Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from Japan: Initiation and Preliminary Results of Changed-Circumstances Review, 14679-14681 [E6-4224]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2006 / Notices
Notice and request for
comments.
ACTION:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended), the
Rural Utilities Service, an agency
delivering the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development
Utilities Programs, invites comments on
this information collection for which
approval from the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) will be requested.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be
received by May 22, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard C. Annan, Director, Program
Development and Regulatory Analysis,
USDA Rural Development, 1400
Independence Ave., SW., STOP 1522,
Room 5818 South Building,
Washington, DC 20250–1522.
Telephone: (202) 720–0784. Fax: (202)
720–8435.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office
of Management and Budget’s (OMB)
regulation (5 CFR 1320) implementing
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13) requires
that interested members of the public
and affected agencies have an
opportunity to comment on information
collection and recordkeeping activities
(see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice
identifies an information collection that
RUS is submitting to OMB for
reinstatement.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of
the Agency’s estimate of the burden of
the proposed collection of information
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology. Comments may be sent to:
Richard C. Annan, Director, Program
Development and Regulatory Analysis,
USDA Rural Development, STOP 1522,
1400 Independence Ave., SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–1522. FAX:
(202) 720–8435.
Title: 7 CFR 1744–C, Advance and
Disbursement of Funds—
Telecommunications.
OMB Control Number: 0572–0023.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:54 Mar 22, 2006
Jkt 208001
Type of Request: Revision of a
currently approved information
collection package.
Abstract: USDA Rural Development,
through the Rural Utilities Service,
manages the Telecommunications loan
program in accordance with the Rural
Electrification Act (RE Act) of 1936, 7
U.S.C. 901 et seq., as amended, and as
prescribed by OMB Circular A–129,
Policies for Federal Credit Programs and
Non-Tax Receivables.
In addition, the Farm Security and
Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Pub. L.
101–171) amended the RE Act to add
Title VI, Rural Broadband Access, to
provide loans and loan guarantees to
fund the cost of construction,
improvement, or acquisition of facilities
and equipment for the provision of
broadband service in eligible rural
communities. USDA Rural Development
therefore requires Telecommunications
and Broadband borrowers to submit
Form 481, Financial Requirement
Statement. This form implements
certain provisions of the standard Rural
Utilities Service loan documents by
setting forth requirements and
procedures to be followed by borrowers
in obtaining advances and making
disbursements of loan funds.
Estimate of Burden: Public reporting
for this collection of information is
estimated to average 1 hour per
response.
Respondents: Business or other for
profit, Not-for-profit institutions.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
177.
Estimated Number of Responses per
Respondent: 6.3.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on
Respondents: 1,223 hours.
Copies of this information collection
can be obtained from Joyce McNeil,
Program Development and Regulatory
Analysis at (202) 720–0812. FAX: (202)
720–8435. All responses to this notice
will be summarized and included in the
request for OMB approval. All
comments will also become a matter of
public record.
Dated: March 15, 2006.
James M. Andrew,
Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
[FR Doc. E6–4169 Filed 3–22–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–15–P
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14679
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–588–804]
Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from
Japan: Initiation and Preliminary
Results of Changed–Circumstances
Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to a petition for
an expedited changed–circumstances
review from Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd., and
Koyo Corporation of U.S.A., the
Department of Commerce is initiating a
changed–circumstances review of the
antidumping duty order on ball bearings
and parts thereof from Japan. We have
preliminarily concluded that JTEKT
Corporation is the successor–in-interest
to Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd., and, as a result,
should be accorded the same treatment
previously accorded to Koyo Seiko Co.,
Ltd., with regard to the antidumping
duty order on ball bearings and parts
thereof from Japan. Interested parties are
invited to comment on these
preliminary results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 23, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edythe Artman at (202) 482–3931 or
Richard Rimlinger at (202) 482–4477,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
The Department of Commerce (the
Department) published antidumping
duty orders on ball bearings, cylindrical
roller bearings, and spherical plain
bearings and parts thereof from Japan on
May 15, 1989. See Antidumping Duty
Orders: Ball Bearings, Cylindrical Roller
Bearings, and Spherical Plain Bearings,
and Parts Thereof from Japan, 54 FR
20904 (May 15, 1989). The orders on
cylindrical roller bearings and spherical
plain bearings and parts thereof from
Japan were revoked, effective January 1,
2000. See Revocation of Antidumping
Duty Orders on Certain Bearings From
Hungary, Japan, Romania, Sweden,
France, Germany, Italy, and the United
Kingdom, 65 FR 42667 (July 11, 2000).
Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd., and Koyo
Corporation of U.S.A. (collectively
Koyo) have participated in numerous
administrative reviews of the order on
ball bearings and parts thereof from
Japan. On February 3, 2006, Koyo
informed the Department that Koyo
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
14680
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2006 / Notices
Seiko Co., Ltd. (Koyo Seiko), had
changed its name to JTEKT Corporation
(JTEKT) and petitioned the Department
to conduct a changed–circumstances
review to confirm that JTEKT is the
successor–in-interest to Koyo Seiko for
purposes of determining antidumping–
duty liabilities subject to this order.1
Koyo also requested that the Department
conduct a changed–circumstances
review on an expedited basis, pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii). We did not
receive any other comments.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Scope of the Order
For a listing of scope determinations
which pertain to the order on ball
bearings and parts thereof, see the Scope
Determination Memorandum (Scope
Memorandum) from the Antifriction
Bearings Team to Laurie Parkhill, dated
March 2, 2006. The Scope
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 2004/
2005 administrative reviews of the
orders on antifriction bearings.
Initiation of Changed–Circumstances
Review
Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
and 19 CFR 351.216 (2005), the
Department will conduct a changed–
circumstances review upon receipt of
information concerning, or a request
from an interested party for a review of,
an antidumping duty order which
shows changed circumstances sufficient
to warrant a review of the order. The
information submitted by Koyo claiming
that JTEKT is the successor–in-interest
to Koyo Seiko demonstrates changed
circumstances sufficient to warrant such
a review. See 19 CFR 351.216(d).
In accordance with the above–
referenced regulation, the Department is
initiating a changed–circumstances
review to determine whether JTEKT is
the successor–in-interest to Koyo Seiko.
In determining whether one company is
the successor to another for purposes of
applying the antidumping duty law, the
Department examines a number of
factors including, but not limited to,
changes in management, production
facilities, supplier relationships, and
customer base. See Industrial
Phosphoric Acid From Israel: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 59 FR 6944
(February 14, 1994). Although no single
or even several of these factors will
necessarily provide a dispositive
1 Koyo clarified in its February 3, 2006,
submission that the name of Koyo Corporation of
U.S.A. will remain unchanged at this time.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:54 Mar 22, 2006
Jkt 208001
indication of succession, generally the
Department will consider one company
to be a successor to another company if
its resulting operation is similar to that
of its predecessor. See Brass Sheet and
Strip from Canada; Notice of Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460
(May 13, 1992), at Comment 1
(‘‘generally, in the case of an asset
acquisition, the Department will
consider the acquiring company to be a
successor to the company covered by
the antidumping duty order, and thus
subject to its duty deposit rate, if the
resulting operation is essentially similar
to that existing before the acquisition’’).
Thus, if the evidence demonstrates that,
with respect to the production and sale
of the subject merchandise, the new
company operates as the same business
entity as the prior company, the
Department will assign the new
company the cash–deposit rate of its
predecessor. Id.; Notice of Final Results
of Changed Circumstances
Antidumping Administrative Review:
Polychloroprene Rubber from Japan, 67
FR 58 (January 2, 2002); see also
Circular Welded Non–Alloy Steel Pipe
from Korea; Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 63 FR 20572
(April 27, 1998), where the Department
found successorship where the
company only changed its name and did
not change its operations.In its February
3, 2006, submission, Koyo provided
information to demonstrate that JTEKT
is the successor–in-interest to Koyo
Seiko. Koyo submitted a press release
announcing the start of JTEKT due to
the merger of Koyo Seiko and another
company, Toyoda Machine Works, Ltd.
