[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 39 (Monday, February 28, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10471-10473]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-4618]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-844-802]


Uranium From Uzbekistan; Preliminary Results of Sunset Review of 
Suspended Antidumping Duty Investigation

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of full sunset review: Uranium 
from Uzbekistan.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On August 2, 1999, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') initiated a sunset review of the antidumping duty 
suspension agreement on uranium from Uzbekistan (64 FR 41915) pursuant 
to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). 
On the basis of a notice of intent to participate filed on behalf of 
domestic and respondent interested parties, the Department determined 
to conduct a full review. As a result of this review, the Department 
preliminarily finds that revocation of the antidumping duty suspension 
agreement would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at 
the levels indicated in the Preliminary Results of Review section of 
this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 28, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn B. McCormick or Melissa G. 
Skinner, Office of Policy for Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
1930 or (202) 482-1560, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Statute and Regulations

    This review is being conducted pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752 
of the Act. The Department's procedures for the conduct of sunset 
reviews are set forth in Procedures for Conducting Five-year 
(``Sunset'') Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 
FR 13516 (March 20, 1998) (``Sunset Regulations'') and in CFR Part 351 
(1999) in general. Guidance on methodological or analytical issues 
relevant to the Department's conduct of sunset reviews is set forth in 
the Department's Policy Bulletin 98.3--Policies Regarding the Conduct 
of Five-year (``Sunset'') Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998) (``Sunset 
Policy Bulletin'').

Background

    On August 2, 1999, the Department initiated a sunset review of the 
antidumping duty suspension agreement on uranium from Uzbekistan (64 FR 
41915), pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act. The Department received 
Notices of Intent to Participate on behalf of domestic interested 
parties, the Ad Hoc Committee, \1\ USEC, Inc. and its subsidiary, the 
United States Enrichment Corporation (collectively, ``USEC''), and 
Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International 
Union, AFL-CIO (``PACE''), within the applicable deadline (August 17, 
1999) specified in section 351.218(d)(1)(i) of the Sunset Regulations. 
On August 27, 1999, we received a notice of intent to participate on 
behalf of AHUG.\2\ The Ad Hoc Committee claimed interested-party status 
under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as the only U.S. producers of a 
domestic like product; AHUG claimed interested-party status as 
industrial users of uranium; \3\ PACE claimed interested-party status 
as a union representing workers of two domestic gaseous diffusion 
plants that produce uranium products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Ad Hoc Committee consists of Rio Algom Mining 
Corporation, Uranium Resources Inc., and Cotter Corporation.
    \2\ AHUG consists of Ameren UE, Baltimore Gas and Electric Co., 
Carolina Power and Light Co., Commonwealth Edison Co., Consumers 
Energy, Duke Power Co., Entergy Services, Inc., FirstEnergy Nuclear 
Operating Co., Florida Power and Light Co., Northern States Power 
Co., PECO Energy Co., Southern Nuclear Operating Co., Texas 
Utilities Electric Co., and Virginia Power.
    \3\ The Department notes that, although industrial users are 
allowed to participate in sunset reviews, they are not considered 
``interested parties'' as defined in the statute and regulations. 
See section 771(9) and 777(h) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Ad Hoc Committee claims that, along with the Oil, Chemical and 
Atomic Workers International Union, it was the original petitioner in 
the suspended antidumping investigation and resulting suspension 
agreement under review (see September 1, 1999, Substantive Response of 
the Ad Hoc Committee at 4). AHUG did not submit a summary of its past 
participation in the proceeding.
    On September 1, 1999, the Government of Uzbekistan (``GOU'') and 
Navoi Mining and Metallurgical Combinat (``Navoi'') notified the 
Department of their intent to participate in the review. GOU is an 
interested party pursuant to section 771(9)(B) of the Act as the 
government of a country in which subject merchandise is produced and 
exported; Navoi is an

[[Page 10472]]

interested party pursuant to section 771(9)(A) of the Act as a foreign 
producer and exporter of subject merchandise. GOU and Navoi note that 
they actively participated in the proceedings in July 1992, once they 
became aware of the action brought by the United States against uranium 
from Uzbekistan.
    On September 1, 1999, we received complete substantive responses 
from the above domestic and respondent interested parties, and 
industrial users, with the exception of USEC and PACE,\4\ within the 
30-day deadline specified in the Sunset Regulations under section 
351.218(d)(3)(i). On September 2, 1999, we received a request for an 
extension to file rebuttal comments from the AHUG.\5\ Pursuant to 19 
CFR 351.302(b) (1999), the Department extended the deadline for all 
participants eligible to file rebuttal comments until September 13, 
1999.\6\ On September 14, 1999, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(A), the Department determined to conduct a full (240-
day) sunset review of this suspension agreement.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See September 9, 1999, Letter to the Secretary from Philip 
H. Potter withdrawing PACE from participation in the sunset reviews 
of uranium from Russia, Uzbekistan, and Ukraine.
    \5\ See September 2, 1999, Request for an Extension to File 
Rebuttal Comments in the Sunset Reviews of Uranium from Russia, 
Uzbekistan, and Ukraine from Shaw Pittman to the Office of Policy.
    \6\ See September 3, 1999, Letter from Jeffrey A. May, Director 
of the Office of Policy to Nancy A. Fischer of Shaw Pittman.
    \7\ See May 24, 1999, Memoranda for Jeffrey A. May, Re: Sunset 
Reviews of Uranium from Russia and Uzbekistan: Adequacy of 
Respondent Interested Party Response to the Notice of Initiation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 751(c)(5)(C)(v) of the Act, the 
Department may treat a review as extraordinarily complicated if it is a 
review of a transition order (i.e., an order in effect on January 1, 
1995). Accordingly, on November 22, 1999, the Department determined 
that the sunset review of the uranium investigation is extraordinarily 
complicated, and extended the time limit for completion of the 
preliminary results of this review until not later than February 18, 
2000, in accordance with section 751(c)(5)(B) of the Act.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Full 
Five-Year Reviews, 64 FR 66879 (November 30, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of Review

