, Timken (formerly Torrington Nadellager), NTN, Bearings Discount International GmbH, Motion Bearings, and Alphateam SPRL). Furthermore, there is no information on the record that demonstrates that the rates we have selected are inappropriate for use as the total adverse facts-available rates for the companies in question. Therefore, we consider the selected rates to have probative value with respect to the firms in question in these reviews and to reflect the appropriate adverse inferences. Other Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made revisions that have changed the results for certain firms. We have corrected programming and clerical errors in the preliminary results, where applicable. Any alleged programming or clerical errors about which we or the parties do not agree are discussed in section 10 of the Decision Memo. Rescission of the Review in Part In the *Preliminary Results for France, et al.* , we stated our intent to rescind the administrative reviews of bearings that were exported by Comal SNC (France, Germany, Italy), Interspecies Donath GmbH (France, Germany, Italy), and BTM Bearing Trade F.C. Miltner

(BTM)(France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom). Comal SNC and Interspecies Donath GmbH were unlocatable and BTM was not the proper party to review because it was a reseller and all of its suppliers had knowledge at the time of sale that the merchandise was destined for the United States. See 69 FR at 5951. Since the status of these firms remains unchanged and we have received no additional information or argument as to our treatment of these companies, we hereby rescind the reviews with respect to these companies in these final results. In the preliminary results of the reviews, we also indicated that, for certain companies that reported no shipments of merchandise subject to those reviews, we intended to rescind these reviews at the time of our final results if we continued to find no evidence of sales during the period of review (69 FR 5959 at footnote 1). However, as we indicated in *Antifriction Bearings (Other than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Sweden, and the United Kingdom; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation of Orders in Part* , 66 FR 36551, 36554 (July 12, 2001), and in * Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews * , 67 FR 55780, 55781 (August 30, 2002), since it is impossible to establish with certainty from U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)data the accuracy of their statements, we will instruct CBP at the time of liquidation to review all documentation for suspended entries of subject merchandise. If CBP finds that any of the “no-shipment” respondents, in fact, had shipments of subject merchandise during the POR, we will instruct CBP to apply a facts-available rate to such respondents based on the adverse facts-available rate we have determined for the applicable country of origin and subject merchandise and we are not rescinding the reviews for the respondents in question. Revocation of Order in Part In the *Preliminary Results for France, et al.* , we stated our intent to revoke the order on ball bearings from Germany in part with respect to Paul Mueller. See 69 FR at 5953-54. We find that, for Paul Mueller, the regulatory requirement for revocation has been satisfied. See 19 CFR 351.222(d)(1). We have received no information or argumentation since the *Preliminary Results for France, et al.* which would cause us to change this determination. Accordingly, we revoke the order in part with respect to all subject merchandise manufactured and exported by Paul Mueller in these final results of review. See the Analysis Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of Review for Paul Mueller, dated February 2, 2004. Final Results of the Reviews We determine that the following percentage weighted-average margins on ball bearings exist for the period of May 1, 2002, through April 30, 2003: Company Margin FRANCE—Ball Bearings Ace Bearing and Transmission Service 66.42 Aktif Endustrie Malzemeleri 66.42 Alphateam SPRL 66.42 Australian Bearing Pty Ltd 66.42 Baltic Bearing Supply 66.42 Bearing and Tool GmbH 66.42 Bearing Dynamics 66.42 Bearing Sales Corp 66.42 Budapesti Sved Csapagy Ltd 66.42 Cantoni and C.S.N.C 66.42 CCVI Bearing Co 66.42 DCD Corp 66.42 Delta Export GmbH 66.42 EuroLatin Ex. Services 66.42 Fair Friend Ent. Co. Ltd 66.42 Friedrich Picard GmbH 66.42 Frohlich and Dorken GmbH 66.42 Han Sol Tech. Corp/Yoo Shin Co 66.42 Hayley Import/Export 66.42 Heinz Knust 66.42 Hergenhan GmbH 66.42 Hoens Industrieel BV 66.42 IBD Ltd 66.42 International Bearing Pte. Ltd 66.42 Italcuscinetti Group 66.42 Kian Ho Bearings, Ltd 66.42 KIS