Large Newspaper Printing Presses and Components Thereof, Whether Assembled or Unassembled, From Japan: Reconsideration of Sunset Review, 19164-19166 [E6-5500]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
19164
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 2006 / Notices
Secretary for Export Administration
with respect to technical questions that
affect the level of export controls
applicable to computer systems and
technology.
2. Remarks from the Bureau of
Industry and Security Management.
3. Industry Presentations.
4. New Business.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to
the provisions of the rules and
regulations of the U.S. Commission on
Civil Rights (USCCR), that a meeting of
the North Dakota State Advisory
Committee will convene at 1 p.m. (CDT)
and adjourn at 4 p.m. (CDT), Thursday,
April 20, 2006, at the Radisson Hotel,
201–5th Street, N, Fargo, ND 58102. The
purpose of the meeting is to conduct
orientation for new advisory committee
members, provide an overview of the
USCCR including recent Commission
activities and new policies affecting
advisory committees, brief Committee
members on civil rights developments
in the state including predatory lending,
discrimination, race relations, and the
administration of justice. The
Committee will also discuss the regional
project, ‘‘Confronting Discrimination in
Reservation Border Town
Communities’’ in North Dakota.
Persons desiring additional
information, or planning a presentation
to the Committee, should contact John
F. Dulles, Director of the Rocky
Mountain Regional Office, (303) 866–
1040 (TDD 303–866–1049). Hearingimpaired persons who will attend the
meeting and require the services of a
sign language interpreter should contact
the Regional Office at least ten (10)
working days before the scheduled date
of the meeting. . It was not possible to
publish this notice 15 days in advance
of the meeting date because of internal
processing delays.
The meeting will be conducted
pursuant to the provisions of the rules
and regulations of the Commission.
Agenda
1. Opening Remarks and
Introductions.
2. Update on BIS Programs and
Activities.
3. Summary of Export Control
Workshop at SEMICON.
4. Introduction of Proposals for
Category 5.
5. Frequency Synthesizer Assembly
Overview.
6. VoIP Networks.
7. 4A3b vs 4A3c Discussions.
The meeting will be open to the
public and a limited number of seats
will be available. To the extent that time
permits, members of the public may
present oral statements to the
Committee. Written statements may be
submitted at any time before or after the
meeting. However, to facilitate
distribution of public presentation
materials to the Committee members,
the Committee suggests that presenters
forward the public presentation
materials two weeks prior to the
meeting date to Yvette Springer at
Yspringer@bis.doc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yvette Springer on (202) 482–4814.
5. Discussion of matters determined to
be exempt from the provisions relating
to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C.
app. 2 §§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3).
A limited number of seats will be
available during the public session of
the meeting. Reservations are not
accepted. To the extent that time
permits, members of the public may
present oral statements to the
Committee. The public may submit
written statements at any time before or
after the meeting. However, to facilitate
distribution of public presentation
materials to the Committee members,
the Committee suggests that the
materials be forwarded before the
meeting to Ms. Yvette Springer at
Yspringer@bis.doc.gov.
The Assistant Secretary for
Administration, with the concurrence of
the General Counsel, formally
determined on March 30, 2006,
pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5
U.S.C. app. 2 10(d)), that the portion of
this meeting dealing with pre-decisional
changes to the Commerce Control List
and U.S. export control policies shall be
exempt from the provisions relating to
public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app.
2 §§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The remaining
portions of the meeting will be open to
the public.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yvette Springer on (202) 482–4814.
Dated at Washington, DC, March 28, 2006.
Ivy L. Davis,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 06–3552 Filed 4–10–06; 12:29 pm]
Sensors and Instrumentation
Technical Advisory Committee; Notice
of Partially Closed Meeting
COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS
Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting
of the North Dakota Advisory
Committee
BILLING CODE 6335–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
HSRObinson on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Information Systems, Technical
Advisory Committee; Notice of Open
Meeting
The Information Systems Technical
Advisory Committee will meet on April
26 and 27, 2006, in the Herbert C.
Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th and
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC. The Committee
advises the Office of the Assistant
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:20 Apr 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
Dated: April 7, 2006.
Yvette Springer,
Committee Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 06–3555 Filed 4–12–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–JT–M
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
The Sensors and Instrumentation
Technical Advisory Committee (SITAC)
will meet on April 25, 2006, 9:30 a.m.,
in the Herbert C. Hoover Building,
Room 3884, 14th Street between
Constitution and Pennsylvania
Avenues, NW., Washington, DC. The
Committee advises the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Export
Administration on technical questions
that affect the level of export controls
applicable to sensors and
instrumentation equipment and
technology.
