Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2002 / Notices 57

interested party intends for the 

Secretary to review sales of merchandise 

by an exporter (or a producer if that 

producer also exports merchandise from 

other suppliers) which were produced 

in more than one country of origin and 

each country of origin is subject to a 

separate order, then the interested party 

must state specifically, on an order-byorder basis, which exporter(s) the 

request is intended to cover. 

Six copies of the request should be 

submitted to the Assistant Secretary for 

Import Administration, International 

Trade Administration, Room 1870, U.S. 

Department of Commerce, 14th Street & 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230. The Department also asks 

parties to serve a copy of their requests 

to the Office of Antidumping/ 

Countervailing Enforcement, Attention: 

Sheila Forbes, in room 3065 of the main 

Commerce Building. Further, in 

accordance with section 351.303(f)(l)(i) 

of the regulations, a copy of each 

request must be served on every party 

on the Department’s service list. 

The Department will publish in the 

Federal Register a notice of ‘‘Initiation 

of Administrative Review of 

Antidumping or Countervailing Duty 

Order, Finding, or Suspended 

Investigation’’ for requests received by 

the last day of January 2002. If the 

Department does not receive, by the last 

day of January 2002, a request for 

review of entries covered by an order, 

finding, or suspended investigation 

listed in this notice and for the period 

identified above, the Department will 

instruct the Customs Service to assess 

antidumping or countervailing duties on 

those entries at a rate equal to the cash 

deposit of (or bond for) estimated 

antidumping or countervailing duties 

required on those entries at the time of 

entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, 

for consumption and to continue to 

collect the cash deposit previously 

ordered. 

This notice is not required by statute 

but is published as a service to the 

international trading community.

Dated: December 19, 2001. 

Holly A. Kuga, 

Senior Office Director, Group II, Office 4, 

Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 01–31838 Filed 12–31–01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration 

Notice of Initiation of Five-Year 

Reviews

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of initiation of five-year 

(‘‘Sunset’’) reviews. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 

751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (‘‘the Act’’), the Department of 

Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) is 

automatically initiating five-year 

(‘‘sunset’’) reviews of the antidumping 

duty orders listed below. The 

International Trade Commission (‘‘the 

Commission’’) is publishing 

concurrently with this notice its notice 

of Institution of Five-Year Review

covering the same antidumping duty 

orders.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James P. Maeder, or Martha V. Douthit, 

Office of Policy, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, at (202) 

482–3330 or (202) 482–5050, 

respectively, or Vera Libeau, Office of 

Investigations, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, at (202) 205–3176.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Applicable Statue 

Unless otherwise indicated, all 

citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (the ‘‘Act’’), are references to 

the provisions effective January 1, 1995, 

the effective date of the amendments 

made to the Act by the Uruguay Round 

Agreements Act (‘‘URAA’’). In addition, 

unless otherwise indicated, all citations 

to the Department of Commerce’s 

(‘‘Department’’) regulations are to 19 

CFR part 351 (2001). Pursuant to 

sections 751(c) and 752 of the Act, an 

antidumping (‘‘AD’’) or countervailing 

duty (‘‘CVD’’) order will be revoked, or 

the suspended investigation will be 

terminated, unless revocation or 

termination would be likely to lead to 

continuation or recurrence of (1) 

dumping or a countervailable subsidy, 

and (2) material injury to the domestic 

industry. 

The Department’s procedures for 

conducting sunset reviews are set forth 

in 19 CFR 351.218. 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 Fiveyear (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews of 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 

(April 16, 1998) (‘‘Sunset Policy 

Bulletin’’). 

Background 

Initiation of Reviews 

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.218 

we are initiating sunset reviews of the 

following antidumping duty orders:

DOC Case No. ITC Case No. Country Product 

A–570–844 731–TA–741 China ......................................................... Melamine Institutional Dinnerware 

A–560–801 731–TA–742 Indonesia .................................................. Melamine Institutional Dinnerware 

A–583–825 731–TA–743 Taiwan ...................................................... Melamine Institutional Dinnerware 

Filing Information 

As a courtesy, we are making 

information related to sunset 

proceedings, including copies of the 

Sunset Regulations (19 CFR 351.218) 

and Sunset Policy Bulletin, the 

Department’s schedule of sunset 

reviews, case history information (i.e.,

previous margins, duty absorption 

determinations, scope language, import 

volumes), and service lists, available to 

the public on the Department’s 

‘‘Sunset’’ Internet website at the 

following address: http://ia.ita.doc.gov/

sunset

All submissions in these sunset 

reviews 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. 

Also, we suggest that parties check the 

Department’s sunset website for any 

updates to the service lists before filing 

any submissions. The Department will 

make additions to and/or deletions from 

the service lists provided on the sunset 

website based on notifications from 

parties and participation in these 

reviews. Specifically, the Department 

will delete from the service lists all 

parties that do not submit a substantive 

response to the notice of initiation. 