Antriebs Technik GmbH 66.42 KSM, Minamiguchi/Bearing Manufacturing Co 66.42 LTM Industrietechnik 66.42 M. Buchhalter Maschenmode/Hergenhan 66.42 Micaknowledge 66.42 Minetti SpA 66.42 Ming Hing Trading Co 66.42 Motion Bearing Pte. Ltd 66.42 Ringball Corporation 2.94 Rodamietos Rovi 66.42 Roeirasa 66.42 Rovi-Marcay 66.42 Rovi-Valencia 66.42 SKF France S.A. and Sarma 5.25 SNR Roulements 6.40 Taninaka Ltd 66.42 Top G Trading Pte Ltd 66.42 Weber Kugellager Int 66.42 Withus Technology Corporation 66.42 Wyko Export 66.42 FRANCE—Spherical Plain Bearings SKF France S.A. and Sarma 22.72 GERMANY—Ball Bearings Ace Bearing and Transmission Service 70.41 Acorn Industrial Services Limited 70.41 Aktif Endustrie Malzemeleri 70.41 Alphateam SPRL 70.41 Australian Bearing Pty Ltd 70.41 Baltic Bearing Supply 70.41 Bearing and Tool GmbH 70.41 Bearing Dynamics 70.41 Bearing Sales Corp 70.41 Budapesti Sved Csapagy Ltd 70.41 Cantoni and C.S.N.C 70.41 CCVI Bearing Co 70.41 DCD Corp 70.41 Delta Export GmbH 70.41 EuroLatin Ex. Services 70.41 Fair Friend Ent. Co. Ltd 70.41 Friedrich Picard GmbH 70.41 Frohlich and Dorken GmbH 70.41 Han Sol Tech. Corp/Yoo Shin Co 70.41 Hayley Import/Export 70.41 Heinz Knust 70.41 Hergenhan GmbH 70.41 Hoens Industrieel BV 70.41 IBD Ltd 70.41 INA/FAG 5.59 International Bearing Pte. Ltd 70.41 Italcuscinetti Group 70.41 Kian Ho Bearings, Ltd 70.41 KIS Antriebs Technik GmbH 70.41 KSM, Minamiguchi/Bearing Manufacturing Co 70.41 LTM Industrietechnik 70.41 M. Buchhalter Maschenmode/Hergenhan 70.41 Micaknowledge 70.41 Minetti SpA 70.41 Ming Hing Trading Co 70.41 Motion Bearing Pte Ltd. 70.41 Paul Mueller 0.36 Ringball 6.54 Rodamietos Rovi 70.41 Roeirasa 70.41 Rovi-Marcay 70.41 Rovi-Valencia 70.41 SKF GmbH 2.49 Taninaka Ltd 70.41 Top G Trading Pte Ltd 70.41 Weber Kugellager Int 70.41 Withus Technology Corporation 70.41 Wyko Export 70.41 ITALY—Ball Bearings Ace Bearing and Transmission Service 68.29 Aktif Endustrie Malzemeleri 68.29 Alphateam SPRL 68.29 Australian Bearing Pty Ltd 68.29 Baltic Bearing Supply 68.29 Bearing and Tool GmbH 68.29 Bearing Dynamics 68.29 Bearing Sales Corp 68.29 Budapesti Sved Csapagy Ltd 68.29 Cantoni and C.S.N.C 68.29 CCVI Bearing Co 68.29 DCD Corp 68.29 Delta Export GmbH 68.29 EuroLatin Ex. Services 68.29 FAG Italia S.p.A 4.79 Fair Friend Ent. Co. Ltd 68.29 Friedrich Picard GmbH 68.29 Frohlich and Dorken GmbH 68.29 Han Sol Tech. Corp/Yoo Shin Co 68.29 Hayley Import/Export 68.29 Heinz Knust 68.29 Hergenhan GmbH 68.29 Hoens Industrieel BV 68.29 IBD Ltd 68.29 International Bearing Pte. Ltd 68.29 Italcuscinetti Group 68.29 Kian Ho Bearings, Ltd 68.29 KIS Antriebs Technik GmbH 68.29 KSM, Minamiguchi/Bearing Manufacturing Co 68.29 LTM Industrietechnik 68.29 M. Buchhalter Maschenmode/Hergenhan 68.29 Micaknowledge 68.29 Minetti SpA 68.29 Ming Hing Trading Co 68.29 Motion Bearing Pte. Ltd 68.29 Ringball 3.45 Rodamietos Rovi 68.29 Roeirasa 68.29 Rovi-Marcay 68.29 Rovi-Valencia 68.29 SKF Industrie S.p.A 1.38 Taninaka Ltd 68.29 Top G Trading Pte Ltd 68.29 Weber Kugellager Int 68.29 Withus Technology Corporation 68.29 Wyko Export 68.29 JAPAN—Ball Bearings Asahi Seiko Co. Ltd 0.23 Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd 5.56 Nankai Seiko 0.46 Nippon Pillow Block Sales 3.37 NSK Ltd 2.46 NTN Corp 2.74 Osaka Pump 1.78 Sapporo Precision 8.74 Takeshita Seiko 2.90 SINGAPORE—Ball Bearings NMB/Pelmec 1.94 UNITED KINGDOM—Ball Bearings Aeroengine Bearings 61.14 Barden/FAG 4.10 Assessment Rates The Department will determine and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. We will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of reviews. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we have calculated, whenever possible, an exporter/importer-specific assessment rate or value for subject merchandise. With respect to the companies which did not respond to our questionnaire for these reviews, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate all imports of subject merchandise for which the non-responsive companies acted in any aspect of the transaction at the applicable adverse-facts-available rate for each country unless the manufacturer of the subject merchandise listed that non-responsive company as an EP customer. The Department clarified its “automatic assessment” regulation on May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the period of review produced by companies included in these final results of reviews for which the reviewed companies did not know their merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full discussion of this clarification, *see Notice of Policy Concerning Assessment of Antidumping Duties* , 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). a. Export Price With respect to export-price

