Notice of Proposed Amendments to Rules of Practice and Procedure

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

19 CFR Parts 201 and 207

Notice of Proposed Amendments to Rules of Practice and Procedure

AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The United States International Trade Commission (the

Commission) proposes to amend its Rules of Practice and Procedure

concerning antidumping and countervailing duty investigations and

reviews in 19 CFR parts 201 and 207. The proposed amendments will

establish procedures for five-year reviews of antidumping and

countervailing duty orders and suspension agreements that the

Commission will begin to conduct in 1998 pursuant to the provisions of

section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

DATES: To be assured of consideration, written comments must be

received not later than December 22, 1997. Rebuttal comments must be

received not later than January 21, 1998.

ADDRESSES: A signed original and 14 copies of each set of comments,

along with a cover letter, should be submitted to the Secretary, U.S.

International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW, Washington, D.C.

20436.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marc A. Bernstein, Office of General

Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission (telephone: 202-205-3087,

e-mail: [email protected]), or Vera A. Libeau, Office of

Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission (telephone 202-205-

3176, e-mail: [email protected]). Hearing-impaired individuals are

advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting

the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) fundamentally revised the

Act by requiring that antidumping and countervailing duty orders and

suspension agreements be revoked after five years unless revocation

would be likely to lead to a continuation or recurrence of (1) dumping

or a countervailable subsidy, and (2) material injury to the domestic

industry. The URAA assigns to the Commission the responsibility of

determining whether revocation of an antidumping or countervailing duty

order, or termination of a suspension agreement, is likely to lead to

the continuation or recurrence of material injury. The URAA requires

that the Department of Commerce (Commerce) begin initiating five-year

reviews in July 1998, that all five-year reviews of ``transition

orders''--those antidumping and countervailing duty orders and

suspension agreements in effect on January 1, 1995, when the United

States acceded to the Uruguay Round Agreements--be initiated by

December 31, 1999, and that all reviews of transition orders be

completed by June 30, 2001. The URAA further requires that Commerce

initiate a five-year review of each order or agreement that is not a

``transition order'' no later than 30 days before the fifth anniversary

of publication of the order or agreement in the Federal Register.

This notice proposes new procedures for five-year reviews. As

described below, some of the proposed procedures will be reflected in

changes to the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. Other

proposed procedures, such as scheduling, relate to internal agency

practices and do not require regulations. Nevertheless, this notice

describes several of these proposals and invites public comment on all

proposed regulations and procedures.

The Commission has determined that these proposed regulations do

not meet the criteria described in section 3(f) of the Executive Order

12866 (58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993) (EO) and thus do not constitute a

significant regulatory

action for purposes of the EO. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.

601 note) is inapplicable to this rulemaking, because it is not one for

which a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) is required under 5 U.S.C.

553(b) or any other statute. Although the Commission has chosen to

publish an NOPR, these proposed regulations are ``agency rules of

procedure and practice,'' and thus are exempt from the notice

requirement imposed by 5 U.S.C. 553(b).

The draft notice of institution reproduced at Annex A to this

Notice constitutes an information collection request subject to the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. After

consultation with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the

Commission believes that the contemplated collection of information

pursuant to the draft notice of institution is encompassed within a

clearance OMB has given the Commission under the Paperwork Reduction

Act to collect information for antidumping and countervailing duty

investigations and reviews, including those undertaken pursuant to

section 751 of the Act. This clearance has been assigned OMB Control

Number 3117-0016.

Request for Comment

The Commission solicits comments pertaining to its proposals

concerning five-year reviews. The Commission will conduct a two-step

comment process. Initial comments should be received by the Commission

Secretary not later than December 22, 1997. Rebuttals to the initial

comments may also be filed. Any rebuttal comments should be received by

the Commission Secretary not later than January 21, 1998. All comments

will be available for public inspection in the Commission's Public

Docket Room between the hours of 8:45 am and 5:15 pm, Monday through

Friday (except Federal Holidays).

Commenters are invited to address several distinct matters in their

comments and rebuttal comments. The Commission requests that, to

facilitate its review, commenters organize their comments as follows:

Section I of the comments should address the proposed amendments to

the part 201 and 207 regulations presented in this notice.

Section II of the comments should address proposed procedures for

five-year reviews that the Commission has discussed in this notice, but

has not incorporated into the proposed amendments to the part 201 and

part 207 regulations. These would include, for example, comments on the

format or specific questions of the sample notice of institution

appearing as Annex A to this notice, or comments on the proposed

schedule appearing as Annex B to this notice.

Section III of the comments should address any other issues

commenters may desire to raise pertaining to five-year reviews. The

regulations proposed below solely concern the procedures that the

Commission intends to use in conducting five-year reviews. The proposed

regulations do not address what methodology the Commission, or

individual Commissioners, may use to determine whether revocation of an

order, or termination of a suspended investigation, would be likely to

lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a

reasonably foreseeable time. Nor do the proposed regulations address

how the Commission, or individual Commissioners, will analyze the

various factors specified in section 752(a) of the Act in making

determinations in five-year reviews.

Although the Commission does not intend to issue regulations

pertaining to methodological or analytical issues in five-year reviews,

many private practitioners may desire the opportunity to address the

Commission about such issues before the reviews begin. The Commission

therefore invites persons to file comments on such issues in

conjunction with their comments on the procedural matters discussed in

this NOPR.