(Toyoda), on January 1, 2006. See
exhibit A of Koyo’s February 3, 2006,
submission. Koyo also submitted the
certification of JTEKT’s history that is
recorded in the registration book
maintained by the local government
authority and shows the merger between
Koyo Seiko and Toyoda. See exhibit B
of the February 3, 2006, submission.
Additional information in Koyo’s
February 3, 2006, submission shows
that JTEKT’s management, production
facilities, suppliers, and customer base
are consistent with those of Koyo Seiko.
With respect to management prior to
and following the name change, the
press release discloses that 21 of Koyo
Seiko’s 28 officers and directors have
retained their positions in the new
company. The press release also shows
that Koyo Seiko’s production facilities
have been placed within a distinct
bearings division of JTEKT and JTEKT’s
corporate guide, that appears in exhibit
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
D of the February 3, 2006, submission,
lists the four primary product lines of
JTEKT, one of which is bearings.
Furthermore, Koyo submitted
information from JTEKT’s website that
shows that Koyo Seiko’s production
facilities are listed as domestic plants of
JTEKT. See exhibit E of Koyo’s February
3, 2006, submission. Thus, based on the
documentation provided by Koyo, we
find that the use of Koyo Seiko’s
production facilities has remained the
same since the name change.
Koyo stated in its February 3, 2006,
submission that, because Toyoda had
not produced or sold bearing products,
production and sale of subject
merchandise would continue under
JTEKT in the same manner as performed
by Koyo Seiko and Koyo did not
anticipate any changes in supplier
relationships or customer base from that
of Koyo Seiko. In exhibit F of its
submission, Koyo provided copies of
the letters that it sent to its customers
at the time of the merger in order to
document JTEKT’s intent to retain Koyo
Seiko’s customers. In addition, Koyo
submitted photographs of JTEKT’s
packaging in order to show that Koyo’s
trademark will continue to figure
prominently in sales of bearings
formerly produced by Koyo Seiko
because of the strong reputation and
goodwill associated with the Koyo
brand. See exhibit G of the February 3,
2006, submission. Koyo observed that
its trademark also appears in JTEKT’s
corporate guide, as can be seen in
exhibit D. Thus, based on the
information provided in Koyo’s
submission, we find that it is JTEKT’s
intent to maintain the suppliers and
customer base of Koyo Seiko.
Therefore, we conclude that Koyo’s
petition for a changed–circumstances
review demonstrates that no major
changes have occurred with respect to
Koyo Seiko’s management, production
facilities, suppliers, or customer base as
a result of its merger with Toyoda and
name change to JTEKT.
When it concludes that expedited
action is warranted, the Department
may publish the notice of initiation and
preliminary results for a changed–
circumstances review concurrently. See
19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii). See also
Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand;
Initiation and Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 69 FR 30878
(June 1, 2004). Based on the information
on the record, we have determined that
expedition of this changed–
circumstances review is warranted. In
this case, we preliminarily find that
JTEKT is the successor–in-interest to
Koyo Seiko and, as such, is entitled to
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2006 / Notices
Koyo Seiko’s cash–deposit rate with
respect to entries of subject
merchandise.
Should our final results remain the
same as these preliminary results,
effective the date of publication of the
final results we will instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection to assign
entries of merchandise produced or
exported by JTEKT the antidumping
duty cash–deposit rate applicable to
Koyo Seiko.
Public Comment
Any interested party may request a
hearing within 14 days of publication of
this notice. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Any
hearing, if requested, will be held 28
days after the date of publication of this
notice or the first working day
thereafter. Interested parties may submit
case briefs and/or written comments not
later than 14 days after the date of
publication of this notice. Rebuttal
briefs and rebuttals to written
comments, which must be limited to
issues raised in such briefs or
comments, may be filed not later than
21 days after the date of publication of
this notice. Parties who submit case
briefs or rebuttal briefs in this changed–
circumstances review are requested to
submit with each argument (1) a
statement of the issue and (2) a brief
summary of the argument with an
electronic version included. Consistent
with 19 CFR 351.216(e), we will issue
the final results of this changed–
circumstances review no later than 270
days after the date on which this review
was initiated or within 45 days of
publication of these preliminary results
if all parties agree to our preliminary
finding.