Because deadlines in a sunset review 

are, in many instances, very 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 the notice of 

initiation of the sunset reviews. The 

58 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2002 / Notices 

1A number of parties commented that these 

interim-final regulations provided insufficient time 

for rebuttals to substantive responses to a notice of 

initiation, 19 CFR 351.218(d)(4). As provided in 19 

CFR 351.302(b), the Department will consider 

individual requests for extension of that five-day 

deadline based upon a showing of good cause.

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 19 CFR 351.102) wishing to 

participate in these sunset reviews must 

respond not later than 15 days after the 

date of publication in the Federal 

Register of the notice of initiation 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 from at least one domestic 

interested party by the 15-day deadline, 

the Department will automatically 

revoke the order without further review. 

If we receive an order-specific notice 

of intent to participate from a domestic 

interested party, the Department’s 

regulations provide that all parties

wishing to participate in the sunset 

reviews must file substantive responses 

not later than 30 days after the date of 

publication in the Federal Register of 

the notice of initiation. The required 

contents of a substantive response, on 

an order-specific basis, are set forth at 

19 CFR 351.218(d)(3). Note that certain 

information requirements differ for 

foreign and domestic parties. Also, note 

that the Department’s information 

requirements are distinct from the 

International Trade Commission’s 

information requirements. 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.

This notice of initiation is being 

published in accordance with section 

751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c).

Dated: December 18, 2001. 

Bernard T. Carreau, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration.

[FR Doc. 01–32245 Filed 12–31–01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration 

[A–588–046] 

Notice of Final Results of Changed 

Circumstances Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review: 

Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of 

changed circumstances antidumping 

duty administrative review. 

SUMMARY: On November 21, 2001, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published a notice of 

initiation and preliminary results of a 

changed circumstances review of the 

antidumping duty finding on 

polychloroprene rubber from Japan. See 

Notice of Initiation and Preliminary 

Results of Changed Circumstances 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From 

Japan, 66 FR 58436 (November 21, 

2001) (Preliminary Results). We have 

now completed that review. For these 

final results, as in the Preliminary 

Results, we have determined that the 

restructured manufacturing and 

marketing joint ventures, Showa DDE 

Manufacturing KK (SDEM) and DDE 

Japan Kabushiki Kaisha (DDE Japan), are 

the successor-in-interest companies to 

Dupont Showa Denko (SDP) and its 

predecessor, Showa Neoprene, for 

purposes of determining antidumping 

liability in this proceeding.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 2, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron 

Trentham or Tom Futtner, AD/CVD 

Enforcement, Group II, Office 4, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482–6320 or (202) 482–

3814, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The Applicable Statute and Regulations 

Unless otherwise stated, all citations 

to the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(the Act), are references to the 

provisions as of January 1, 1995, the 

effective date of the amendments made 

to the Act by the Uruguay Round 

Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, 

unless otherwise indicated, all 

references to the regulations of the 

Department are to 19 CFR part 351 

(2001). 

Background 

In a letter dated September 27, 2001, 

DuPont Dow Elastomers L.L.C. (Dupont 

Dow) and DDE Japan advised the 

Department that in 1998, SDP was 

restructured. The production portion of 

SDP was renamed SDEM. Further, the 

marketing end of SDP’s business was 

separated from SDEM and renamed DDE 

Japan. According to Dupont Dow and 

DDE Japan, these entities were renamed 

to reflect Dupont Dow’s participation in 

the joint ventures and to make the 

companies more globally competitive. 

Nevertheless, like SDP and similar to 

Showa Neoprene, the two firms, SDEM 

and DDE Japan, remained jointly owned 

ventures of Dupont Dow and Showa 

Denko KK. 

On November 21, 2001, the 

Department published a notice of 

initiation and preliminary results of a 

changed circumstances review of the 

antidumping duty finding on 

polychloroprene rubber from Japan. See 

Preliminary Results. Interested parties 

were invited to comment on the 

preliminary results. On December 11, 

2001, Dupont Dow Elastomers L.L.C. 

and DDE Japan Kabushiki Kaisha 

submitted comments. See Comments 

section below. 

Scope of Review 

Imports covered by this review are 

shipments of polychloroprene rubber, 

an oil resistant synthetic rubber also 

known as polymerized chlorobutadiene 

or neoprene, currently classifiable under 

items 4002.42.00, 4002.49.00, 

4003.00.00, 4462.15.21 and 4462.00.00 

of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 

the United States (HTSUS). HTSUS item 

numbers are provided for convenience 

and for U.S. Customs Service purposes. 

The written descriptions remain 

dispositive. 

Successorship 

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 Brass Sheet and 

Strip from Canada: Notice of Final 

Results of Antidumping Administrative 

Review, 57 FR 20460, 20462 (May 13, 

1992) (Canadian Brass). While no one or 

several of these factors will necessarily 

provide a dispositive indication, the 

Department will generally consider the 

new company to be the successor to the 

previous company if its resulting 

operation is not materially dissimilar to 

that of its predecessor. See, e.g., 

Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Israel: