Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago: Notice of Initiation and Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 17952-17954 [E8-6842]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
17952
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 2, 2008 / Notices
Members (in addition to applicant):
None.
Agla Trade Link International seeks a
Certificate to cover the following
specific Export Trade, Export Markets,
and Export Trade Activities and
Methods of Operations.
Export Trade
1. Products
All Products.
2. Services
All Services.
3. Technology Rights
Technology rights, including, but not
limited to, patents, trademarks,
copyrights, and trade secrets, that relate
to Products and Services.
4. Export Trade Facilitation Services
(as they relate to the export of Products,
Services, and Technology Rights)
Export Trade Facilitation Services
include professional services in the
areas of government relations and
assistance with state and federal
programs; foreign trade and business
protocol; consulting; market research
and analysis; collection of information
on trade opportunities; marketing;
negotiations; joint ventures; shipping;
export management; export licensing;
advertising; documentation and services
related to compliance with customs
requirements; insurance and financing;
trade show exhibitions; organizational
development; management and labor
strategies; transfer of technology;
transportation; and facilitating the
formation of shippers’ associations.
Export Markets
The Export Markets include all parts
of the world except the United States
(the fifty states of the United States, the
District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the
Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam,
the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, and the Trust Territory
of the Pacific Islands).
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
Export Trade Activities and Methods of
Operation
1. With respect to the sale of Products
and Services, licensing of Technology
Rights and the provision of Export
Trade Facilitation Services, Agla Trade
Link International, subject to the terms
and conditions listed below, may:
a. Provide and arrange for the
provision of Export Trade Facilitation
Services;
b. Engage in promotional and
marketing activities and collect
information on trade opportunities in
the Export Markets and distribute such
information to clients;
c. Enter into exclusive and/or nonexclusive licensing and/or sales
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:36 Apr 01, 2008
Jkt 214001
agreements with Suppliers for the
export of Products, Services, and/or
Technology Rights to Export Markets;
d. Enter into exclusive and/or nonexclusive agreements with distributors
and/or sales representatives in Export
Markets;
e. Allocate export sales or divide
Export Markets among Suppliers for the
sale and/or licensing of Products,
Services, and/or Technology Rights;
f. Allocate export orders among
Suppliers;
g. Establish the price of Products,
Services, and/or Technology Rights for
sales and/or licensing in Export
Markets;
h. Negotiate, enter into, and/or
manage licensing agreements for the
export of Technology Rights; and
i. Enter into contracts for shipping.
2. Agla Trade Link International and
individual Suppliers may regularly
exchange information on an individual
one-on-one basis regarding that
Supplier’s inventories and near-term
production schedules in order that the
availability of Products for export can be
determined and effectively coordinated
by Agla Trade Link International with
its distributors in Export Markets.
Terms and Conditions of Certificate
1. Agla Trade Link International,
including its officers, employees or
agents, shall not intentionally disclose,
directly or indirectly, to any Supplier
(including parent companies,
subsidiaries, or other entities related to
any Supplier) any information about
any other Supplier’s costs, production,
capacity, inventories, domestic prices,
domestic sales, terms of domestic
marketing or sale, or U.S. business
plans, strategies, or methods unless
such information is already generally
available to the trade or public.
2. Agla Trade Link International, will
comply with requests made by the
Secretary of Commerce on behalf of the
Secretary or the Attorney General for
information or documents relevant to
conduct under the Certificate. The
Secretary of Commerce will request
such information or documents when
either the Attorney General or the
Secretary believes that the information
or documents are required to determine
that the Export Trade, Export Trade
Activities and Methods of Operation of
a person protected by this Certificate of
Review continue to comply with the
standards of Section 303(a) of the Act.
Definition
‘‘Supplier’’ means a person who
produces, provides, or sells Products,
Services, and/or Technology Rights.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: March 27, 2008.
Jeffrey Anspacher,
Director, Export Trading Company Affairs.