    The merchandise covered in the June 3, 1992, preliminary 
determination of the suspended investigation includes natural uranium 
in the form of uranium ores and concentrates; natural uranium metal and 
natural uranium compounds; alloys, dispersions (including cermets), 
ceramic products, and mixtures containing natural uranium or natural 
uranium compound; uranium enriched in U\235\ and its compounds; alloys 
dispersions (including cermets), ceramic products and mixtures 
containing uranium enriched in U\235\ or compounds or uranium enriched 
in U\235\; and any other forms of uranium within the same class or 
kind. According to the Department's preliminary determination, the 
uranium subject to these investigations is provided for under 
subheadings 2612.10.00.00, 2844.10.10.00, 2844.10.20.10, 2844.10.20.25, 
2844.10.20.50, 2844.10.20.55, 2844.10.50, 2844.20.00.10, 2844.20.00.20, 
2844.20.00.30, and 2844.20.00.50 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
the United States (``HTSUS'').\9\ In addition, the Department 
preliminarily determined that highly-enriched uranium (``HEU'') is not 
covered within the scope of the investigation, and that the subject 
merchandise constitutes a single class or kind of merchandise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Uranium from Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, 
Ukraine and Uzbekistan; and Preliminary Determination of Sales at 
Not Less Than Fair Value: Uranium from Armenia, Azerbaijan, 
Byelarus, Georgia, Moldova and Turkmenistan, 57 FR 23381, 23382 
(June 3, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 30, 1992, the Department issued a suspension of the 
antidumping duty investigation of uranium from Uzbekistan and an 
amendment of the preliminary determination.\10\ The suspension 
agreement (the ``Agreement'') provided that uranium ore from Uzbekistan 
that is milled into U3O8 and/or converted into 
UF6 in another country prior to direct and/or indirect 
importation into the United States is considered uranium from 
Uzbekistan and is subject to the terms of the Agreement.\11\ Further, 
uranium enriched in U235 in another country prior to direct 
and/or indirect importation into the United States is not considered 
uranium from Uzbekistan and is not subject to the terms of this 
Agreement.\12\ In this Agreement, imports of uranium ores and 
concentrates, natural uranium compounds, and all forms of enriched 
uranium are classifiable under HTSUS subheadings 2612.10.00, 
2844.10.20, 2844.20.00, respectively. Imports of natural uranium metal 
and forms of natural uranium other than compounds are classifiable 
under HTSUS subheadings 2844.10.10 and 2844.44.10.50. Although the 
above HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes, the written description remains dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Antidumping; Uranium from Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, 
Russia, Tajikistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan; Suspension of 
Investigations and Amendment of Preliminary Determinations, 57 FR 
49220 (October 30, 1992).
    \11\ Id. at 49255.
    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department determined in the amendment that HEU and any other 
forms of uranium within the same class or kind are included in the 
scope of the investigations.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id. at 49221.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this sunset review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum'' (``Decision Memo'') from Jeffrey A. May, Director, Office 
of Policy, Import Administration, to Robert S. LaRussa, Assistant 
Secretary for Import Administration, dated February 18, 2000, which is 
hereby adopted and incorporated by reference into this notice. The 
issues discussed in the attached Decision Memo include the likelihood 
of continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the 
margin likely to prevail were the suspension investigation terminated. 
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 B-099.
    In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be 
accessed directly on the Web at www.ita.doc.gov/import__admin/records/
frn/, under the heading ``Uzbekistan.'' The paper copy and electronic 
version of the Decision Memo are identical in content.

Preliminary Results of Review

    We determine that revocation of the antidumping duty suspension 
agreement on uranium from Uzbekistan would be likely to lead to 
continuation or recurrence of dumping at the following percentage 
weighted-average margin:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                   Manufacturer/exporters                     (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Uzbek manufacturers/exporters..........................       115.82
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of 
publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(c). Any 
hearing, if requested, will be held on April 18, 2000, in accordance 
with 19 CFR 351.310(d). Interested parties may submit case briefs no 
later than April 10, 2000, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(i). 
Rebuttal briefs, which

[[Page 10473]]

must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not 
later than April 14, 2000. The Department will issue a notice of final 
results of this sunset review, which will include the results of its 
analysis of issues raised in any such, no later than June 27, 2000.
    This five-year (``sunset'') review and notice are in accordance 
with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: February 18, 2000.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-4618 Filed 2-25-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P