We are issuing and publishing this
initiation and preliminary results notice
in accordance with sections 751(b)(1)
and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.216 and 351.221(c)(3).
Dated: March 16, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–4224 Filed 3–22–06; 8:45 am]
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:54 Mar 22, 2006
Jkt 208001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–831]
Notice of Extension of Time Limit for
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and New
Shipper Reviews: Fresh Garlic from
the People’s Republic of China
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 23, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Katharine Huang, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 8, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone; (202)
482–1271.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
14681
these reviews by March 18, 2006.1
Several significant issues were raised in
the briefs which warrant further
analysis, including the ‘‘intermediate–
product valuation methodology,’’ which
we applied in the Preliminary Results,
and the surrogate value for garlic bulbs
(i.e., the intermediate product). For
these reasons, the Department is
extending the time limit for the
completion of these final results by 30
days until no later than Monday, April
17, 2006, which is 150 days from the
date on which the notice of the
Preliminary Results was published.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A)
and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: March 16, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–4214 Filed 3–22–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
Background
The Department of Commerce (‘‘The
Department’’) published the preliminary
results of the administrative review and
new shipper reviews of the antidumping
duty order on fresh garlic from the
People’s Republic of China covering the
period November 1, 2003, through
October 31, 2004, on November 18,
2005. See Fresh Garlic from the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and Preliminary Results of New
Shipper Reviews, 70 FR 69942
(November 18, 2005) (‘‘Preliminary
Results’’).
Extension of Time Limits for Final
Results
Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), and section 351.213(h)(1) of the
Department’s regulations, the
Department shall issue the preliminary
results of an administrative review
within 245 days after the last day of the
anniversary month of the date of
publication of the antidumping duty
order. The Act further provides that the
Department shall issue the final results
of review within 120 days after the date
on which the notice of the preliminary
results was published in the Federal
Register. However, if the Department
determines that it is not practicable to
complete the review within this time
period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act
and section 351.213(h)(2) of the
Department’s regulations allow the
Department to extend the 245-day
period to 365 days and the 120-day
period to 180 days. We have determined
that it is not practicable to complete
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–893]
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp
from the People’s Republic of China:
Initiation of New Shipper Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 23, 2006.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) has determined that a
request to conduct a new shipper review
of the antidumping duty order on frozen
warmwater shrimp from the People’s
Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’), received on
February 22, 2006, meets the statutory
and regulatory requirements for
initiation. Therefore, in accordance with
19 CFR 351.214(d), we are initiating a
new shipper review for Hai Li Aquatic
Co., Ltd. Zhao An, Fujian (also known
as Haili Aquatic Co. Ltd. Zhaoan,
Fujian) (‘‘Hai Li’’). The period of review
(‘‘POR’’) for this new shipper review is
July 16, 2004, through January 31,
2006.1
AGENCY:
1 As noted in the Preliminary Results, the two
new shipper respondents and the petitioners agreed
to waive the time limits applicable to the new
shipper reviews and to permit the Department to
conduct the new shipper reviews concurrently with
the administrative review.
1 The antidumping duty order for certain frozen
warmwater shrimp from PRC was published on
February 1, 2005. See Notice of Amended Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Frozen
Warmwater Shrimp From the People’s Republic of
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
Continued
23MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 56 (Thursday, March 23, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14679-14681]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-4224]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-588-804]
Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from Japan: Initiation and
Preliminary Results of Changed-Circumstances Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to a petition for an expedited changed-
circumstances review from Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd., and Koyo Corporation of
U.S.A., the Department of Commerce is initiating a changed-
circumstances review of the antidumping duty order on ball bearings and
parts thereof from Japan. We have preliminarily concluded that JTEKT
Corporation is the successor-in-interest to Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd., and,
as a result, should be accorded the same treatment previously accorded
to Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd., with regard to the antidumping duty order on
ball bearings and parts thereof from Japan. Interested parties are
invited to comment on these preliminary results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 23, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edythe Artman at (202) 482-3931 or
Richard Rimlinger at (202) 482-4477, AD/CVD Operations, Office 5,
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department of Commerce (the Department) published antidumping
duty orders on ball bearings, cylindrical roller bearings, and
spherical plain bearings and parts thereof from Japan on May 15, 1989.