Hearing

The Commission also intends to hold a public hearing at which

interested persons will be invited to present their views regarding the

procedural matters discussed in this NOPR as well as methodological and

analytical issues relating to five-year reviews. The Commission will

issue a notice in advance of the hearing setting forth the date of the

hearing and the procedures that will be followed at the hearing. The

hearing will be held after the submission of the rebuttal comments.

Overview of the Proposed Regulations

The Commission is proposing to promulgate a series of new

regulations, to be codified in Subpart F of Part 207, establishing

procedures for five-year reviews. Several of the proposed regulations

closely resemble current regulations in Subpart C of Part 207

concerning final phase antidumping and countervailing duty

investigations. Others establish new procedures that address unique

aspects of the five-year review mechanism created by the URAA.

The statute requires Commerce to initiate all five-year reviews

automatically. As part of the initiation, Commerce and the Commission

are authorized to request that interested parties submit certain

information needed to conduct the review. Accordingly, one of the

proposed regulations describes the information that the Commission will

request from interested parties upon initiation of the review. Each

interested party will be requested to state its willingness to

participate in the review, and describe the likely effects of

revocation of the order or termination of the suspended investigation

under review. In addition, the Commission will request that each

interested party provide other information or industry data, including

a statement concerning conditions of competition in the pertinent

domestic industry, a listing of U.S. producers of the domestic like

product and importers and foreign producers of the subject merchandise,

and certain quantitative data concerning its operations. All interested

parties will be requested to furnish this information to the Commission

within 30 days. (Interested parties that desire to participate as

parties in the Commission review must also file entries of appearance

with the Commission within 21 days.) These provisions will aid the

Commission in ascertaining whether interested parties have sufficient

willingness to participate in a five-year review. They will also

provide the Commission with record information for use in an expedited

determination, if appropriate.

Section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act authorizes the Commission to make

an expedited determination without further investigation when

interested party responses to the notice of initiation are inadequate.

Interested parties that have entered appearances in the review and have

responded to the notice of institution and other parties that have

entered appearances in the review will be permitted to file a brief

submission concerning whether an expedited determination is appropriate

based on the adequacy of interested party responses to the notice of

institution.

The Commission will consider these comments and the responses to

the notice of institution and determine whether the review should be

expedited approximately 95 days after publication of the notice of

institution. Should the Commission determine to expedite the review,

interested parties that have entered appearances in the review and have

responded adequately to the notice of institution and other parties

that have entered appearances in the review will be provided the

opportunity to submit comments concerning the merits of the review

before the Commission's

determination on the merits. The record evidence in the expedited

review will be limited to that already available to the Commission.

Should the Commission determine not to expedite the review, the

review will proceed in a manner closely resembling a final phase

antidumping or countervailing duty investigation. Several of the

proposed regulations apply existing procedures to five-year reviews.

For example, parties that have entered appearances in the review will

have the opportunity to submit written comments on draft

questionnaires. They will receive prehearing and final reports from the

Commission staff, and will have the opportunity to present testimony at

a hearing before the Commission and to file prehearing and posthearing

briefs and final comments.

Section-by-Section Analysis of the Proposed Regulations

Section 201.11

Section 201.11 concerns the filing of entries of appearance in

Commission investigations and reviews. The Commission is proposing to

add new paragraphs (b)(4) and (b)(5) to this section to govern the

filing of entries of appearance in five-year reviews. Under proposed

section 201.11(b)(4), a party will have 21 days from publication of the

Commission's notice of institution of five-year review to file an entry

of appearance.

If the Commission determines not to expedite the review, it will

issue a notice of scheduling approximately 95 days after institution of

the review. (See proposed section 207.62.) Under proposed section

201.11(b)(5), a party will have an additional 45 days after publication

of this notice to file an entry of appearance.

Section 207.3

Section 207.3(b) requires parties to provide hand or overnight

service of, inter alia, prehearing briefs, hearing testimony, and

posthearing briefs filed in antidumping and countervailing duty

investigations. The proposed amendment adds cross-references to several

of the new provisions in Subpart F to existing requirements regarding

service.

Section 207.45

Section 207.45 concerns changed circumstances reviews pursuant to

section 751(b) of the Act. The proposed amendment changes the statutory

cross-reference in section 207.45(a) so it specifically cites section

751(b). No substantive change is intended.

Section 207.46

Section 207.46 is an interim regulation that establishes procedures

for investigations under section 753 of the Act, which concerns

countervailing duty orders issued under former section 303 of the Act

without an injury determination by the Commission.1 The

proposed regulation contains three changes from the interim regulation.

First, in the caption for subsection 207.46(g) and in the first

sentence of section 207.46(g)(1), the word ``expedited'' has been

deleted to avoid any confusion between simultaneous reviews conducted

pursuant to section 753(e) of the Act and five-year reviews that are

expedited pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act. Second, the

second sentence of section 207.46(g)(1) has been deleted as

unnecessary. This sentence requires that requests for simultaneous

five-year reviews under section 753(e) of the Act contain a statement

why revocation of the order to be reviewed would lead to continuation

or recurrence of material injury. Should a simultaneous five-year

review be conducted, a similar statement will be requested in the

notice of institution. Third, the final sentence in section

207.46(g)(2) has been amended to refer to the new Subpart F governing

five-year reviews.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\Section 207.46 became effective on January 1, 1995, together

with several other interim regulations that were designed to conform

the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure to the URAA pending

adoption of final regulations. See 60 Fed. Reg. 18 (Jan. 3, 1995).

