Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France: Preliminary Results of Changed-Circumstances Review, 27280-27281 [E9-13493]
Download as PDF
27280
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 9, 2009 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–427–801]
Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from
France: Preliminary Results of
Changed–Circumstances Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
is conducting a changed–circumstances
review of the antidumping duty order
on ball bearings and parts thereof from
France pursuant to section 751(b) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. We
preliminarily determine that SKF
Aeroengine France S.A.S.U. is the
successor–in-interest to SNFA France
S.A.S.U. Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 9, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kristin Case or Richard Rimlinger, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 5, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
(202) 482–3174 or (202) 482–4477,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department of Commerce (the
Department) published an antidumping
duty order on ball bearings and parts
thereof from France on May 15, 1989.
See Antidumping Duty Orders: Ball
Bearings, Cylindrical Roller Bearings,
Spherical Plain Bearings, and Parts
Thereof From France, 54 FR 20902 (May
15, 1989). On August 11, 2000, the
Department revoked the order, effective
May 1, 1999, with respect to sales of ball
bearings by SNFA S.A. (subsequently
SNFA S.A.S.U.). See Antifriction
Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller
Bearings) and Parts Thereof From
France, Germany, Italy, Japan,
Romania, Singapore, Sweden, and the
United Kingdom; Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Reviews and Revocation of Orders in
Part, 65 FR 49219, 49221 (August 11,
2000).
On March 2, 2007, pursuant to a
request from SNFA S.A.S.U. (SNFA),
SKF France S.A., and SKF Aerospace
France S.A.S., we initiated a changed–
circumstances review in order to
determine whether SNFA was a
successor–in-interest to SKF France S.A.
following SNFA’s acquisition by that
company or, alternatively, that post–
acquisition SNFA was the successor–in-
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:45 Jun 08, 2009
Jkt 217001
interest to the pre–acquisition SNFA.
See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof
from France: Initiation of an
Antidumping Duty Changed–
Circumstances Review, 72 FR 9513
(March 2, 2007). During the course of
the changed–circumstances review, the
companies informed the Department
that SNFA would be changing its name
to SKF Aeroengine France S.A.S.U.
(SKF Aeroengine).
On June 29, 2007, we initiated an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on ball bearings
and parts thereof from France for the
period May 1, 2006, through April 30,
2007, with respect to SKF France S.A.
and SKF Aerospace France S.A.S. See
Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews, Request for Revocation in Part
and Deferral of Administrative Review,
72 FR 35690 (June 29, 2007). On
October 26, 2007, we rescinded the
changed–circumstances review initiated
on March 2, 2007, and explained that,
because we had initiated an
administrative review with respect to
SKF France S.A. and SKF Aerospace
France S.A.S., we would address any
issues that had arisen during the course
of the changed–circumstances review in
the context of the administrative review.
See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof
from France and Italy: Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Changed–
Circumstances Reviews, 72 FR 60798,
60799 (October 26, 2007). In the final
results of the 2006/07 administrative
review, we determined that post–
acquisition SNFA was the successor–ininterest to pre–acquisition SNFA and
that SNFA had not changed its name to
SKF Aeroengine until after the period of
review. See Ball Bearings and Parts
Thereof From France, Germany, Italy,
Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews and Rescission
of Reviews in Part, 73 FR 52823
(September 11, 2008), and
accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 12 (AFBs
Final Results).
On February 6, 2009, SKF Aeroengine
requested that, because the Department
appeared to have left open the effect of
the name change on its determination in
AFBs Final Results, the Department
either confirm that its determination
encompassed the name change or, in the
alternative, the Department initiate a
changed–circumstances review to
determine whether SKF Aeroengine is
the successor–in-interest to SNFA.
Along with its request, SKF Aeroengine
provided detailed information
comparing pre- and post–name change
operational management, production
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
facilities, supplier relationships, and
customer bases.
On March 30, 2009, we initiated a
changed–circumstances review. See Ball
Bearings and Parts Thereof from France:
Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Changed–Circumstances Review, 74 FR
14107 (March 30, 2009) (CCR Initiation).
Since the initiation of the review, no
other interested party has submitted
comments.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the order are
ball bearings (other than tapered roller
bearings) and parts thereof. These
products include all bearings that
employ balls as the rolling element.
Imports of these products are classified
under the following categories:
antifriction balls, ball bearings with
integral shafts, ball bearings (including
radial ball bearings) and parts thereof,
and housed or mounted ball bearing
units and parts thereof.
Imports of these products are
classified under the following
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) subheadings:
3926.90.45, 4016.93.00, 4016.93.10,
4016.93.50, 6909.19.5010, 8431.20.00,
8431.39.0010, 8482.10.10, 8482.10.50,
8482.80.00, 8482.91.00, 8482.99.05,
8482.99.2580, 8482.99.35, 8482.99.6595,
8483.20.40, 8483.20.80, 8483.50.8040,
8483.50.90, 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30,
8483.90.70, 8708.50.50, 8708.60.50,
8708.60.80, 8708.70.6060, 8708.70.8050,
8708.93.30, 8708.93.5000, 8708.93.6000,
8708.93.75, 8708.99.06, 8708.99.31,
8708.99.4960, 8708.99.50, 8708.99.5800,
8708.99.8080, 8803.10.00, 8803.20.00,
8803.30.00, 8803.90.30, and 8803.90.90.
Although the HTSUS item numbers
above are provided for convenience and
customs purposes, the written
description of the scope of the order is
dispositive.
Preliminary Results
In conducting this changed–
circumstances review pursuant to
section 751(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act), the Department
has conducted a successor–in-interest
analysis. In making a successor–ininterest determination, the Department
examines several factors including, but
not limited to, changes in the following:
(1) management; (2) production
facilities; (3) supplier relationships; (4)
customer base. See, e.g., Brake Rotors
From the People’s Republic of China:
Final Results of Changed Circumstances
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 70 FR 69941 (November 18,
2005), and Notice of Final Results of
Changed Circumstances Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review:
E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM
09JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 9, 2009 / Notices
Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan, 67
FR 58 (January 2, 2002). 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 Fresh and
Chilled Atlantic Salmon From Norway;
Final Results of Changed Circumstances
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 64 FR 9979 (March 1, 1999),
and Industrial Phosphoric Acid From
Israel: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Changed Circumstances Review,
59 FR 6944 (February 14, 1994).
Thus, if the evidence demonstrates
that, with respect to the production and
sale of 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.
Additionally, in changed–circumstances
reviews where the Department
determines that a successor company is
a successor–in-interest to a predecessor
company that had not been subject to
the order previously, the Department’s
practice is to apply the determination
back to the date of the occurrence that
prompted the changed–circumstances
review. See Certain Carbon Steel Butt–
Weld Pipe Fittings From Thailand: Final
Results of Changed–Circumstances
Antidumping Duty Review, 74 FR 8904
(February 27, 2009), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 1; see also Stainless Steel
Wire Rod from Italy: Notice of Final
Results of Changed Circumstances
Antidumping Duty Review, 71 FR
24643, 24644 (April 26, 2006), and
Certain Hot–Rolled Lead and Bismuth
Carbon Steel Products From the United
Kingdom: Final Results of Changed–
Circumstances Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews, 64 FR 66880, 66881 (November
30, 1999).
We preliminarily determine that SKF
Aeroengine is the successor–in-interest
to SNFA. In its February 6, 2009,
submission, SKF Aeroengine provided
evidence supporting its claim to be the
successor–in-interest to SNFA.
Specifically, SKF Aeroengine submitted
its Managing Director’s declaration that
the September 3, 2007, name change of
the company did not result in changes
in management, production facilities,
product mix, sales channels, supplier
base, or customer base. Moreover, in the
declaration, the Managing Director also
stated that there are no plans to alter
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:45 Jun 08, 2009
Jkt 217001
either the production facilities or
product mix of SKF Aeroengine, there
are no plans to integrate SKF
Aeroengine’s production with that of
either SKF France S.A. or SKF
Aerospace France S.A.S., and that SKF
Aeroengine continues to operate as a
separate and distinct business apart
from the other SKF entities located in
France. According to the declaration,
SKF Aeroengine employs the same
channels of distribution, payment terms,
and delivery modes to serve the same
customer base as SNFA had used. SKF
Aeroengine also submitted an outline of
its senior officers and board of directors
both before and after its name change to
demonstrate that the name change did
not affect its senior management.