(EP)sales, we divided the total dumping margins (calculated as the difference between normal value and the EP) for each exporter's importer/customer by the total number of units the exporter sold to that importer/customer. We will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-unit dollar amount against each unit of merchandise on each of that importer's/customer's entries under the relevant order during the review period. b. Constructed Export Price For constructed export-price

(CEP)sales (sampled and non-sampled), 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 CBP to assess the resulting percentage margin against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise on each of that importer's entries under the relevant order during the review period. See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Cash-Deposit Requirements To calculate the cash-deposit rate for each respondent ( *i.e.* , each exporter and/or manufacturer included in these reviews), we divided the total dumping margins for each company by the total net value of that company's sales of merchandise during the review period subject to each order. To derive a single deposit rate for each respondent, we weight-averaged the EP and CEP deposit rates (using the EP and CEP, respectively, as the weighting factors). To accomplish this when we sampled CEP sales, we first calculated the total dumping margins for all CEP sales during the review period by multiplying the sample CEP margins by the ratio of total days in the review period to days in the sample weeks. We then calculated a total net value for all CEP sales during the review period by multiplying the sample CEP total net value by the same ratio. Finally, we divided the combined total dumping margins for both EP and CEP sales by the combined total value for both EP and CEP sales to obtain the deposit rate. We will direct CBP to collect the resulting percentage deposit rate against the entered customs value of each of the exporter's entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice. Entries of parts incorporated into finished bearings before sales to an unaffiliated customer in the United States will receive the respondent's deposit rate applicable to the order. Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of this notice of final results of administrative reviews for all shipments of the subject merchandise 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 rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates shown above except that, for firms whose weighted-average margins are less than 0.5 percent and, therefore, *de minimis* , the Department will not require a deposit of estimated antidumping duties;