When the Commission proposed adopting its other interim regulations

as final regulations, it did not do so with respect to section

207.46, because it perceived section 207.46 to relate to the general

question of five-year reviews and stated that ``the Commission is

not prepared to address the question of ``sunset'' reviews at this

time.'' 60 Fed. Reg. 51748, 51753 (Oct. 3, 1995). Now that the

Commission is establishing procedures for five-year reviews, it

believes that proposing to adopt section 207.46 as a final

regulation is appropriate. (The Commission contemplates that it will

be conducting investigations under section 753, pursuant to pending

requests, during 1997-98. Additionally, there is a theoretical

possibility that future requests for section 753 investigations may

be filed if additional countries become Subsidies Agreement

countries.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 207.60

Proposed section 207.60 defines certain terms used in Subpart F of

Part 207 concerning five-year reviews. The first three definitions,

``five-year review,'' ``expedited determination,'' and ``notice of

institution,'' are proposed to promote economy of wording. ``Five-year

review'' is a five-year review investigation conducted under section

751(c) of the Act. ``Expedited determination'' is a determination made

under section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act. ``Notice of institution'' is the

notice of institution of five-year review that the Commission will

publish in the Federal Register upon initiation of a review. The

remaining three terms, ``domestic like product,'' ``domestic

industry,'' and ``subject merchandise,'' are terms commonly used in

antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings, and are based on

sections 771(10), 771(4)(A), and 771(25) of the Act, respectively.

Section 207.61

When Commerce initiates a five-year review, the Commission will

publish a notice of institution of five-year review in the Federal

Register informing interested parties and other persons of their

opportunity to provide information to the Commission. Proposed section

207.61 describes what interested parties will be requested to submit to

the Commission in response to the notice of institution.

Each interested party (as that term is defined in section 771(9) of

the Act) may respond to the notice of institution whether or not it

entered an appearance in the Commission review proceedings. If

interested parties do not file adequate responses, however, the

Commission may determine not to conduct a full review investigation,

but instead may issue an expedited determination based on the facts

available pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act. The Commission's

evaluation of adequacy is described below in the discussion of proposed

section 207.62.

Proposed Sec. 207.61(a) states that responses to the notice of

institution must be submitted to the Commission no later than 30 days

after publication of the notice in the Federal Register. The Commission

believes that 30 days will be ample time for interested parties to

submit the requested information, particularly since the Commission

will provide public notice (through this rulemaking and other actions)

of the type of information that will be requested in five-year reviews

well in advance of the actual institution of any five-year reviews.

Moreover, the Commission intends that it will jointly prepare with

Commerce a final schedule of all transition reviews, which will be

published in the Federal Register before the initiation of the first

review. This notice will provide interested parties with sufficient

advance notice of scheduling of all transition reviews to enable them

to know approximately when such information will be due before

publication of the actual notice of institution. This notice will also

be mailed to the embassy in Washington, D.C. of each country that will

be a

subject country in any five-year review. Persons who are not interested

parties will also be provided an opportunity to respond under proposed

Sec. 207.61(e), as discussed below.

Proposed paragraphs (b) and (c) describe what interested parties

will be requested to submit to the Commission in response to the notice

of institution. Sections 751(c)(2)(A), (B), and (C) of the Act

expressly direct the Commission and Commerce to request interested

parties to submit: (1) A statement expressing their willingness to

participate in the review by providing information requested by the

agencies, (2) a statement regarding the likely effects of revocation of

the order or termination of the suspension agreement under review, and

(3) such other information or industry data as the agencies may

specify. The URAA's legislative history specifically contemplates that

the Commission may seek detailed quantitative data from interested

parties upon initiation of a five-year review, such as ``certain key

data regarding sales, prices, imports, and market conditions.''

2

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ URAA Statement of Administrative Action (SAA), H.R. Rep.

316, 103d Cong., 2d Sess., vol. 1 at 879 (1994).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission has two reasons for requesting the submission of

certain information and quantitative data from interested parties upon

initiation of a five-year review. First, the Commission must determine

whether there is sufficient willingness among interested parties to

participate in the review and adequate indication that parties will

submit requested information throughout the proceeding. The Commission

could not effectively ascertain whether such willingness exists--and

whether any future investigative efforts are likely to be fruitful--if

interested parties were permitted merely to submit pro forma statements

of intent to participate. When such willingness does not exist or is

limited, an expedited review will be more efficient for both the

parties and the Commission than conducting a full review.

Second, the responses to the notice of institution will provide the

Commission with information for the record it can use in making a

determination, particularly an expedited determination pursuant to

section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act. Section 752(a) of the Act requires the

Commission to consider a number of factors when it makes its

determination, including an expedited determination, in a five-year

review. Additionally, the Commission's expedited determinations are

subject to review by U.S. courts, NAFTA Chapter 19 panels, and/or the

WTO Dispute Settlement Body.

As a practical matter, the Commission's sole opportunity in

expedited reviews to obtain information that will enhance its ability

to reach a defensible determination--beyond what is available from the

original record--is to request such information in the notice of

institution. Thus, because of the possibility of an expedited

determination in any five-year review, there is a certain amount of

information gathering at the initiation stage that is simply

unavoidable and any resulting burden on interested parties is inherent

in the statutory scheme. Moreover, the information to be submitted is

the same type of information that the Commission necessarily would seek

at some point in the review. At most, therefore, the proposed

regulations request interested parties to submit information earlier in

the review process. The Commission nevertheless solicits comments

addressing what amount and type of information should be requested in

the notice of institution that will enable the Commission to assess the

willingness of interested parties to participate in a full five-year

review and to make an expedited determination when such a determination

is appropriate, while minimizing burdens on interested parties.