Finally, SKF Aeroengine submitted an
outline of the senior officers and boards
of directors of SKF France S.A. and SKF
Aerospace France S.A.S. both before
and after the name change to
demonstrate that the name change did
not result in changes to the senior
management of either SKF France S.A.
or SKF Aerospace France S.A.S.
In summary, SKF Aeroengine has
presented evidence to establish a prima
facie case of its successorship status.
The record indicates that SNFA’s name
change to SKF Aeroengine has not
changed the operations of the company
in a meaningful way. SKF Aeroengine’s
management, production facilities,
supplier relationships, and customer
base are substantially unchanged from
those of SNFA. The record evidence
demonstrates that the new entity
operates essentially in the same manner
as the predecessor company.
Consequently, we preliminarily
determine that SKF Aeroengine should
be assigned the same antidumping–duty
treatment as SNFA.
Public Comment
Case briefs from interested parties
may be submitted not later than 30 days
after the date of publication of this
notice of preliminary results of
changed–circumstances review.
Rebuttal briefs from interested parties,
limited to the issues raised in the case
briefs, may be submitted not later than
five days after the time limit for filing
the case briefs or comments. Parties who
submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in
this proceeding are requested to submit
with each argument a statement of the
issue, a summary of the arguments not
exceeding five pages, and a table of
statutes, regulations, and cases cited.
Interested parties who wish to request
a hearing or to participate in a hearing
if a hearing is requested must submit a
written request to the Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
27281
within 30 days of the date of publication
of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.310(c).
Such requests should contain the
following information: (1) the party’s
name, address, and telephone number;
(2) the number of participants; (3) a list
of issues to be discussed. Issues raised
in the hearing will be limited to those
discussed in the case briefs. If
requested, any hearing will be held two
days after the scheduled date for
submission of rebuttal briefs.
The Department will publish in the
Federal Register a notice of the final
results of this changed–circumstances
review, including the results of its
analysis of issues raised in any written
briefs or at the hearing if requested.
As indicated in the CCR Initiation,
during the course of this changed–
circumstances review we will not
change any cash–deposit requirements
on entries of merchandise subject to the
antidumping duty order unless a change
is determined to be warranted pursuant
to the final results of this review.
We are issuing and publishing these
preliminary results and notice in
accordance with sections 751(b) and
777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216.
Dated: June 2, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–13493 Filed 6–8–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–580–839]
Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the
Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results
of the 2007/2008 Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
is conducting an administrative review
of the antidumping duty order on
certain polyester staple fiber from the
Republic of Korea. The period of review
is May 1, 2007, through April 30, 2008.
This review covers imports of certain
polyester staple fiber from one
producer/exporter. We preliminarily
find that sales of the subject
merchandise have been made below
normal value. If these preliminary
results are adopted in our final results,
we will instruct U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to assess
antidumping duties. Interested parties
are invited to comment on these
E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM
09JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 9, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27280-27281]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13493]
[[Page 27280]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-427-801]
Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France: Preliminary Results
of Changed-Circumstances Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce is conducting a changed-
circumstances review of the antidumping duty order on ball bearings and
parts thereof from France pursuant to section 751(b) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended. We preliminarily determine that SKF Aeroengine
France S.A.S.U. is the successor-in-interest to SNFA France S.A.S.U.
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 9, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Case or Richard Rimlinger, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; (202) 482-3174 or (202)
482-4477, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department of Commerce (the Department) published an
antidumping duty order on ball bearings and parts thereof from France
on May 15, 1989. See Antidumping Duty Orders: Ball Bearings,
Cylindrical Roller Bearings, Spherical Plain Bearings, and Parts
Thereof From France, 54 FR 20902 (May 15, 1989). On August 11, 2000,
the Department revoked the order, effective May 1, 1999, with respect
to sales of ball bearings by SNFA S.A. (subsequently SNFA S.A.S.U.).
See Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and
Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Romania, Singapore,
Sweden, and the United Kingdom; Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews and Revocation of Orders in Part, 65 FR 49219,
49221 (August 11, 2000).