(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;

(4)the cash-deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be the “All Others” rate for the relevant order made effective by the final results of review published on July 26, 1993. *See Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, et al: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Revocation in Part of an Antidumping Duty Order* , 58 FR 39729 (July 26, 1993). For ball bearings from Italy, *see Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, et al; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, and Revocation in Part of Antidumping Duty Orders* , 61 FR 66472, 66521 (December 17, 1996). These rates are the “All Others” rates from the relevant LTFV investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative reviews. This notice serves as a 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 these review periods. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled 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 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of the return or 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 are sanctionable violations. We are issuing and publishing these determinations in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: September 8, 2004. James J. Jochum, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix Comments and Responses 1. Offsetting Margins with Above-Normal-Value Transactions 2. Model-Match Methodology 3. Adverse Facts Available 4. Indirect Selling Expenses 5. Allocation Methodology 6. Movement Expenses 7. Sample Sales 8. Billing Adjustments and Rebates 9. Cost Issues 10. Clerical Errors 11. Miscellaneous Issues A. Performance Lubricant B. HM Sales Reporting by NPBS C. Sales Outside the Ordinary Course of Trade D. Home-Market Interest Rate E. Home-Market Commissions [FR Doc. E4-2195 Filed 9-14-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-803] Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 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 reviews. SUMMARY: On March 10, 2004, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative reviews of the antidumping duty orders on heavy forged hand tools (HFHTs) from the People's Republic of China (PRC). These reviews cover HFHTs exported to the United States by multiple PRC manufacturers/exporters during the period February 1, 2002 through January 31, 2003. We provided interested parties with an opportunity to comment on the preliminary results of review. After analyzing the comments received, we made two changes in the margin calculations:

(1)We are no longer applying total adverse facts available

(AFA)to sales of products covered by the bars/wedges order made by Shandong Machinery Import & Export Corporation

(SMC)and are instead calculating a margin using the reported sales and factors of production

(FOP)data, and

(2)we have applied partial AFA to SMC for its failure to report a FOP for finish coating. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled “Final Results of Review.” We will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. DATES: Effective September 15, 2004. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Martin or Mark Manning, Office of AD/CVD Enforcement, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-3936 and

(202)482-5253, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On March 10, 2004, the Department published in the **Federal Register** the preliminary results of the antidumping administrative reviews of HFHTs from the PRC. *See Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Administrative Reviews, Preliminary Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, and Determination Not To Revoke in Part* , 69 FR 11371 (March 10, 2004) ( *Preliminary Results* ). In response to the Department's invitation to comment on the *Preliminary Results* of these reviews, the petitioner, Ames True Temper, and the respondents filed case briefs on April 16, 2004 and rebuttal briefs on April 21, 2004. The respondents in these reviews are Shangdong Huarong Machinery Co., Ltd. (Huarong), Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation and Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation, Ltd. (LMC/LIMAC), SMC, and Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation (TMC). No interested party requested a public hearing in these reviews. Scope of Review The products covered by these administrative reviews are HFHTs 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 over 18 inches in length, track tools and wedges (bars/wedges);

(3)picks and mattocks (picks/mattocks); and

(4)axes, adzes and similar hewing tools (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 Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 8205.20.60, 8205.59.30, 8201.30.00, and 8201.40.60. Specifically excluded from these investigations 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. The Department has issued four conclusive scope rulings regarding the merchandise covered by these orders:

(1)On August 16, 1993, the Department found the “Max Multi-Purpose Axe,” imported by the Forrest Tool Company, to be within the scope of the axes/adzes order;

(2)on March 8, 2001, the Department found “18-inch” and “24-inch” pry bars, produced without dies, imported by Olympia Industrial, Inc. and SMC Pacific Tools, Inc., to be within the scope of the bars/wedges order;

(3)on March 8, 2001, the Department found the “Pulaski” tool, produced without dies by TMC, to be within the scope of the axes/adzes order; and