[FR Doc. E8–6822 Filed 4–1–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–274–804]
Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire
Rod from Trinidad and Tobago: Notice
of Initiation and Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(‘‘the Department’’) has received
information sufficient to warrant
initiation of a changed circumstances
review of the antidumping duty order of
carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod
(‘‘steel wire rod’’) from Trinidad and
Tobago.1 Based on this information, we
preliminarily determine that Arcelor
Mittal Point Lisas Limited (‘‘AMPL’’) is
the successor–in-interest to Mittal Steel
Point Lisas Limited (‘‘MSPL’’), formerly
Caribbean Ispat Limited (‘‘CIL’’), a
respondent in the less–than-fair–value
investigation and that, as such, AMPL is
entitled to receive the same
antidumping duty treatment accorded
MSPL.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dennis McClure or Stephanie Moore,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–5973 and (202)
482–3692, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On October 29, 2002, the Department
published in the Federal Register an
antidumping duty order on steel wire
rod from Trinidad and Tobago. See
Antidumping Order. The current scope
of the merchandise subject to this order
was published in the Carbon and Alloy
Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and
Tobago: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review,72 FR
62824 (November 7, 2007). One of the
1 See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Carbon
and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Brazil,
Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago,
and Ukraine, 67 FR 65945 (October 29, 2002)
(‘‘Antidumping Order’’).
E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM
02APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 2, 2008 / Notices
companies subject to the investigation
was CIL. On July 6, 2005, the
Department determined that MSPL was
the successor–in-interest to CIL. See
Notice of Final Result of Antidumping
Duty Changed Circumstances Review:
Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire
Rod from Trinidad and Tobago, 70 FR
38871 (July 6, 2005). The Department
has completed administrative reviews
covering (1) April 2002 through
September 2003, (2) October 2003
through September 2004, (3) October
2004 through September 2005, and (4)
October 2005 through September 2006,
and is currently conducting an
administrative review covering October
2006 through September 2007.2
On January 30, 2008, AMPL requested
that the Department initiate and
conduct an expedited changed
circumstances review to determine that
for purposes of the antidumping law,
AMPL is the successor–in-interest to
MSPL. See January 30, 2008, letter from
AMPL to the Secretary of Commerce.
AMPL claimed that counsel for
petitioners3 in this proceeding indicated
their consent to this request. On
February 8, 2008, AMPL provided
correspondence from counsel to the
petitioners confirming petitioners’
consent to this request.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
Initiation and Preliminary Results 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, the
Department will conduct a changed
circumstances review upon receipt of
information concerning, or a request
from an interested party for review of,
an antidumping duty order which
shows changed circumstances sufficient
to warrant a review of the order. In this
case, the Department finds that the
information submitted by the
respondent provides sufficient evidence
of changed circumstances to warrant a
review to determine whether AMPL is
the successor–in-interest to MSPL.
2 Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy
Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago, 70 FR
12648 (March 15, 2005); Notice of Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Carbon
and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad
and Tobago, 70 FR 69512 (November 16, 2005);
Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad
and Tobago: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review,72 FR 9922 (March 6, 2007);
Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad
and Tobago: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review,72 FR 62824 (November 7,
2007); and Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and
Request for Revocation in Part, 72 FR 65938
(November 26, 2007), respectively.
3 Gerdau Ameristeel US Inc., Nucor Connecticut
Inc., Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc., Rocky
Mountain Steel Mills, U.S.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:36 Apr 01, 2008
Jkt 214001
Thus, in accordance with section 751(b)
of the Act, the Department is initiating
a changed circumstances review to
determine whether AMPL is the
successor–in-interest to MSPL for
purposes of determining antidumping
duty liability with respect to imports of
steel wire rod from Trinidad and
Tobago.
Furthermore, 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii)
permits the Department to combine the
notice of initiation of a changed
circumstances review and the notice of
preliminary results in a single notice if
the Department concludes that
expedited action is warranted. In this
case, we find that the evidence provided
by AMPL is sufficient to preliminarily
determine that its change of corporate
name from MSLP to AMPL did not
affect the company’s operations.