Agenda
Public Session
1. Welcome and Introductions.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Closed Session
Dated: April 7, 2006.
Yvette Springer,
Committee Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 06–3518 Filed 4–12–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–JT–M
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–588–837]
Large Newspaper Printing Presses and
Components Thereof, Whether
Assembled or Unassembled, From
Japan: Reconsideration of Sunset
Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(‘‘the Department’’) is initiating a review
to reconsider the five-year (‘‘sunset’’)
review that resulted in revocation of the
antidumping duty order on large
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\13APN1.SGM
13APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 2006 / Notices
newspaper printing presses and
components thereof, whether assembled
or unassembled, from Japan.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
April 13, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David J. Goldberger or Kate Johnson,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone (202) 482–4136, or (202) 482–
4929 respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
HSRObinson on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Background
On February 25, 2002, the Department
revoked the antidumping duty order on
large newspaper printing presses (LNPP)
from Japan under a five–year sunset
review pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(A)
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act), because the only domestic
interested party in the sunset review,
Goss International Corporation (Goss),
withdrew its participation and thus its
interest in the review. See Large
Newspaper Printing Presses and
Components Thereof, Whether
Assembled or Unassembled, from Japan
(A–588–837) and Germany (A–428–821):
Notice of Final Results of Five-Year
Sunset Reviews and Revocation of
Antidumping Duty Orders, 67 FR 8522
(February 25, 2002).
On May 5, 2005, the Department self–
initiated a changed circumstances
review to consider information
contained in a federal court decision,
Goss International Corp. v. Tokyo Kikai
Seisakusho, Ltd., 321 F.Supp.2d 1039
(N.D. Iowa 2004). See Large Newspaper
Printing Presses and Components
Thereof, Whether Assembled or
Unassembled, from Japan: Initiation of
Changed Circumstances Review, 70 FR
24524 (May 10, 2005). On March 8,
2006, the Department published the
final results of that changed
circumstances review. See Large
Newspaper Printing Presses and
Components Thereof, Whether
Assembled or Unassembled, from Japan:
Final Results of Changed Circumstances
Review (71 FR 11590) (CCR Final
Results). In the final results, the
Department stated that it would reopen
for reconsideration the sunset review
that resulted in revocation of this order.
The Department further stated that it
would conduct this reconsideration of
the sunset review following the
procedures outlined in section 751(c) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.218.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:20 Apr 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
Initiation of Reconsideration of Sunset
Review
As detailed in CCR Final Results,
particularly at Comments 2 and 3 of the
accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum, the misconduct of the
respondent Tokyo Kikai Seisakusho,
Ltd. (TKS) during the 1997–1998
administrative review of the LNPP
antidumping duty order, which
ultimately led to its company–specific
revocation from the underlying order,
substantially tainted the integrity of the
proceeding, and may have significantly
undermined the integrity of the sunset
review results, including the parties’
decisions whether or not to participate
in the sunset review. As such, the
results of that sunset review are
unreliable. Accordingly, the Department
will reconsider the sunset review it
conducted when the order was in place,
but when the Department was unaware
of misstatements made by TKS with the
purpose of avoiding a determination of
dumping. This action is warranted
because the Department has the
responsibility and authority to defend
the integrity of its past determinations
and to ensure the integrity of its future
proceedings against deliberate,
misleading behavior. Therefore, we are
conducting anew the five–year sunset
review of LNPP from Japan. As in a
situation when a suspension agreement
is terminated and an investigation is
resumed, the Department will examine
and collect information from the prior
sunset review period (i.e., September 4,
1996, through September 4, 2001). See,
e.g., Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Uranium from the
Republic of Kazakhstan, 64 FR 31179
(June 10, 1999). See also Fresh
Tomatoes from Mexico: Notice of Intent
to Terminate Suspension Agreement,
Intent to Terminate the Five-Year
Sunset Review, Intent to Resume
Antidumping Investigation, and Request
for Comments on the Use of Updated
Information, 67 FR 43278 (June 27,
2002).
In reconsidering this sunset review, as
with any sunset review, the Department
will report to the International Trade
Commission (‘‘ITC’’) whether or not
there is a likelihood of continuation of
dumping; however, the Department by
itself cannot order the continuation of
an antidumping order without an
affirmative injury finding by the ITC.
See section 751(c) of the Act; Uruguay
Round Agreements Act, Statement of
Administrative Action, H.R. Doc No.
103–316, vol. 1, at 879 (1994) (the
Department determines whether the
revocation of the order would lead to
recurring or continuing dumping, but
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19165
the ITC determines the likelihood of
recurring or continuing injury).