Interested party responses to the notice of institution will be in

two parts. One part will be filed with the Secretary. The other will be

submitted to the Office of Investigations. The Commission believes that

such a bifurcated filing process will reduce the burdens to interested

parties in submitting business proprietary information (BPI), because,

as explained below, the parties need not justify proprietary treatment

for information they will submit to the Office of Investigations or

prepare and file a public version of this submission. The evaluation of

whether the response of an individual interested party is adequate will

be based on that party's response to both parts of the notice.

The first part of the response, which proposed section 207.61(b)

addresses, will be filed with the Secretary pursuant to the

requirements of Commission rules 201.8 and 207.3. This submission will

include the material specified in section 751(c)(2)(A) and (B) of the

Act: a statement that the submitter is willing to participate in the

review by providing requested information and a statement regarding the

likely effects of revocation of the order or termination of the

suspended investigation. These requirements are set forth in proposed

sections 207.61(b)(1) and (b)(2). The submission will also provide

identifying information: the submitter's name, address, telephone

number, facsimile number, electronic mail address and (if applicable)

World Wide Web site address, and a statement indicating whether it is a

producer of the domestic like product, a U.S. importer of subject

merchandise, a foreign producer or exporter of subject merchandise, or

another type of interested party.

Interested parties will also be asked to list all known and

currently operating U.S. producers of the domestic like product, all

known and currently operating U.S. importers of subject merchandise,

and all known and currently operating producers of the subject

merchandise in each subject country that currently export or have

exported subject merchandise to the United States or to any other

country during the period specified in the notice of institution. This

material will aid the Commission in determining the adequacy of

interested party responses to the notice of institution. Interested

parties will be required only to furnish information in their

possession to compile these lists. If this information is not in the

interested party's possession, however, it must expressly so indicate

in its response to the Commission pursuant to proposed section

207.61(d).

Additionally, each interested party will be provided the option of

stating whether it agrees with the definitions of the domestic like

product and domestic industry that the Commission adopted in its

original investigation(s). Interested parties that respond that they

disagree with an original definition will be requested to explain why

and to provide an alternative definition. This information will assist

the Commission to ascertain the like product and domestic industry

issues that may arise in each review, and the extent and nature of any

future investigative activity it may conduct.

The second part of the response to the notice of institution, which

proposed section 207.61(c) addresses, will be a submission to the

Commission's Office of Investigations. Domestic producers, foreign

producers of subject merchandise, and U.S. importers of subject

merchandise will be requested to furnish certain quantitative data to

the Office of Investigations concerning their operations. Each domestic

producer will be asked to provide information about the domestic like

product(s) defined by the Commission in the original investigation(s)

giving rise to the review, including information on capacity,

production, commercial shipments, inventories, employment, financial

performance, and prices. Each

importer of subject merchandise will be asked to provide information

about its import volumes, commercial shipments, inventories, and prices

for the subject merchandise. Each foreign producer of subject

merchandise will be asked to provide information about its capacity,

production, home market shipments, export shipments, and inventories of

the subject merchandise. The Commission will request each party to

submit actual data for the most recently completed calendar year, and

projections for the succeeding calendar year (which will generally be

the calendar year in which the notice of institution is published) in

accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. The notice of

institution for each review will specify the particular data that

interested parties are to furnish.

Each interested party will also be requested to provide certain

narrative information to the Office of Investigations. First, each

interested party will be requested to identify significant changes in

the supply of and demand for the domestic like product that have

occurred since the order(s) or agreement(s) under review became

effective. This will provide the Commission with information concerning

conditions of competition that it can use in making a determination.

Additionally, interested parties in grouped reviews involving multiple

subject countries will be asked to explain the extent to which the

domestic like product competes or is likely to compete with subject

merchandise from each subject country, and the degree to which

merchandise from each subject country competes or is likely to compete

with merchandise from each other subject country. This will provide the

Commission with information pertinent to its determination on

cumulation.

Finally, under proposed section 207.61(c)(2), interested parties

will be free to furnish any other information or data relevant to the

Commission's determination. For example, interested parties may desire

to provide information not specifically requested in the notice of

institution pertinent to one or more of the factors that the Commission

is to consider under section 752(a) of the Act in rendering a

determination in a five-year review. Interested parties may also desire

to indicate which domestic producers are related parties under section

771(4)(B) of the Act.

Any submission that interested parties make pursuant to section

207.61(c) will be submitted to the Office of Investigations and will

not be subject to the filing requirements of section 201.8. Instead,

only a single copy of the submission need be filed with the Office of

Investigations. The Commission contemplates that substantially all of

the information contained in this submission will be business

proprietary. Consequently, the Commission will automatically accord

such submissions proprietary treatment, except to the extent the

information is otherwise publicly available. A submitter need not

submit the justification for proprietary treatment or public versions

of the submissions that would otherwise be required by Commission rules

201.6 or 201.8. This procedure will accord the same treatment to these

submissions that has long been accorded to questionnaires submitted to

the Office of Investigations in Commission investigations. Pursuant to

Commission rule 207.3(b), interested parties that entered appearances

in the review must serve the public version of the submission described

in section 207.61(b) on all other parties to the review and the

proprietary versions of both parts of their response to the notice of

institution (i.e., the submissions described in both sections 207.61(b)

and 207.61(c)) on all representatives on the Administrative Protective

Order (APO) service list.