In making a successor–in-interest
determination, the Department
examines several factors including, but
not limited to, changes in: (1)
management; (2) production facilities;
(3) supplier relationships; and (4)
customer base. See, e.g., Notice of Final
Results of Changed Circumstances
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From
Japan, 67 FR 58 (January 2, 2002); Brass
Sheet and Strip from Canada: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460,
20462 (May 13, 1992). While no single
factor or combination of factors will
necessarily provide a dispositive
indication of a successor–in-interest
relationship, the Department will
generally consider the new company to
be the successor to the previous
company if the new company’s resulting
operation is not materially dissimilar to
that of its predecessor. See, e.g., Fresh
and Chilled Atlantic Salmon from
Norway; Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 64 FR 9979
(March 1, 1999); Industrial Phosphoric
Acid from Israel; Final Results of
Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR
6944 (February 14, 1994). 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 former company, the Department
will accord the new company the same
antidumping treatment as its
predecessor.
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.221(c)(3)(ii), we preliminarily
determine that AMPL is the successor–
in-interest to MSPL. In its January 30,
2008, submission AMPL provided
evidence supporting its claim to be the
successor–in-interest to MSPL.
Documentation attached to AMPL’s
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17953
January 30, 2008, submission shows that
the merger of Arcelor and Mittal Steel
(MSPL’s parent company) and the
following name change to AMPL
resulted in little or no change in
management, production facility,
supplier relationships, or customer base.
This documentation consists of: (1) a
press releases regarding the name
change of Mittal Steel and Arcelor; (2)
the merger proposal between Arcelor
Mittal and Mittal Steel; (3) Form 425
filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission explaining the first step of
the merger; (4) excerpts of
ArcelorMittal’s proxy statement
concerning the merger of Mittal Steel;
(5) a press release concerning details of
the merger of AcelorMittal into Arcelor;
(6) excerpts of ArcelorMittal’s proxy
statement concerning the merger into
Arcelor; (7) a news article explaining
the merger of ArcelorMittal into Arcelor;
(8) an ArcelorMittal news release
concerning the merger of ArcelorMittal
into Arcelor; (9) a certificate of
amendment concerning MSPL’s name
change to AMPL; (10) documentation
certifying that AMPL maintains the
same VAT tax ID number; (11) a letter
from the bank confirming that AMPL
maintains the same bank account MSPL
had; (12) an organizational chart
reflecting the organization of MSPL and
AMPL; (13) certification from company
officials at AMPL stating that neither
management nor corporate structure of
AMPL has changed because of the name
change; (14) a letter from AMPL’s lessor
acknowledging that AMPL will occupy
the same premises and continue MSPL’s
lease; (15) a list of suppliers before and
after the name change; and (16) a list of
customers identifying the same
customers before and after the name
change. The documentation described
above demonstrates that there was little
to no change in management structure,
supplier relationships, production
facilities, or customer base.
Therefore, we determine that
expedited action is warranted and we
preliminarily find that AMPL is the
successor–in-interest to MSPL and,
thus, should receive the same
antidumping duty treatment with
respect to steel wire rod from Trinidad
and Tobago as the former MSPL.
Because we have concluded that
expedited action is warranted, we are
combining these notices of initiation
and preliminary results.
Public Comment
Any interested party may request a
hearing within 30 days of publication of
this notice. Any hearing, if requested,
will be held no later than 44 days after
the date of publication of this notice, or
E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM
02APN1
17954
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 64 / Wednesday, April 2, 2008 / Notices
the first workday thereafter. Case briefs
from interested parties may be
submitted not later than 30 days after
the date of publication of this notice.
Rebuttal briefs, limited to the issues
raised in those comments, may be filed
not later than 37 days after the date of
publication of this notice. All written
comments shall be submitted in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.303.
Persons interested in attending the
hearing, if one is requested, should
contact the Department for the date and
time of the hearing. The Department
will publish the final results of this
changed circumstances review, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.216(e),
including the results of its analysis of
issues raised in any written comments.