The Department’s procedures for the
conduct of sunset reviews are set forth
in its Procedures for Conducting FiveYear (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Orders, 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 1998)
and 70 FR 62061 (October 28, 2005).
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’’). These
procedures and guidance will apply in
this reconsideration.
Filing Information
All submissions in this
reconsideration of the sunset review
must be filed in accordance with the
Department’s regulations regarding
format, translation, service, and
certification of documents. These rules
can be found at 19 CFR 351.303.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), the
Department will maintain and make
available a service list for this
proceeding. To facilitate the timely
preparation of the service list, it is
requested that those seeking recognition
as interested parties to a proceeding
contact the Department in writing
within 10 days of the publication of this
notice.
As the deadlines in this review may
be short, we urge interested parties to
apply for access to proprietary
information under administrative
protective order (‘‘APO’’) immediately
following publication in the Federal
Register of this notice. The
Department’s regulations on submission
of proprietary information and
eligibility to receive access to business
proprietary information under APO can
be found at 19 CFR 351.304–306.
Information Required From Interested
Parties
Domestic interested parties (defined
in section 771(9)(C), (D), (E), (F), or (G)
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b))
wishing to participate in this
reconsideration of the sunset review
must respond not later than 15 days
after the date of publication in the
Federal Register of this notice by filing
a notice of intent to participate. The
required contents of the notice of intent
to participate are set forth at 19 CFR
351.218(d)(1)(ii). In accordance with the
Department’s regulations, if we do not
receive a notice of intent to participate
E:\FR\FM\13APN1.SGM
13APN1
19166
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 2006 / Notices
from at least one domestic interested
party by the 15-day deadline, the
Department will terminate this
reconsideration of the sunset review.
See 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(iii).
If we receive a notice of intent to
participate from a domestic interested
party, the Department’s regulations
provide that all parties wishing to
participate in a sunset review must file
complete substantive responses not later
than 30 days after the date of
publication in the Federal Register of
this notice. The required contents of a
substantive response are set forth at 19
CFR 351.218(d)(3). Note that certain
information requirements differ for
respondent and domestic parties. Please
consult the Department’s regulations for
information regarding the Department’s
conduct of sunset reviews.1 Please
consult the Department’s regulations at
19 CFR Part 351 for definitions of terms
and for other general information
concerning antidumping and
countervailing duty proceedings at the
Department.
Dated: April 6, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–5500 Filed 4–12–06; 8:45 am]
Billing Code: 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–122–839]
Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Certain Softwood Lumber Products
From Canada: Notice of NAFTA Panel
Decision
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 22, 2005, the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) issued its Fifth Remand
Determination In the Matter of Certain
Softwood Lumber from Canada: Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, Secretariat File No.
USA–CDA–2002–1904–03 NAFTA
Binational Panel Review (‘‘Fifth
Remand Determination’’). On March 17,
2006, a North American Free Trade
Agreement (‘‘NAFTA’’) Panel upheld
HSRObinson on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
1 In comments made on the interim final sunset
regulations, a number of parties stated that the
proposed five-day period for rebuttals to
substantive responses to a notice of initiation was
insufficient. This requirement was retained in the
final sunset regulations at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(4). As
provided in 19 CFR 351.302(b), however, the
Department will consider individual requests for
extension of that five-day deadline based upon a
showing of good cause.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:20 Apr 12, 2006
Jkt 208001
the Department’s Fifth Remand
Determination. See Decision of the
Panel on Fifth Remand, In the Matter of
Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada:
Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, Secretariat File No.
USA–CDA–2002–1904–03 NAFTA
Binational Panel Review, March 17,
2006 (‘‘Panel Decision on Fifth
Remand’’). Subsequently, the NAFTA
Panel directed the NAFTA Secretariat to
issue a Notice of Final Panel Action on
March 28, 2006.
Consistent with the decision of the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (‘‘Federal Circuit’’) in
Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d
337 (Fed. Cir. 1990)(‘‘Timken’’), the
Department is notifying the public that
the Panel Decision on Fifth Remand and
the Notice of Final Panel Action issued
by the NAFTA Secretariat are not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with the Department’s
original results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 7, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Terpstra, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 3, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–3965.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On April 2, 2002, the Department
published a notice of final
determination in the countervailing
duty investigation on certain softwood
lumber products from Canada. See
Notice of Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination and
Final Negative Critical Circumstances
Determination: Certain Softwood
Lumber Products From Canada, 67 FR
15545 (April 2, 2002) (Final
Determination) and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum:
Final Results of the Countervailing Duty
Investigation of Certain Softwood
Lumber Products from Canada (March
21, 2002). The Final Determination was
subsequently amended. See Notice of
Amended Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination and
Notice of Countervailing Duty Order:
Certain Softwood Lumber Products
From Canada, 67 FR 36070 (May 22,
2002). Respondent parties subsequently
challenged the Department’s final
determination before the United States–
Canada Binational Panel, pursuant to
Article 1904 of NAFTA. The parties
briefed and argued the case before the
Panel, and on August 13, 2003, the
Panel issued its decision, affirming in
part and remanding in part the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Department’s determination. See
Decision of the Panel, In the Matter of
Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada:
Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, Secretariat File No.