A sample notice of institution appears at Annex A to this notice.

The Commission contemplates that interested parties will be able to

obtain forms, whose use will be optional, to respond to the notice of

institution in a specific review from the Office of Investigations or

the Commission's World Wide Web site.

Proposed section 207.61(d) addresses situations in which an

interested party cannot furnish the information requested in the notice

of institution in the form or manner requested. In such instances, the

interested party should explain in its response why it is unable to

comply and indicate alternative forms in which it can provide such

information. This section is intended to apply the provisions of

section 782(c)(1) of the Act in the context of responses to notices of

institution.

Pursuant to section 782(b) of the Act and Commission rule 207.3(a),

any person that submits information in response to the notice of

institution or that makes a submission pursuant to section 207.61(e)

must certify that the information is accurate and complete to the best

of its knowledge. The Commission contemplates that the standard forms

it will make available for responses to the notice of institution will

contain specific language, such as that currently used in

questionnaires in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations,

for the required certification. Interested parties must certify both

parts of their responses (i.e., the submissions described in section

207.61(b) and section 207.61(c)).

Each individual interested party response to the notice of

institution will be reviewed for completeness by Commission staff

immediately upon its receipt. Commission staff will attempt to notify

each interested party of any deficiencies in its response, will state

the nature of the deficiency and will, to the extent practicable,

provide it with a brief period of time (approximately 5-10 days) in

which to remedy or explain the deficiency. The Commission will not

collect or accept any additional information or conduct other

investigative activity thereafter unless it decides to proceed to a

full review. This notification procedure is intended to apply the

provisions of section 782(d) of the Act in the context of responses to

notices of institution.

The Act provides the Commission with several potential courses of

action when interested parties fail to provide responses to the notice

of institution or provide responses that are deficient. Under section

782(d) of the Act, when a person fails to respond in a satisfactory or

timely manner to a request to remedy or explain a deficiency in a

submission, the Commission may disregard all or part of the submission.

Under section 776(b) of the Act, when an interested party fails to

cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with a

Commission request for information, the Commission may take an adverse

inference against the party in reaching a determination. Consequently,

when an interested party neither provides the information requested in

the notice of institution nor provides an acceptable explanation of its

inability to provide such information, the Commission may take an

adverse inference against that party in reaching any determination in a

five-year review, including an expedited determination.

Proposed section 207.61(e) provides an opportunity for those

persons that are not interested parties as defined by the Act (such as

industrial users, and, if merchandise under investigation is sold at

the retail level, representative consumer groups) to submit information

they consider relevant to the Commission's five-year review. Such

information must be filed with the Commission Secretary in accordance

with the provisions of section 201.8 within the 30-day period

applicable to interested party responses to the notice of institution.

Section 207.62

Section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act permits the Commission to make

expedited determinations in five-year reviews when ``interested parties

provide inadequate responses to a notice of initiation.'' Proposed

section 207.62 describes the procedures for issuing expedited

determinations under section 751(c)(3)(B).

Proposed section 207.62(a) authorizes certain parties to file brief

comments to the Commission within a time specified in the notice of

institution, which will generally be no later than 60 days after

publication of the notice. Parties authorized to file comments are: (1)

Interested parties that have entered appearances in the review and have

responded to the notice of institution; and (2) all parties that have

entered appearances in the review that are not interested parties. The

sole issue these comments may address is whether an expedited

determination under section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act is appropriate.

These comments may not include any new factual information (such as

supplementation of the response to the notice of institution) and will

be limited to five pages.

Representatives of interested parties that have entered into a

Commission APO will have access to other parties' proprietary responses

to the notice of institution well before these comments are due. Under

section 207.3(b), responses to the notice of institution submitted by

parties that have entered appearances in the investigation must be

served on all other parties on the service list. The Commission will

release under APO responses to the notice of institution filed by

interested parties that have not entered appearances in the

investigation approximately two weeks before the section 207.62(a)

comments are due. At approximately the same time, the Commission

intends to release confidential versions of the Commission's opinion(s)

in the original investigation and staff reports and non-privileged

memoranda prepared in connection with that investigation (where

available) to representatives under the APO. Public versions of these

documents (where available) will also be released. The Commission will

also release official import statistics and estimates of domestic and

foreign industry production compiled by Commission staff, where such

information is available.

After all comments are received, the Commission will determine

whether interested party responses are adequate. The SAA provides that

the purpose of the expedited review mechanism is to promote

administrative efficiency by eliminating needless reviews. The SAA also

states that the determination of adequacy is committed to the

Commission's (and, separately, Commerce's) discretion. 3

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ SAA at 880.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Responses will be evaluated for adequacy on both an individual and

an aggregate basis. In assessing the adequacy of responses in the

aggregate, the Commission will consider only those responses that

individually are considered adequate. The Commission will separately

determine the adequacy of response (in the aggregate) of: (1)

Interested parties described in sections 771(9)(C), (D), (E), (F), and

(G) of the Act (a group that consists of, inter alia, U.S. producers of

the domestic like product and labor unions or groups of workers which

are representative of an industry producing the domestic like product;

this group will be referred to as ``domestic producers/unions''), and

(2) interested parties described in sections 771(9)(A) and (B) of the

Act (a group that consists of, inter alia, U.S. importers and foreign

exporters or producers of subject merchandise and subject country

governments; this group will be referred to as ``foreign producers/

importers'').