The current requirement for a cash
deposit of estimated antidumping duties
on all subject merchandise will
continue unless and until it is modified
pursuant to the final results of this
changed circumstances review.
We are issuing and publishing these
results and notice in accordance with
sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) and (2)
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216.
Dated: March 27, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–6842 Filed 4–1–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–821–801]
Solid Urea From the Russian
Federation: Extension of Time Limit for
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Schauer or Minoo Hatten, AD/
CVD Operations Office 5, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–0410 and (202)
482–1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Background
At the request of EuroChem, a Russian
producer and exporter of solid urea
from the Russian Federation, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) initiated an administrative
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:46 Apr 01, 2008
Jkt 214001
review of the antidumping duty order
on solid urea from Russia for the period
July 1, 2006, through June 30, 2007. See
Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews and Request for Revocation in
Part, 72 FR 48613 (August 20, 2007).
The preliminary results of this
administrative review are currently due
no later than April 1, 2008.
Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary
Results of Review
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires
the Department to issue the preliminary
results of an administrative review of an
antidumping duty order within 245
days after the last day of the month in
which the anniversary of the date of
publication of the order occurs. The Act
provides further that, if it is not
practicable to complete the review
within the 245 days, the Department
may extend the 245-day period to 365
days.
We determine that it is not practicable
to complete the preliminary results by
the current deadline of April 1, 2008.
Specifically, we are conducting a
concurrent new–shipper review which
covers the same entry as is covered by
this administrative review and it is not
practicable to complete the preliminary
results of this review prior to the
conclusion of the new–shipper review.
Therefore, in accordance with section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.213(h)(2), we are extending the time
period for issuing the preliminary
results of this review by 120 days to July
30, 2008. The final results of this review
continue to be due 120 days after the
date of issuance of the preliminary
results of the administrative review.
This notice is published in
accordance with section
751(751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.213(h)(2).
Dated: March 26, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–6839 Filed 4–1–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Rice University, Notice of Decision on
Application for Duty–Free Entry of
Scientific Instrument
This is a decision pursuant to Section
6(c) of the Educational, Scientific, and
Cultural Materials Importation Act of
1966 (Pub. L. 89–651, as amended by
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Pub. L.106–36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part
301). Related records can be viewed
between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. in
Room 2104, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th and Constitution Ave,
NW, Washington, D.C.
Comments: None received. Decision:
Approved. We know of no instrument of
equivalent scientific value to the foreign
instruments described below, for such
purposes as each is intended to be used,
that was being manufactured in the
United States at the time of its order.
Docket Number: 08–003. Applicant:
Rice University, Houston, TX 77005.
Instrument: Variable Temperature High
Magnetic Field Nanometer–Precision
Probe Station. Manufacturer: Attocube
Systems AG, Germany. Intended Use:
See notice at 73 FR 12375, March 7,
2008. Reasons: This instrument can
supply a cryostate and magnet system
with four independently
nanopositionable probes. This variable
temperature probe system is unique and
is essential to enable a variety of physics
and chemistry research efforts involving
nanomaterials.
Dated: March 28, 2008.
Faye Robinson,
Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff,
Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–6843 Filed 4–1–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
VA Connecticut Healthcare System, et
al., Notice of Consolidated Decision on
Applications for Duty–Free Entry of
Electron Microscopes
This is a decision consolidated pursuant
to Section 6(c) of the Educational,
Scientific, and Cultural Materials
Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89–
651, 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301).
Related records can be viewed between
8:30 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. in Room 2104,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and
Constitution Avenue., NW, Washington,
D.C.
Docket Number: 08–004. Applicant: VA
Connecticut Healthcare System, West
Haven, CT 06516. Instrument: Electron
Microscope, Model JEM–1011.
Manufacturer: Jeol, Inc., Japan. Intended
Use: See notice at 73 FR 12078, March
6, 2008.