On March 2, 2007, pursuant to a request from SNFA S.A.S.U. (SNFA),
SKF France S.A., and SKF Aerospace France S.A.S., we initiated a
changed-circumstances review in order to determine whether SNFA was a
successor-in-interest to SKF France S.A. following SNFA's acquisition
by that company or, alternatively, that post-acquisition SNFA was the
successor-in-interest to the pre-acquisition SNFA. See Ball Bearings
and Parts Thereof from France: Initiation of an Antidumping Duty
Changed-Circumstances Review, 72 FR 9513 (March 2, 2007). During the
course of the changed-circumstances review, the companies informed the
Department that SNFA would be changing its name to SKF Aeroengine
France S.A.S.U. (SKF Aeroengine).
On June 29, 2007, we initiated an administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on ball bearings and parts thereof from France
for the period May 1, 2006, through April 30, 2007, with respect to SKF
France S.A. and SKF Aerospace France S.A.S. See Initiation of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, Request for
Revocation in Part and Deferral of Administrative Review, 72 FR 35690
(June 29, 2007). On October 26, 2007, we rescinded the changed-
circumstances review initiated on March 2, 2007, and explained that,
because we had initiated an administrative review with respect to SKF
France S.A. and SKF Aerospace France S.A.S., we would address any
issues that had arisen during the course of the changed-circumstances
review in the context of the administrative review. See Ball Bearings
and Parts Thereof from France and Italy: Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Changed-Circumstances Reviews, 72 FR 60798, 60799 (October 26, 2007).
In the final results of the 2006/07 administrative review, we
determined that post-acquisition SNFA was the successor-in-interest to
pre-acquisition SNFA and that SNFA had not changed its name to SKF
Aeroengine until after the period of review. See Ball Bearings and
Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United
Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and
Rescission of Reviews in Part, 73 FR 52823 (September 11, 2008), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 12 (AFBs Final
Results).
On February 6, 2009, SKF Aeroengine requested that, because the
Department appeared to have left open the effect of the name change on
its determination in AFBs Final Results, the Department either confirm
that its determination encompassed the name change or, in the
alternative, the Department initiate a changed-circumstances review to
determine whether SKF Aeroengine is the successor-in-interest to SNFA.
Along with its request, SKF Aeroengine provided detailed information
comparing pre- and post-name change operational management, production
facilities, supplier relationships, and customer bases.
On March 30, 2009, we initiated a changed-circumstances review. See
Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France: Initiation of Antidumping
Duty Changed-Circumstances Review, 74 FR 14107 (March 30, 2009) (CCR
Initiation). Since the initiation of the review, no other interested
party has submitted comments.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the order are ball bearings (other than
tapered roller bearings) and parts thereof. These products include all
bearings that employ balls as the rolling element. Imports of these
products are classified under the following categories: antifriction
balls, ball bearings with integral shafts, ball bearings (including
radial ball bearings) and parts thereof, and housed or mounted ball
bearing units and parts thereof.
Imports of these products are classified under the following
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings:
3926.90.45, 4016.93.00, 4016.93.10, 4016.93.50, 6909.19.5010,
8431.20.00, 8431.39.0010, 8482.10.10, 8482.10.50, 8482.80.00,
8482.91.00, 8482.99.05, 8482.99.2580, 8482.99.35, 8482.99.6595,
8483.20.40, 8483.20.80, 8483.50.8040, 8483.50.90, 8483.90.20,
8483.90.30, 8483.90.70, 8708.50.50, 8708.60.50, 8708.60.80,
8708.70.6060, 8708.70.8050, 8708.93.30, 8708.93.5000, 8708.93.6000,
8708.93.75, 8708.99.06, 8708.99.31, 8708.99.4960, 8708.99.50,
8708.99.5800, 8708.99.8080, 8803.10.00, 8803.20.00, 8803.30.00,
8803.90.30, and 8803.90.90.
Although the HTSUS item numbers above are provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the order
is dispositive.
Preliminary Results
In conducting this changed-circumstances review pursuant to section
751(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department
has conducted a successor-in-interest analysis. In making a successor-
in-interest determination, the Department examines several factors
including, but not limited to, changes in the following: (1)
management; (2) production facilities; (3) supplier relationships; (4)
customer base. See, e.g., Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of
China: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 70 FR 69941 (November 18, 2005), and Notice of
Final Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review:
[[Page 27281]]
Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan, 67 FR 58 (January 2, 2002). 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 Fresh and Chilled
Atlantic Salmon From Norway; Final Results of Changed Circumstances
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 64 FR 9979 (March 1, 1999), and
Industrial Phosphoric Acid From Israel: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR 6944 (February 14, 1994).