See Antidumping Duty Orders: Ball Bearings, Cylindrical Roller
Bearings, and Spherical Plain Bearings, and Parts Thereof from Japan,
54 FR 20904 (May 15, 1989). The orders on cylindrical roller bearings
and spherical plain bearings and parts thereof from Japan were revoked,
effective January 1, 2000. See Revocation of Antidumping Duty Orders on
Certain Bearings From Hungary, Japan, Romania, Sweden, France, Germany,
Italy, and the United Kingdom, 65 FR 42667 (July 11, 2000). Koyo Seiko
Co., Ltd., and Koyo Corporation of U.S.A. (collectively Koyo) have
participated in numerous administrative reviews of the order on ball
bearings and parts thereof from Japan. On February 3, 2006, Koyo
informed the Department that Koyo
[[Page 14680]]
Seiko Co., Ltd. (Koyo Seiko), had changed its name to JTEKT Corporation
(JTEKT) and petitioned the Department to conduct a changed-
circumstances review to confirm that JTEKT is the successor-in-interest
to Koyo Seiko for purposes of determining antidumping-duty liabilities
subject to this order.\1\ Koyo also requested that the Department
conduct a changed-circumstances review on an expedited basis, pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii). We did not receive any other comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Koyo clarified in its February 3, 2006, submission that the
name of Koyo Corporation of U.S.A. will remain unchanged at this
time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
For a listing of scope determinations which pertain to the order on
ball bearings and parts thereof, see the Scope Determination Memorandum
(Scope Memorandum) from the Antifriction Bearings Team to Laurie
Parkhill, dated March 2, 2006. The Scope 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 2004/2005 administrative
reviews of the orders on antifriction bearings.
Initiation of Changed-Circumstances Review
Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act), and 19 CFR 351.216 (2005), the Department will conduct a
changed-circumstances review upon receipt of information concerning, or
a request from an interested party for a review of, an antidumping duty
order which shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review
of the order. The information submitted by Koyo claiming that JTEKT is
the successor-in-interest to Koyo Seiko demonstrates changed
circumstances sufficient to warrant such a review. See 19 CFR
351.216(d).
In accordance with the above-referenced regulation, the Department
is initiating a changed-circumstances review to determine whether JTEKT
is the successor-in-interest to Koyo Seiko. In determining whether one
company is the successor to another for purposes of applying the
antidumping duty law, the Department examines a number of factors
including, but not limited to, changes in management, production
facilities, supplier relationships, and customer base. See Industrial
Phosphoric Acid From Israel: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 59 FR 6944 (February 14, 1994). Although no
single or even several of these factors will necessarily provide a
dispositive indication of succession, generally the Department will
consider one company to be a successor to another company if its
resulting operation is similar to that of its predecessor. See Brass
Sheet and Strip from Canada; Notice of Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460 (May 13, 1992), at Comment 1
(``generally, in the case of an asset acquisition, the Department will
consider the acquiring company to be a successor to the company covered
by the antidumping duty order, and thus subject to its duty deposit
rate, if the resulting operation is essentially similar to that
existing before the acquisition''). Thus, if the evidence demonstrates
that, with respect to the production and sale of the subject
merchandise, the new company operates as the same business entity as
the prior company, the Department will assign the new company the cash-
deposit rate of its predecessor. Id.; Notice of Final Results of
Changed Circumstances Antidumping Administrative Review:
Polychloroprene Rubber from Japan, 67 FR 58 (January 2, 2002); see also
Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from Korea; Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 63 FR 20572 (April 27,
1998), where the Department found successorship where the company only
changed its name and did not change its operations.In its February 3,
2006, submission, Koyo provided information to demonstrate that JTEKT
is the successor-in-interest to Koyo Seiko. Koyo submitted a press
release announcing the start of JTEKT due to the merger of Koyo Seiko
and another company, Toyoda Machine Works, Ltd. (Toyoda), on January 1,
2006. See exhibit A of Koyo's February 3, 2006, submission. Koyo also
submitted the certification of JTEKT's history that is recorded in the
registration book maintained by the local government authority and
shows the merger between Koyo Seiko and Toyoda. See exhibit B of the
February 3, 2006, submission.