Docket Number: 08–005. Applicant:
University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
84112. Instrument: Electron Microscope,
Model 600 Quanta FEG. Manufacturer:
FEI Company, Czech Republic. Intended
Use: See notice at 73 FR 12078, March
6, 2008.
E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM
02APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 2, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17952-17954]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-6842]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-274-804]
Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago:
Notice of Initiation and Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Changed Circumstances Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') has received
information sufficient to warrant initiation of a changed circumstances
review of the antidumping duty order of carbon and certain alloy steel
wire rod (``steel wire rod'') from Trinidad and Tobago.\1\ Based on
this information, we preliminarily determine that Arcelor Mittal Point
Lisas Limited (``AMPL'') is the successor-in-interest to Mittal Steel
Point Lisas Limited (``MSPL''), formerly Caribbean Ispat Limited
(``CIL''), a respondent in the less-than-fair-value investigation and
that, as such, AMPL is entitled to receive the same antidumping duty
treatment accorded MSPL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Carbon and Certain
Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova,
Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine, 67 FR 65945 (October 29, 2002)
(``Antidumping Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis McClure or Stephanie Moore, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14\th\ Street &
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
5973 and (202) 482-3692, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 29, 2002, the Department published in the Federal
Register an antidumping duty order on steel wire rod from Trinidad and
Tobago. See Antidumping Order. The current scope of the merchandise
subject to this order was published in the Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire
Rod from Trinidad and Tobago: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review,72 FR 62824 (November 7, 2007). One of the
[[Page 17953]]
companies subject to the investigation was CIL. On July 6, 2005, the
Department determined that MSPL was the successor-in-interest to CIL.
See Notice of Final Result of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances
Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and
Tobago, 70 FR 38871 (July 6, 2005). The Department has completed
administrative reviews covering (1) April 2002 through September 2003,
(2) October 2003 through September 2004, (3) October 2004 through
September 2005, and (4) October 2005 through September 2006, and is
currently conducting an administrative review covering October 2006
through September 2007.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and
Tobago, 70 FR 12648 (March 15, 2005); Notice of Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy
Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago, 70 FR 69512 (November 16,
2005); Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and Tobago:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,72 FR 9922
(March 6, 2007); Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Trinidad and
Tobago: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,72
FR 62824 (November 7, 2007); and Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for
Revocation in Part, 72 FR 65938 (November 26, 2007), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 30, 2008, AMPL requested that the Department initiate
and conduct an expedited changed circumstances review to determine that
for purposes of the antidumping law, AMPL is the successor-in-interest
to MSPL. See January 30, 2008, letter from AMPL to the Secretary of
Commerce. AMPL claimed that counsel for petitioners\3\ in this
proceeding indicated their consent to this request. On February 8,
2008, AMPL provided correspondence from counsel to the petitioners
confirming petitioners' consent to this request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Gerdau Ameristeel US Inc., Nucor Connecticut Inc., Keystone
Consolidated Industries, Inc., Rocky Mountain Steel Mills, U.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation and Preliminary Results 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, the Department will conduct a
changed circumstances review upon receipt of information concerning, or
a request from an interested party for review of, an antidumping duty
order which shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review
of the order. In this case, the Department finds that the information
submitted by the respondent provides sufficient evidence of changed
circumstances to warrant a review to determine whether AMPL is the
successor-in-interest to MSPL. Thus, in accordance with section 751(b)
of the Act, the Department is initiating a changed circumstances review
to determine whether AMPL is the successor-in-interest to MSPL for
purposes of determining antidumping duty liability with respect to
imports of steel wire rod from Trinidad and Tobago.
Furthermore, 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii) permits the Department to
combine the notice of initiation of a changed circumstances review and
the notice of preliminary results in a single notice if the Department
concludes that expedited action is warranted. In this case, we find
that the evidence provided by AMPL is sufficient to preliminarily
determine that its change of corporate name from MSLP to AMPL did not
affect the company's operations.