The Commission will make the determination of adequacy on a case-

by-case basis taking several factors into account. One factor that the

Commission will consider in determining adequacy is the responding

parties' likely share of domestic production (for domestic producers/

unions) or of subject imports or production of the subject merchandise

(for foreign producers/importers). The Commission does not intend to

apply strict numerical tests to determine adequacy of interested party

responses. Nevertheless, to provide some guidance to interested

parties, the Commission can tentatively identify certain circumstances

in which it will consider that response rates are sufficiently high or

low to provide a strong indication that interested party responses are

either adequate or inadequate. Specifically, responses from parties

accounting for more than 50 percent of domestic production will

normally be considered to be a strong indication of an adequate

response from domestic producers/unions. Responses from parties

accounting for more than 50 percent of subject imports or production of

subject merchandise will normally be considered to be a strong

indication of an adequate response from foreign producers/importers.

Consequently, a sufficient response by either U.S. importers or foreign

producers of the subject merchandise may constitute an adequate

response from foreign producers/importers. By contrast, responses

accounting for less than 25 percent of domestic production, on the one

hand, or subject imports or production of subject merchandise, on the

other, will normally be considered to be a strong indication of

inadequate responses by domestic producers/unions and foreign

producers/importers, respectively.

The Commission will not rely solely on numerical tests and will

take other factors into account in determining whether interested party

responses are adequate. For example, a response rate that may seem to

be inadequate for a highly concentrated industry may be adequate for a

highly fragmented industry.

Additional factors that the Commission intends to consider include

the structure of the pertinent domestic industry and industry producing

the subject merchandise, the potential of particular foreign producers

to export to the United States, the extent to which subject imports are

effectively excluded from the U.S. market by the order or suspension

agreement under review, and, for domestic producers/unions, the

prevalence of related party producers. The Commission invites parties

to comment on the appropriateness of relying on these factors to

determine whether interested party responses are adequate, and whether

there are additional or different factors that the Commission should

consider in making such a determination. The Commission also invites

parties to comment on the appropriateness of making expedited

determinations in grouped reviews involving subject merchandise from

several countries, if responses from the foreign producers/importers

are adequate with respect to some of the subject countries within the

group but inadequate with respect to others.

Pursuant to proposed section 207.62(b), if the Commission

determines that interested party responses are adequate, it will

conduct a full five-year review. In such cases, the Commission will

publish its schedule of the remaining procedures in the Federal

Register. (A sample schedule appears as Annex B to this notice.) Under

proposed section 201.11(b)(5), parties will have 45 days after

publication of this Federal Register notice to file additional entries

of appearance and APO applications.

By contrast, proposed section 207.62(c) describes procedures that

apply when the Commission concludes that interested party responses are

inadequate and an expedited determination is appropriate. In such

circumstances, the Secretary will notify all parties that submitted

timely entries of appearance in the Commission review that the

Commission has decided to make an expedited determination. The notice

will invite interested parties that responded adequately to the notice

of institution and all parties that are not interested parties to

submit comments on the merits of the review by a specific deadline

(which will generally be approximately 30-35 days from issuance of the

notice). Other persons who are not interested parties will have the

opportunity to submit a brief written statement on the merits of the

review by the same deadline.

The comments to be filed under proposed section 207.62(c), which

will satisfy the requirements of section 782(g) of the Act, give

parties their sole opportunity to submit comments to the Commission on

the merits of an expedited determination. These comments may not

contain new factual information and may not exceed 25 pages. Consistent

with Commission practice under section 207.30(b), comments containing

new factual information will be accepted into the record, but new

factual information and arguments based on that new factual information

will be disregarded. Any compilations by the Commission of information

collected and not previously released to representatives under APO will

be released under APO approximately 20 days before these comments are

due. The information released will include a staff report that will

compile information obtained in response to the notice of institution

as well as official import statistics, and, where available, estimates

of domestic and foreign industry production compiled by the Commission

staff. A public version of the staff report will also be released.

Proposed section 207.62(d) allows the Commission to delegate to a

senior member of the staff, such as the Director of Operations or the

Director of Investigations, authority to make decisions concerning

whether interested party responses to the notice of institution are

adequate or inadequate. Initially, the Commission will itself make all

such decisions. Should the Commission decide to delegate decisionmaking

authority concerning whether interested party responses are inadequate,

it will retain sole authority to issue the expedited determination in

any particular review.

Section 207.63

Proposed section 207.63 concerns circulation of draft

questionnaires in five-year reviews. As stated in proposed section

207.63(a), when the Commission does not issue an expedited

determination in a five-year review, it will circulate draft

questionnaires to the parties that have entered appearances in the

review. The Commission anticipates sending questionnaires to U.S.

producers of the domestic like product, foreign producers of subject

merchandise, U.S. importers of subject merchandise, and U.S.

purchasers. Questionnaires will commonly seek data in more detail

(particularly with respect to financial performance and pricing), for

additional periods of time, and, when warranted, for additional

products than will the notice of institution. The Commission

anticipates that draft questionnaires will be circulated to the parties

to the review approximately 150 days after initiation. The Commission

invites comment on the content and format of questionnaires in five-

year reviews.

Parties that desire to comment on the draft questionnaires may

submit written comments to the Commission, as indicated by proposed

section 207.63(b). The Commission anticipates that such comments will

be due approximately 30 days after circulation of the draft

questionnaires.

Proposed section 207.63(b) requires each party to present all data

collection requests in its questionnaire comments. The Commission will

disregard any subsequent arguments that are premised on the collection

of new data if the data collection request was not asserted in the

questionnaire comments. Thus, if the draft questionnaires in a review

propose collecting data for only one product, and a party believes that

data should be collected for two products, it must request data

collection for two products, and provide a legal basis for its request,

in its comments on the questionnaire. It may not request collection of

such data for the first time, for example, in its prehearing brief or

at the hearing.

The Commission believes this procedure is necessary to focus its

data collection efforts. In original antidumping and countervailing

duty investigations, the Commission has found issuing supplemental

questionnaires in the late stages of an investigation to be impractical

because of time and staffing constraints. These problems will be

exacerbated in five-year reviews. Therefore, any data collected in a

five-year review must be collected pursuant to the notice of

institution and in the questionnaires. It is imperative that the

Commission be apprised of all data collection issues before

questionnaires are issued. The Commission believes that this procedure

will impose no hardship on representatives of interested parties who

have entered an APO, who will have the benefit of pertinent portions of

the record of the original investigation, as well as access under APO

to all information collected in response to the notice of institution,

before they are to file comments on the questionnaires. This material

should allow interested party representatives ample time to determine

what information they believe the Commission should seek and consider.

Likewise, parties to the review that are not interested parties will

have ample notification and access to the public record to provide an

informed basis for comment.

Section 207.64

Proposed section 207.64 concerns staff reports in five-year

reviews. It tracks current section 207.22 concerning staff reports in

final phase antidumping and countervailing duty investigations.

Section 207.65

Proposed section 207.65 concerns prehearing briefs. It is adapted

from current section 207.23. In a five-year review, every party to the

review is to submit a prehearing brief on the date specified in the

scheduling notice.

Section 207.66

Proposed section 207.66 concerns hearings in five-year reviews. The

Commission will conduct a hearing in each five-year review in which it

does not render an expedited determination. Hearing procedures will

conform to those established in current section 207.24 concerning final

phase antidumping and countervailing duty investigations.

Section 207.67

Proposed section 207.67 concerns posthearing briefs and statements.

It is based on current sections 207.25 and 207.26.

Section 207.68

Proposed section 207.68 concerns final comments on information in

five-year reviews. It is based on the final comment procedure in

section 207.30 currently used in final phase antidumping and

countervailing duty investigations.

The procedures in section 207.68 will be used in five-year reviews

where the determination is not expedited. In five-year reviews where

the determination is

expedited, the final comment procedure is specified in proposed section

207.62(c).

Section 207.69

Proposed section 207.69 requires the Commission to publish and

serve its determinations in five-year reviews. It tracks current

section 207.29.

List of Subjects

19 CFR Part 201

Administrative practice and procedure, Investigations, Imports.

19 CFR Part 207

Administrative practice and procedure, Antidumping, Countervailing

duties, Investigations.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, 19 CFR parts 201 and 207

are proposed to be amended as set forth below:

PART 201--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 201 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: Section 335 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.

1335) and Sec. 603 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2482), unless

otherwise noted.

2. New paragraphs (b)(4) and (b)(5) are added to Sec. 201.11 to

read as follows:

Sec. 201.11 Appearance in an investigation as a party.

* * * * *

(b) Time for filing. * * *

(4) In the case of reviews conducted under subpart F of part 207 of

this chapter, each entry of appearance shall be filed with the

Secretary not later than twenty-one (21) days after publication in the

Federal Register of the notice of institution described in

Sec. 207.60(c).

(5) Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(4) of this section, a party may

file an entry of appearance in a review conducted under subpart F of

part 207 of this chapter for a period of 45 days after publication in

the Federal Register of the notice specified under Sec. 207.62(b).

* * * * *

PART 207--[AMENDED]

3. The authority citation for part 207 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 19 U.S.C. 1336, 1671-1677n, 2482, 3513.

4. Paragraph (b) of Sec. 207.3 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 207.3 Service, filing, and certification of documents

* * * * *

(b) Service. Any party submitting a document for inclusion in the

record of the investigation shall, in addition to complying with

Sec. 201.8 of this chapter, serve a copy of each such document on all

other parties to the investigation in the manner prescribed in

Sec. 201.16 of this chapter. If a document is filed before the

Secretary's issuance of the service list provided for in Sec. 201.11 of

this chapter or the administrative protective order list provided for

in Sec. 207.7, the document need not be accompanied by a certificate of

service, but the document shall be served on all appropriate parties

within two (2) days of the issuance of the service list or the

administrative protective order list and a certificate of service shall

then be filed. Notwithstanding Sec. 201.16 of this chapter, petitions,

briefs, and testimony filed by parties pursuant to Secs. 207.10,

207.15, 207.23, 207.24, 207.25, 207.65, 207.66, and 207.67 shall be

served by hand or, if served by mail, by overnight mail or its

equivalent. Failure to comply with the requirements of this rule may

result in removal from status as a party to the investigation. The

Commission shall make available to all parties to the investigation a

copy of each document, except transcripts of conferences and hearings,

business proprietary information, privileged information, and

information required to be served under this section, placed in the

record of the investigation by the Commission.

* * * * *

5. Paragraph (a) of Sec. 207.45 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 207.45 Investigation to review outstanding determination

(a) Request for review. Any person may file with the Commission a

request for the institution of a review investigation under section

751(b) of the Act. The person making the request shall also promptly

serve copies of the request on the parties to the original

investigation upon which the review is to be based. All requests shall

set forth a description of changed circumstances sufficient to warrant

the institution of a review investigation by the Commission.

* * * * *

6. Paragraph (g) of Sec. 207.46 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 207.46 Investigations concerning certain countervailing duty

orders.