(4)on March 8, 2001, the Department found the “skinning axe,” imported by Import Traders, Inc., to be within the scope of the axes/adzes order. Period of Review The period of review

(POR)is February 1, 2002 through January 31, 2003. Rescission of Review We preliminarily rescinded these reviews with respect to Zhenjiang All Joy Light Industrial Products & Textiles; Linshu Jinrun Ironware & Tools Co., Ltd.; Jinhua Runhua Foreign Trade Co., Ltd.; Tian Rui International Trade Co., Ltd.; Jinhua Twin-Star Tools Co., Ltd.; Jinma, Ltd.; Hebei Machinery Import & Export Corporation; Chenzhou Estar Enterprises Ltd.; China National Machinery Import & Export Corporation; and Ningbo Tiangong Tools Co., Ltd., which reported that they did not sell merchandise subject to any of the four HFHT antidumping orders during the POR. We also preliminarily rescinded the review of Huarong and LMC/LIMAC with respect to the hammers/sledges and picks/mattocks orders, since Huarong and LMC/LIMAC reported that they made no shipments of subject hammers/sledges and picks/mattocks during the POR. The Department reviewed CBP data, which supports the claims that these companies did not export subject merchandise during the POR. Furthermore, no party has placed evidence on the record demonstrating that these companies exported the merchandise identified above during the POR. We received comments on these preliminary rescissions from the petitioner, Huarong, and LMC/LIMAC. After analyzing these comments we continue to find that it is appropriate to rescind these reviews. For a discussion of these comments, *see* Memorandum from Jeffrey May, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to James J. Jochum, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Twelfth Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Orders on Heavy Forged Hand Tools from the People's Republic of China,” dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and consistent with the Department's practice, we are rescinding these administrative reviews with respect to the companies and merchandise identified above. Determination To Not Revoke in Part We preliminarily determined that SMC does not qualify for revocation of the order on hammers/sledges under 19 CFR 351.222(b) and

(e)because SMC did not ship hammers/sledges produced by its supplier to the United States in commercial quantities during the three consecutive years under consideration. Furthermore, we preliminarily determined that LMC/LIMAC does not qualify for revocation of the order on bars/wedges under 19 CFR 351.222(b) and

(e)because the Department preliminarily found that the use of AFA was warranted with respect to LMC/LIMAC's sales of bars/wedges during the POR. The petitioner, SMC, and LMC/LIMAC submitted comments on these preliminary determinations not to revoke in part. After analyzing these comments, we continue to find that, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b) and (e), SMC does not qualify for revocation of the order on hammers/sledges and LMC/LIMAC does not qualify for revocation of the order on bars/wedges. For a discussion of these comments, *see* Issues and Decision Memorandum. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to these administrative reviews are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues that parties have raised is attached to this notice as an appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in these reviews, and the corresponding recommendations, in the Issues and Decision Memorandum that is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on Import Administration's Web site at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov* . The paper copy and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Facts Available In the *Preliminary Results* , we based the dumping margins for the respondents Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, SMC, and TMC on total AFA for their sales of merchandise subject to certain HFHTs orders pursuant to sections 776(a) and 776(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). *See Preliminary Results* , 69 FR at 11375. We continue to apply total AFA to Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and TMC because these respondents significantly impeded our ability to

(1)Complete the review of the bars/wedges order, pursuant section 751 of the Act, and

(2)impose the correct antidumping duties, as mandated by section 731 of the Act. Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and TMC participated in an “agent” sales scheme whereby one PRC company allowed another PRC company to enter subject merchandise under the first company's invoices. In addition, we continue to apply total AFA to certain respondents that failed to provide sales and FOP information that was requested by the Department in the reviews of the axes/adzes (Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and SMC), bars/wedges (TMC), and picks/mattocks