In making a successor-in-interest determination, the Department
examines several factors including, but not limited to, changes in: (1)
management; (2) production facilities; (3) supplier relationships; and
(4) customer base. See, e.g., Notice of Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Polychloroprene
Rubber From Japan, 67 FR 58 (January 2, 2002); Brass Sheet and Strip
from Canada: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,
57 FR 20460, 20462 (May 13, 1992). While no single factor or
combination of factors will necessarily provide a dispositive
indication of a successor-in-interest relationship, the Department will
generally consider the new company to be the successor to the previous
company if the new company's resulting operation is not materially
dissimilar to that of its predecessor. See, e.g., Fresh and Chilled
Atlantic Salmon from Norway; Final Results of Changed Circumstances
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 64 FR 9979 (March 1, 1999);
Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Israel; Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Review, 59 FR 6944 (February 14, 1994). 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 former company, the Department will accord the new
company the same antidumping treatment as its predecessor.
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii), we preliminarily
determine that AMPL is the successor-in-interest to MSPL. In its
January 30, 2008, submission AMPL provided evidence supporting its
claim to be the successor-in-interest to MSPL. Documentation attached
to AMPL's January 30, 2008, submission shows that the merger of Arcelor
and Mittal Steel (MSPL's parent company) and the following name change
to AMPL resulted in little or no change in management, production
facility, supplier relationships, or customer base. This documentation
consists of: (1) a press releases regarding the name change of Mittal
Steel and Arcelor; (2) the merger proposal between Arcelor Mittal and
Mittal Steel; (3) Form 425 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission explaining the first step of the merger; (4) excerpts of
ArcelorMittal's proxy statement concerning the merger of Mittal Steel;
(5) a press release concerning details of the merger of AcelorMittal
into Arcelor; (6) excerpts of ArcelorMittal's proxy statement
concerning the merger into Arcelor; (7) a news article explaining the
merger of ArcelorMittal into Arcelor; (8) an ArcelorMittal news release
concerning the merger of ArcelorMittal into Arcelor; (9) a certificate
of amendment concerning MSPL's name change to AMPL; (10) documentation
certifying that AMPL maintains the same VAT tax ID number; (11) a
letter from the bank confirming that AMPL maintains the same bank
account MSPL had; (12) an organizational chart reflecting the
organization of MSPL and AMPL; (13) certification from company
officials at AMPL stating that neither management nor corporate
structure of AMPL has changed because of the name change; (14) a letter
from AMPL's lessor acknowledging that AMPL will occupy the same
premises and continue MSPL's lease; (15) a list of suppliers before and
after the name change; and (16) a list of customers identifying the
same customers before and after the name change. The documentation
described above demonstrates that there was little to no change in
management structure, supplier relationships, production facilities, or
customer base.
Therefore, we determine that expedited action is warranted and we
preliminarily find that AMPL is the successor-in-interest to MSPL and,
thus, should receive the same antidumping duty treatment with respect
to steel wire rod from Trinidad and Tobago as the former MSPL. Because
we have concluded that expedited action is warranted, we are combining
these notices of initiation and preliminary results.
Public Comment
Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of
publication of this notice. Any hearing, if requested, will be held no
later than 44 days after the date of publication of this notice, or
[[Page 17954]]
the first workday thereafter. Case briefs from interested parties may
be submitted not later than 30 days after the date of publication of
this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to the issues raised in those
comments, may be filed not later than 37 days after the date of
publication of this notice. All written comments shall be submitted in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.303. Persons interested in attending the
hearing, if one is requested, should contact the Department for the
date and time of the hearing. The Department will publish the final
results of this changed circumstances review, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.216(e), including the results of its analysis of issues raised in
any written comments.
The current requirement for a cash deposit of estimated antidumping
duties on all subject merchandise will continue unless and until it is
modified pursuant to the final results of this changed circumstances
review.
We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in
accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) and (2) of the Act and
19 CFR 351.216.
Dated: March 27, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-6842 Filed 4-1-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