USA–CDA–2002–1904–03 NAFTA
Binational Panel Review, August 13,
2003. On January 12, 2004, the
Department issued its first remand
determination continuing to find that
Canadian softwood lumber was
subsidized but at a country–wide rate of
13.23 percent ad valorem. See Remand
Determination In the Matter of Certain
Softwood Lumber from Canada: Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, Secretariat File No.
USA–CDA–2002–1904–03 NAFTA
Binational Panel Review, January 12,
2004. On June 7, 2004, the Panel issued
its decision on remand, affirming in part
and remanding in part the Department’s
determination. See Decision of the
Panel, In the Matter of Certain Softwood
Lumber from Canada: Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination,
Secretariat File No. USA–CDA–2002–
1904–03 NAFTA Binational Panel
Review, June 7, 2004. On July 30, 2004,
the Department issued its second
remand determination continuing to
find that Canadian lumber is subsidized
but at a country–wide rate of 7.82
percent ad valorem. See Second
Remand Determination In the Matter of
Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada:
Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, Secretariat File No.
USA–CDA–2002–1904–03 NAFTA
Binational Panel Review, July 30, 2004
(Second Remand Determination). On
December 1, 2004, the Panel issued its
decision on second remand, affirming in
part and remanding in part the
Department’s determination. See
Decision of the Panel on Second
Remand, In the Matter of Certain
Softwood Lumber from Canada: Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, Secretariat File No.
USA–CDA–2002–1904–03 NAFTA
Binational Panel Review, December 1,
2004. On January 24, 2005, the
Department issued its third remand
determination continuing to find that
Canadian lumber is subsidized but at a
country–wide rate of 1.88 percent ad
valorem. See Third Remand
Determination In the Matter of Certain
Softwood Lumber from Canada: Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, Secretariat File No.
USA–CDA–2002–1904–03 NAFTA
Binational Panel Review, January 24,
2005 (Third Remand Determination). On
May 23, 2005, the Panel issued its
decision on third remand, affirming in
part and remanding in part the
E:\FR\FM\13APN1.SGM
13APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 71 (Thursday, April 13, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19164-19166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-5500]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-588-837]
Large Newspaper Printing Presses and Components Thereof, Whether
Assembled or Unassembled, From Japan: Reconsideration of Sunset Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') is initiating
a review to reconsider the five-year (``sunset'') review that resulted
in revocation of the antidumping duty order on large
[[Page 19165]]
newspaper printing presses and components thereof, whether assembled or
unassembled, from Japan.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 13, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David J. Goldberger or Kate Johnson,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-
4136, or (202) 482-4929 respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On February 25, 2002, the Department revoked the antidumping duty
order on large newspaper printing presses (LNPP) from Japan under a
five-year sunset review pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(A) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), because the only domestic interested
party in the sunset review, Goss International Corporation (Goss),
withdrew its participation and thus its interest in the review. See
Large Newspaper Printing Presses and Components Thereof, Whether
Assembled or Unassembled, from Japan (A-588-837) and Germany (A-428-
821): Notice of Final Results of Five-Year Sunset Reviews and
Revocation of Antidumping Duty Orders, 67 FR 8522 (February 25, 2002).
On May 5, 2005, the Department self-initiated a changed
circumstances review to consider information contained in a federal
court decision, Goss International Corp. v. Tokyo Kikai Seisakusho,
Ltd., 321 F.Supp.2d 1039 (N.D. Iowa 2004). See Large Newspaper Printing
Presses and Components Thereof, Whether Assembled or Unassembled, from
Japan: Initiation of Changed Circumstances Review, 70 FR 24524 (May 10,
2005). On March 8, 2006, the Department published the final results of
that changed circumstances review. See Large Newspaper Printing Presses
and Components Thereof, Whether Assembled or Unassembled, from Japan:
Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review (71 FR 11590) (CCR Final
Results). In the final results, the Department stated that it would
reopen for reconsideration the sunset review that resulted in
revocation of this order. The Department further stated that it would
conduct this reconsideration of the sunset review following the
procedures outlined in section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218.