(SMC)antidumping orders. Lastly, we continue to find that the companies that constitute the PRC-wide entity, including Jiangsu Guotai International Group Huatai Import & Export Company, Ltd., which did not establish its entitlement to a separate rate, failed to provide certain requested information. For this reason, we continue to find that, in accordance with sections 776(a)(2)(A), (B), and

(C)of the Act, it is appropriate to base the PRC-wide margin in these reviews on total AFA. As in the *Preliminary Results* , we are assigning as AFA the PRC-wide rates published in the most recently completed administrative reviews of the HFHTs orders. *See Heavy Forged Hand Tools, Finished or Unfinished, With or Without Handles, From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of the Order on Bars and Wedges* , 68 FR 53347 (September 10, 2003) ( *11th Review Final Results* ). As AFA, we are assigning the sales of

(1)Axes/adzes made by Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and SMC the current PRC-wide rate of 55.74 percent;

(2)bars/wedges made by Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and TMC the current PRC-wide rate of 139.31 percent; and

(3)picks/mattocks made by SMC the current the PRC-wide rate of 98.77 percent. Although we are applying total AFA to the PRC-wide entity for all four classes or kinds of subject merchandise in this review, the rates assigned to this entity have not changed from the *11th Review Final Results* . A complete explanation of the selection, corroboration, and application of AFA can be found in the *Preliminary Results* . *See Preliminary Determination* , 69 FR at 11375-11380. The Department received comments and rebuttal comments with regard to certain aspects of our selection and application of AFA. *See Issues and Decision Memorandum* , at Comments 17-21. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made one change in our application of AFA from the *Preliminary Results* . For the final results, the Department will not apply AFA to SMC's sales of bars/wedges. *See Issues and Decision Memorandum* , at Comment 18. Other than this change, nothing has changed since the *Preliminary Results* that would affect the Department's selection, corroboration, and application of facts available for the above-referenced companies and orders. Accordingly, for the final results, we continue to apply AFA as noted above. Final Results of Review We determine that the following weighted-average percentage margins exist for the period February 1, 2002, through January 31, 2003: Manufacturer/Exporter Margin (percent) Shandong Huarong Machinery Corporation Limited (Huarong): Axes/Adzes 55.74 Bars/Wedges 139.31 Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation (LMC)/Liaoning Machinery Import & Export Corporation Ltd. (LIMAC): Axes/Adzes 55.74 Bars/Wedges 139.31 Shandong Machinery Import & Export Corporation (SMC): Axes/Adzes 55.74 Bars/Wedges 5.40 Hammers/Sledges 0.02 Picks/Mattocks 98.77 Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Corporation (TMC): Axes/Adzes 10.49 Bars/Wedges 139.31 Hammers/Sledges 6.46 Picks/Mattocks 4.76 PRC-Wide Entity: Axes/Adzes 55.74 Bars/Wedges 139.31 Hammers/Sledges 27.71 Picks/Mattocks 98.77 Cash Deposit Requirements The following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of these administrative reviews for all shipments of HFHTs from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of this notice, as provided for by section 751(a)(1) of the Act:

(1)The cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies named above will be the rates for those firms established in the final results of these administrative reviews;

(2)for any previously reviewed or investigated PRC or non-PRC exporter, not covered in these reviews, with a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the company-specific rate established in the most recent segment of these proceedings;

(3)for all other PRC exporters, the cash deposit rates will be the PRC-wide rates established in the final results of these reviews; and

(4)the cash deposit rate for any non-PRC exporter of subject merchandise from the PRC who does not have its own rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied the non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative reviews. The PRC-Wide Cash Deposit Rates The current PRC-wide cash deposit rates are 55.74 percent for Axes/Adzes, 139.31 percent for Bars/Wedges, 27.71 percent for Hammers/Sledges, and 98.77 percent for Picks/Mattocks. These rates are unchanged from the most recently completed administrative review. *See 11th Review Final Results* . These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative reviews. Assessment Rates Upon completion of these administrative reviews, the Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), for the respondents receiving calculated dumping margins, we calculated importer-specific per-unit duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of the dumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total quantity of those same sales. These importer-specific per-unit rates will be assessed uniformly on all entries of each importer that were made during the POR. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to antidumping duties any entries for which the importer-specific assessment rate is *de minimis* ( *i.e.* , less than 0.5 percent *ad valorem* ). In testing whether any importer-specific assessment rate is *de minimis* , we used the reported data to calculate the freight on board at the port of export

(FOB)price of U.S. sales and used this FOB price as an estimate for the entered value. For all shipments of subject merchandise for the four antidumping orders covering HFHTs from the PRC, exported by the respondents and imported by entities not identified by the respondents in their questionnaire responses, we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties at the cash deposit rate in effect on the date of the entry. Lastly, for the respondents receiving dumping rates based upon AFA, the Department, upon completion of these reviews, will instruct CBP to liquidate entries according to the AFA *ad valorem* rate. The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to CBP upon the completion of the final results of these administrative reviews. Reimbursement of Duties 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. Administrative Protective Orders 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 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written 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. These final results of administrative reviews are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: September 7, 2004. James J. Jochum, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix—Issues in Decision Memorandum Part I—Surrogate Value Issues Comment 1: The Department should use hexagonal steel bar as a surrogate for certain FOP. Comment 2: The Department should value marine insurance at 110 percent of invoice value. Comment 3: The Department did not apply the proper surrogate value for railroad rails. Comment 4: The Department should value pallets using hot- and cold-rolled sheet/strip because respondents' claims regarding the use of scrap metal for pallet manufacturing are unsupported. Comment 5: The Department should recalculate the finished weight of shipped goods. Comment 6: The Department should recalculate movement charges to include additional expenses. Comment 7: The Department should value the coating on tool heads/bodies. Part II—Company Specific Issues 1. Huarong Comment 8: The Department should calculate a margin and assign it to Huarong if Huarong is benefitting from the rate that it has been assigned as AFA. 2. LMC/LIMAC Comment 9: The Department should revoke the dumping order for bars/wedges produced by the Lishu factory and exported by LMC/LIMAC. 3. SMC Comment 10: The Department should apply AFA to SMC's ocean freight expense. Comment 11: The Department should find that SMC shipped commercial quantities and revoke the hammers/sledges order with respect to SMC. Comment 12: The Department should include sales made by SMC through an agent that are outside the POR. 4. TMC Comment 13: The Department should label a PRC supplier as an uncooperative interested party with respect to the axes/adzes and picks/mattocks it supplied to SMC and apply AFA to TMC's sales of axes/adzes, hammers/sledges, and bars/wedges produced by this PRC supplier. Comment 14: The Department should perform a *Shakeproof* analysis for TMC, which will show market economy purchases of ocean freight services to be insignificant. Comment 15: The Department should increase TMC's normal value

(NV)to account for the commission paid to its U.S. sales office. Comment 16: The Department should disregard the variable Style (3.21) used by TMC in reporting hammer sales. Part III—Issues Regarding the Use of Total AFA and Rescission of Certain Reviews Comment 17: The Department should not apply AFA while scope inquiries are pending. Comment 18: The Department should not apply AFA for the failure to report cast products. Comment 19: The Department should not apply AFA to agent sales made by Huarong, LMC/LIMAC, and TMC. Comment 20: The Department should establish “combination” cash deposit rates and utilize “master list” assessment rates. Comment 21: The Department should recalculate the AFA and PRC-wide rate of 139.31 percent for bars/wedges because this rate contains subsidized prices. Comment 22: The Department should reconsider its determination to rescind the review of hammers/sledges and picks/mattocks with respect to Huarong and LMC/LIMAC. Part IV—Issues Regarding Assessment Instructions Comment 23: The Department should deny the request by Olympia Industrial Incorporated to instruct CBP to liquidate entries of scrapers and tampers. Comment 24: The Department should correct the ministerial error in the draft assessment instructions. [FR Doc. E4-2194 Filed 9-14-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, United States Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of partially closed meeting. SUMMARY: The National Construction Safety Team

