North American Free-Trade Agreement, Article 1904; NAFTA Panel Reviews; Completion of Panel Review, 75940 [E6-21620]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
75940
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 2006 / Notices
351.221, the Department initiated this
changed circumstances review of the
CVD order to determine whether
Hyundai is the successor–in-interest to
INI. In the context of changed
circumstances reviews of an AD order
involving, E.G., a change in a company’s
name, structure or ownership, the
Department relies on its successor–ininterest analysis to determine whether
the newly named or structured company
remains essentially the same as the
predecessor company. See, e.g., Notice
of Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Changed Circumstances Review; Certain
Forged Stainless Steel Flanges From
India, 71 FR 31156 (June 1, 2006), CITING
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
INDUSTRIAL PHOSPHORIC ACID FROM
ISRAEL; FINAL RESULTS OF ANTIDUMPING
DUTY CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES REVIEW,
59 FR 6944, 6945 (February 14, 1994).
If the evidence demonstrates that, with
respect to the production and sale of the
subject merchandise, the successor
company operates as the same business
entity as its predecessor, the Department
will assign the successor the existing
cash deposit rate of its predecessor.
For similar changed circumstances in
a CVD order, the appropriate focus of
the analysis for determining the cash
deposit rate for a successor company is
usually whether the successor company
operates as the same business entity as
its predecessor. For such determinations
in the context of a CVD order, however,
such an analysis may not always be
sufficient, in itself, to determine
whether it is appropriate to assign the
predecessor’s CVD cash deposit rate to
the successor where the circumstances
indicate that a change relevant to the
subsidy analysis may have occurred. We
do not find, however, that there are any
such circumstances in the instant
review, such as a privatization or sale of
a company, that would warrant going
beyond the Department’s standard
successor–in-interest analysis. In the
instant proceeding, we are only
examining a change in the name of the
company. Further, Hyundai has
presented evidence establishing that its
change in corporate name from INI to
Hyundai did not affect the company’s
operations such that they are materially
different to those of its predecessor. See
Hyundai’s March 22, 2006, submission
at Exhibits 2 though 4; see also
Hyundai’s April 11, 2006, submission at
page 3 and Exhibit 7. The evidence
indicates that Hyundai has essentially
the same corporate structure and
operations as INI.
Therefore, based on the record
evidence, and consistent with the
Department’s findings in the AD
Changed Circumstances Preliminary
Results, we preliminarily determine that
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 18, 2006
Jkt 211001
the current cash deposit rate applicable
to INI shall be applicable to entries of
subject merchandise made by Hyundai,
entered on or after the publication date
of the final results of this changed
circumstances review. Thus, if these
preliminary results are adopted in the
final results of this changed
circumstances review, we will instruct
U.S. Customs and Border Protection to
collect a cash deposit at the rate of 0.54
percent ad valorem on all entries of
SSSS produced and exported by
Hyundai on or after the publication of
the final results of this review. This cash
deposit rate shall remain in effect until
publication of the final results of the
next administrative review in which
Hyundai participates.
In addition, the Department intends to
further consider the issue of whether
alternative or additional successorship
criteria would be appropriate in the
CVD context, and therefore, the
Department anticipates releasing a
separate Federal Register notice shortly
hereafter inviting parties to submit
public comments on the issue.
Public Comment
Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
Any written comments may be
submitted no later than 14 days after
date of publication of this notice.
Rebuttal briefs, limited to arguments
raised in case briefs, are due five days
after the case brief deadline. Case briefs
and rebuttal briefs must be served on
interested parties in accordance with 19
CFR 351.309. In accordance with 19
CFR 351.216(e), the Department will
publish the final results of the changed
circumstances review including the
results of its analysis of any issues
raised in any such comments within 270
days after the date on which the
changed circumstances review was
initiated.
This notice is in accordance with
section 751(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.216 and 351.221.
Dated: December 12, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–21634 Filed 12–18–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
North American Free-Trade
Agreement, Article 1904; NAFTA Panel
Reviews; Completion of Panel Review
NAFTA Secretariat, United
States Section, International Trade
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Administration, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Completion of Panel
Review of the final injury determination
made by the U.S. International Trade
Commission, in the matter of
Magnesium from Canada, Secretariat
File No. USA–CDA–00–1904–09.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Order of the
Binational Panel dated October 6, 2006,
affirming the final remand
determination described above, the
panel review was completed on
November 17, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Caratina L. Alston, United States
Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite
2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue,
Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
October 6, 2006, the Binational Panel
issued an order which affirmed the final
determination of the United States
International Trade Commission (ITC)
concerning Magnesium from Canada
Injury Determination. The Secretariat
was instructed to issue a Notice of
Completion of Panel Review on the 31st
day following the issuance of the Notice
of Final Panel Action, if no request for
an Extraordinary Challenge was filed.
No such request was filed. Therefore, on
the basis of the Panel Order and Rule 80
of the Article 1904 Panel Rules, the
Panel Review was completed and the
panelists discharged from their duties
effective November 17, 2006.
Dated: December 14, 2006.
Caratina L. Alston,
United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat.
[FR Doc. E6–21620 Filed 12–18–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
North American Free-Trade
Agreement, Article 1904 NAFTA Panel
Reviews; Request for Panel Review
NAFTA Secretariat, United
States Section, International Trade
Administration, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of First Request for Panel
Review.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On November 27, 2006, the
Northwest Fruit Exporters filed a First
Request for Panel Review with the
Mexican Section of the NAFTA
Secretariat pursuant to Article 1904 of
the North American Free Trade
Agreement. Panel review was requested
of the final revocation of the
antidumping investigation, respecting
E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM
19DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 19, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 75940]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-21620]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
North American Free-Trade Agreement, Article 1904; NAFTA Panel
Reviews; Completion of Panel Review
AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United States Section, International Trade
Administration, Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Completion of Panel Review of the final injury
determination made by the U.S. International Trade Commission, in the
matter of Magnesium from Canada, Secretariat File No. USA-CDA-00-1904-
09.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Order of the Binational Panel dated October 6,
2006, affirming the final remand determination described above, the
panel review was completed on November 17, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Caratina L. Alston, United States
Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite 2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue,
Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482-5438.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 6, 2006, the Binational Panel
issued an order which affirmed the final determination of the United
States International Trade Commission (ITC) concerning Magnesium from
Canada Injury Determination. The Secretariat was instructed to issue a
Notice of Completion of Panel Review on the 31st day following the
issuance of the Notice of Final Panel Action, if no request for an
Extraordinary Challenge was filed. No such request was filed.
Therefore, on the basis of the Panel Order and Rule 80 of the Article
1904 Panel Rules, the Panel Review was completed and the panelists
discharged from their duties effective November 17, 2006.
Dated: December 14, 2006.
Caratina L. Alston,
United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat.
[FR Doc. E6-21620 Filed 12-18-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-GT-P