Initiation of Reconsideration of Sunset Review
As detailed in CCR Final Results, particularly at Comments 2 and 3
of the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, the misconduct of
the respondent Tokyo Kikai Seisakusho, Ltd. (TKS) during the 1997-1998
administrative review of the LNPP antidumping duty order, which
ultimately led to its company-specific revocation from the underlying
order, substantially tainted the integrity of the proceeding, and may
have significantly undermined the integrity of the sunset review
results, including the parties' decisions whether or not to participate
in the sunset review. As such, the results of that sunset review are
unreliable. Accordingly, the Department will reconsider the sunset
review it conducted when the order was in place, but when the
Department was unaware of misstatements made by TKS with the purpose of
avoiding a determination of dumping. This action is warranted because
the Department has the responsibility and authority to defend the
integrity of its past determinations and to ensure the integrity of its
future proceedings against deliberate, misleading behavior. Therefore,
we are conducting anew the five-year sunset review of LNPP from Japan.
As in a situation when a suspension agreement is terminated and an
investigation is resumed, the Department will examine and collect
information from the prior sunset review period (i.e., September 4,
1996, through September 4, 2001). See, e.g., Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Uranium from the Republic of Kazakhstan,
64 FR 31179 (June 10, 1999). See also Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico:
Notice of Intent to Terminate Suspension Agreement, Intent to Terminate
the Five-Year Sunset Review, Intent to Resume Antidumping
Investigation, and Request for Comments on the Use of Updated
Information, 67 FR 43278 (June 27, 2002).
In reconsidering this sunset review, as with any sunset review, the
Department will report to the International Trade Commission (``ITC'')
whether or not there is a likelihood of continuation of dumping;
however, the Department by itself cannot order the continuation of an
antidumping order without an affirmative injury finding by the ITC. See
section 751(c) of the Act; Uruguay Round Agreements Act, Statement of
Administrative Action, H.R. Doc No. 103-316, vol. 1, at 879 (1994) (the
Department determines whether the revocation of the order would lead to
recurring or continuing dumping, but the ITC determines the likelihood
of recurring or continuing injury).
The Department's procedures for the conduct of sunset reviews are
set forth in its Procedures for Conducting Five-Year (``Sunset'')
Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 FR 13516
(March 20, 1998) and 70 FR 62061 (October 28, 2005). 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''). These
procedures and guidance will apply in this reconsideration.
Filing Information
All submissions in this reconsideration of the sunset review must
be filed in accordance with the Department's regulations regarding
format, translation, service, and certification of documents. These
rules can be found at 19 CFR 351.303.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), the Department will maintain and
make available a service list for this proceeding. To facilitate the
timely preparation of the service list, it is requested that those
seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding contact the
Department in writing within 10 days of the publication of this notice.
As the deadlines in this review may be short, we urge interested
parties to apply for access to proprietary information under
administrative protective order (``APO'') immediately following
publication in the Federal Register of this notice. The Department's
regulations on submission of proprietary information and eligibility to
receive access to business proprietary information under APO can be
found at 19 CFR 351.304-306.
Information Required From Interested Parties
Domestic interested parties (defined in section 771(9)(C), (D),
(E), (F), or (G) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b)) wishing to
participate in this reconsideration of the sunset review must respond
not later than 15 days after the date of publication in the Federal
Register of this notice by filing a notice of intent to participate.
The required contents of the notice of intent to participate are set
forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(ii). In accordance with the Department's
regulations, if we do not receive a notice of intent to participate
[[Page 19166]]
from at least one domestic interested party by the 15-day deadline, the
Department will terminate this reconsideration of the sunset review.
See 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(iii).
If we receive a notice of intent to participate from a domestic
interested party, the Department's regulations provide that all parties
wishing to participate in a sunset review must file complete
substantive responses not later than 30 days after the date of
publication in the Federal Register of this notice. The required
contents of a substantive response are set forth at 19 CFR
351.218(d)(3). Note that certain information requirements differ for
respondent and domestic parties. Please consult the Department's
regulations for information regarding the Department's conduct of
sunset reviews.\1\ Please consult the Department's regulations at 19
CFR Part 351 for definitions of terms and for other general information
concerning antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings at the
Department.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In comments made on the interim final sunset regulations, a
number of parties stated that the proposed five-day period for
rebuttals to substantive responses to a notice of initiation was
insufficient. This requirement was retained in the final sunset
regulations at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(4). As provided in 19 CFR
351.302(b), however, the Department will consider individual
requests for extension of that five-day deadline based upon a
showing of good cause.
Dated: April 6, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6-5500 Filed 4-12-06; 8:45 am]
Billing Code: 3510-DS-P