(NCST)Advisory Committee (Committee), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), will meet Tuesday, October 5, 2004, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Wednesday, October 6, 2004, from 8:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. The primary purpose of this meeting is to discuss draft findings of the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (WTC Investigation) and the Rhode Island Nightclub Investigation. Consequently, all of the first day and all but the last one and one-half hours of the second day will be held in closed session. The agenda may change to accommodate Committee business. The final agenda will be posted on the NIST Web site at *http://www.nist.gov/ncst.* DATES: The meeting will convene on October 5, 2004, at 8:30 a.m. and will adjourn at 3 p.m. on October 6, 2004. The closed portion of the meeting is scheduled to begin on October 5 at 8:30 a.m. and to end at 1:45 p.m. on October 6, 2004. The last portion of the meeting from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. on October 6, 2004, will be open to the public. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in the Administration Building, Room A1038 at NIST, Gaithersburg, Maryland. Please note admittance instructions under the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Cauffman, National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 8611, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-8611. Mr. Cauffman's e-mail address is *stephen.cauffman@nist.gov* and his phone number is

(301)975-6051. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee was established pursuant to Section 11 of the National Construction Safety Team Act (15 U.S.C. 7310 *et seq.* ). The Committee is composed of nine members appointed by the Director of NIST who were selected for their technical expertise and experience, established records of distinguished professional service, and their knowledge of issues affecting teams established under the NCST Act. The Committee will advise the Director of NIST on carrying out investigations of building failures conducted under the authorities of the NCST Act that became law in October 2002 and will review the procedures developed to implement the NCST Act and reports issued under section 8 of the NCST Act. Background information on the NCST Act and information on the NCST Advisory Committee is available at *http://www.nist.gov/ncst.* Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 2, notice is hereby given that the National Construction Safety Team

(NCST)Advisory Committee (Committee), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), will meet Tuesday, October 5, 2004, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Wednesday, October 6, 2004, from 8:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. at NIST headquarters in Gaithersburg, Maryland. The primary purpose of this meeting is to present draft findings of the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (WTC Investigation) and the Rhode Island Nightclub Investigation. The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the General Counsel, formally determined on August 2, 2004, that portions of the meeting of the National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee that involve discussions regarding the proprietary information and trade secrets of third parties, data and documents that may also be used in criminal cases or lawsuits, matters the premature disclosure of which would be likely to significantly frustrate implementation of a proposed agency action, and data collection status and the issuance of subpoenas may be closed in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4), (5), (9)(B), and

(10)respectively. Consequently, all of the first day and all but the last one and one-half hours of the second day will be held in closed session. The agenda may change to accommodate Committee business. The final agenda will be posted on the NIST Web site at *http://www.nist.gov/ncst.* Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions related to the Committee's affairs, the WTC Investigation, or the Rhode Island Investigation are invited to request a place on the agenda. On October 6, 2004, approximately one-half hour will be reserved for public comments, and speaking times will be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis. The amount of time per speaker will be determined by the number of requests received, but is likely to be 5 minutes each. Questions from the public will not be considered during this period. Speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, those who had wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, and those who were unable to attend in person are invited to submit written statements to the National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 8611, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-8611, via fax at

(301)975-6122, or electronically by e-mail to *ncstac@nist.gov.* All visitors to the NIST site are required to pre-register to be admitted. Anyone wishing to attend this meeting must register by close of business Friday, October 1, 2004, in order to attend. Please submit your name, time of arrival, e-mail address and phone number to Stephen Cauffman and he will provide you with instructions for admittance. Non-U.S. citizens must also submit their country of citizenship, title, employer/sponsor, and address. Mr. Cauffman's e-mail address is *stephen.cauffman@nist.gov* and his phone number is

(301)975-6051. Dated: September 9, 2004. Hratch G. Semerjian, Acting Director. [FR Doc. 04-20741 Filed 9-14-04; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 9

Traces to 9 documents

CFR