Additional information in Koyo's February 3, 2006, submission shows
that JTEKT's management, production facilities, suppliers, and customer
base are consistent with those of Koyo Seiko. With respect to
management prior to and following the name change, the press release
discloses that 21 of Koyo Seiko's 28 officers and directors have
retained their positions in the new company. The press release also
shows that Koyo Seiko's production facilities have been placed within a
distinct bearings division of JTEKT and JTEKT's corporate guide, that
appears in exhibit D of the February 3, 2006, submission, lists the
four primary product lines of JTEKT, one of which is bearings.
Furthermore, Koyo submitted information from JTEKT's website that shows
that Koyo Seiko's production facilities are listed as domestic plants
of JTEKT. See exhibit E of Koyo's February 3, 2006, submission. Thus,
based on the documentation provided by Koyo, we find that the use of
Koyo Seiko's production facilities has remained the same since the name
change.
Koyo stated in its February 3, 2006, submission that, because
Toyoda had not produced or sold bearing products, production and sale
of subject merchandise would continue under JTEKT in the same manner as
performed by Koyo Seiko and Koyo did not anticipate any changes in
supplier relationships or customer base from that of Koyo Seiko. In
exhibit F of its submission, Koyo provided copies of the letters that
it sent to its customers at the time of the merger in order to document
JTEKT's intent to retain Koyo Seiko's customers. In addition, Koyo
submitted photographs of JTEKT's packaging in order to show that Koyo's
trademark will continue to figure prominently in sales of bearings
formerly produced by Koyo Seiko because of the strong reputation and
goodwill associated with the Koyo brand. See exhibit G of the February
3, 2006, submission. Koyo observed that its trademark also appears in
JTEKT's corporate guide, as can be seen in exhibit D. Thus, based on
the information provided in Koyo's submission, we find that it is
JTEKT's intent to maintain the suppliers and customer base of Koyo
Seiko.
Therefore, we conclude that Koyo's petition for a changed-
circumstances review demonstrates that no major changes have occurred
with respect to Koyo Seiko's management, production facilities,
suppliers, or customer base as a result of its merger with Toyoda and
name change to JTEKT.
When it concludes that expedited action is warranted, the
Department may publish the notice of initiation and preliminary results
for a changed-circumstances review concurrently. See 19 CFR
351.221(c)(3)(ii). See also Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand;
Initiation and Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 69 FR 30878 (June 1, 2004). Based on the
information on the record, we have determined that expedition of this
changed-circumstances review is warranted. In this case, we
preliminarily find that JTEKT is the successor-in-interest to Koyo
Seiko and, as such, is entitled to
[[Page 14681]]
Koyo Seiko's cash-deposit rate with respect to entries of subject
merchandise.
Should our final results remain the same as these preliminary
results, effective the date of publication of the final results we will
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to assign entries of
merchandise produced or exported by JTEKT the antidumping duty cash-
deposit rate applicable to Koyo Seiko.
Public Comment
Any interested party may request a hearing within 14 days of
publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Any hearing, if
requested, will be held 28 days after the date of publication of this
notice or the first working day thereafter. Interested parties may
submit case briefs and/or written comments not later than 14 days after
the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals
to written comments, which must be limited to issues raised in such
briefs or comments, may be filed not later than 21 days after the date
of publication of this notice. Parties who submit case briefs or
rebuttal briefs in this changed-circumstances review are requested to
submit with each argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief
summary of the argument with an electronic version included. Consistent
with 19 CFR 351.216(e), we will issue the final results of this
changed-circumstances review no later than 270 days after the date on
which this review was initiated or within 45 days of publication of
these preliminary results if all parties agree to our preliminary
finding.
We are issuing and publishing this initiation and preliminary
results notice in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.216 and 351.221(c)(3).
Dated: March 16, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6-4224 Filed 3-22-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