Thus, if the evidence demonstrates that, with respect to the
production and sale of 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. Additionally, in changed-circumstances reviews where the
Department determines that a successor company is a successor-in-
interest to a predecessor company that had not been subject to the
order previously, the Department's practice is to apply the
determination back to the date of the occurrence that prompted the
changed-circumstances review. See Certain Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe
Fittings From Thailand: Final Results of Changed-Circumstances
Antidumping Duty Review, 74 FR 8904 (February 27, 2009), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1; see also
Stainless Steel Wire Rod from Italy: Notice of Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Antidumping Duty Review, 71 FR 24643, 24644 (April 26,
2006), and Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products
From the United Kingdom: Final Results of Changed-Circumstances
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 64 FR
66880, 66881 (November 30, 1999).
We preliminarily determine that SKF Aeroengine is the successor-in-
interest to SNFA. In its February 6, 2009, submission, SKF Aeroengine
provided evidence supporting its claim to be the successor-in-interest
to SNFA. Specifically, SKF Aeroengine submitted its Managing Director's
declaration that the September 3, 2007, name change of the company did
not result in changes in management, production facilities, product
mix, sales channels, supplier base, or customer base. Moreover, in the
declaration, the Managing Director also stated that there are no plans
to alter either the production facilities or product mix of SKF
Aeroengine, there are no plans to integrate SKF Aeroengine's production
with that of either SKF France S.A. or SKF Aerospace France S.A.S., and
that SKF Aeroengine continues to operate as a separate and distinct
business apart from the other SKF entities located in France. According
to the declaration, SKF Aeroengine employs the same channels of
distribution, payment terms, and delivery modes to serve the same
customer base as SNFA had used. SKF Aeroengine also submitted an
outline of its senior officers and board of directors both before and
after its name change to demonstrate that the name change did not
affect its senior management. Finally, SKF Aeroengine submitted an
outline of the senior officers and boards of directors of SKF France
S.A. and SKF Aerospace France S.A.S. both before and after the name
change to demonstrate that the name change did not result in changes to
the senior management of either SKF France S.A. or SKF Aerospace France
S.A.S.
In summary, SKF Aeroengine has presented evidence to establish a
prima facie case of its successorship status. The record indicates that
SNFA's name change to SKF Aeroengine has not changed the operations of
the company in a meaningful way. SKF Aeroengine's management,
production facilities, supplier relationships, and customer base are
substantially unchanged from those of SNFA. The record evidence
demonstrates that the new entity operates essentially in the same
manner as the predecessor company. Consequently, we preliminarily
determine that SKF Aeroengine should be assigned the same antidumping-
duty treatment as SNFA.
Public Comment
Case briefs from interested parties may be submitted not later than
30 days after the date of publication of this notice of preliminary
results of changed-circumstances review. Rebuttal briefs from
interested parties, limited to the issues raised in the case briefs,
may be submitted not later than five days after the time limit for
filing the case briefs or comments. Parties who submit case briefs or
rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are requested to submit with each
argument a statement of the issue, a summary of the arguments not
exceeding five pages, and a table of statutes, regulations, and cases
cited.
Interested parties who wish to request a hearing or to participate
in a hearing if a hearing is requested must submit a written request to
the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration within 30 days of the
date of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Such
requests should contain the following information: (1) the party's
name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants;
(3) a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will
be limited to those discussed in the case briefs. If requested, any
hearing will be held two days after the scheduled date for submission
of rebuttal briefs.
The Department will publish in the Federal Register a notice of the
final results of this changed-circumstances review, including the
results of its analysis of issues raised in any written briefs or at
the hearing if requested.
As indicated in the CCR Initiation, during the course of this
changed-circumstances review we will not change any cash-deposit
requirements on entries of merchandise subject to the antidumping duty
order unless a change is determined to be warranted pursuant to the
final results of this review.
We are issuing and publishing these preliminary results and notice
in accordance with sections 751(b) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.216.
Dated: June 2, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-13493 Filed 6-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S