* * * * *

(g) Request for simultaneous section 751(c) review. (1) A

requesting party who requests a section 753 review may at the same time

request from the Commission and the administering authority a review

under section 751(c) of the Act of a countervailing or antidumping duty

order involving the same or comparable subject merchandise.

(2) Should the administering authority, after consulting with the

Commission, determine to initiate a section 751(c) review, the

Commission shall conduct a consolidated review under sections 751(c)

and 753 of the Act of the orders involving the same or comparable

subject merchandise. Any such consolidated review shall be conducted

under the applicable procedures set forth in subparts A and F of this

part.

(3) Should the administering authority, after consulting with the

Commission, determine not to initiate a section 751(c) review, the

Commission will consider the request for a section 753 review pursuant

to the procedures established in this section.

7. A new subpart F is added to read as follows:

Subpart F--Five-Year Reviews

207.60 Definitions.

207.61 Responses to notice of institution.

207.62 Adequacy of responses to notice of institution.

207.63 Circulation of draft questionnaires.

207.64 Staff reports.

207.65 Prehearing briefs.

207.66 Hearing.

207.67 Posthearing briefs and statements.

207.68 Final comments on information.

207.69 Publication of determinations.

Sec. 207.60 Definitions.

For purposes of this subpart:

(a) The term five-year review means a five-year review

investigation conducted pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act.

(b) The term expedited determination means a determination issued

by the Commission pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act.

(c) The term notice of institution shall refer to the notice of

institution of five-year review that the Commission shall publish in

the Federal Register requesting that interested parties provide

information to the Commission upon initiation of a five-year review.

(d) The term domestic like product means a product produced in the

United States which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in

characteristics and uses with, the articles subject to a five-year

review.

(e) The term domestic industry means the producers as a whole of a

domestic like product, or those producers whose collective output of a

domestic like product constitutes a major proportion of the total

domestic production of the product.

(f) The term subject merchandise means the class or kind of

merchandise

that is within the scope of the five-year review.

Sec. 207.61 Responses to notice of institution.

(a) When information must be filed. Responses to the notice of

institution shall be submitted to the Commission no later than 30 days

after its publication in the Federal Register.

(b) Information to be filed with the Secretary. The notice of

institution shall direct each interested party to make a filing

pursuant to Secs. 201.8 and 207.3 of this chapter containing the

following:

(1) A statement expressing its willingness to participate in the

review by providing information requested by the Commission;

(2) A statement regarding the likely effects of revocation of the

order(s) or termination of the suspended investigation(s) under review;

(3) Other information requested in the notice of institution.

(c) Information to be submitted to the Office of Investigations.

The notice of institution shall further direct each interested party to

submit the following material to the Commission's Office of

Investigations:

(1) Such information or industry data as the Commission may specify

in the notice of institution;

(2) Any other information or data the party considers relevant to

the Commission's determination.

(d) When requested information cannot be supplied. Any interested

party that cannot furnish the information requested by the notice of

institution shall explain in its response(s) why it is unable to

provide the information and indicate alternative forms in which it can

provide equivalent information.

(e) Submissions by persons other than interested parties. Any

person who is not an interested party may submit to the Commission, in

a filing satisfying the requirements of Sec. 201.8 of this title,

information relevant to the Commission's review no later than 30 days

after publication of the notice of institution in the Federal Register.

Sec. 207.62 Adequacy of responses to notice of institution.

(a) Comments to the Commission. (1) Comments to the Commission

concerning whether the Commission should make an expedited

determination in that review may be submitted by:

(i) Any interested party that is a party to the investigation and

that has responded to the notice of institution; and

(ii) Any party, other than an interested party, that is a party to

the investigation.

(2) Comments shall be submitted within the time specified in the

notice of institution. Comments shall not exceed five (5) pages of

textual material, double-spaced and single-sided, on stationery

measuring 8\1/2\ x 11 inches. Comments containing new factual

information shall be disregarded.

(b) Determination that responses are adequate. If the Commission

concludes that interested parties' responses to the notice of

institution are adequate, investigative activities pertaining to that

review will continue. The Commission will publish in the Federal

Register a notice of scheduling pertaining to subsequent procedures in

the review.

(c) Determination that responses are inadequate. (1) If the

Commission concludes that interested parties' responses to the notice

of institution are inadequate, it may decide to issue an expedited

determination. In that event, the Commission shall direct the Secretary

to issue a notice stating that the Commission has decided to make an

expedited determination and inviting those parties to the review

described in paragraph (c)(2) of this section to file written comments

with the Secretary on what determination the Commission should reach in

the review. The date on which such comments must be filed will be

specified in the notice to be issued by the Secretary. Comments shall

not exceed twenty-five (25) pages of textual material, double-spaced

and single-sided, on stationery measuring 8\1/2\ x 11 inches.

Comments containing new factual information shall be disregarded.

(2) The following parties may file the comments described in

paragraph (c)(1) of this section:

(i) Any interested party that is a party to the investigation and

that has filed an adequate response to the notice of institution; and

(ii) Any party, other than an interested party, that is a party to

the investigation.

(3) Any person who is neither a party to the investigation nor an

interested party may submit a brief written statement (which shall not

contain any new factual information) pertinent to the review within the

time specified for the filing of written comments.

(d) Delegation of responsibilities. Notwithstanding any other

provision of this part, the Commission may delegate its

responsibilities pursuant to this section to a member of the Commission

staff.

Sec. 207.63 Circulation of draft questionnaires.

(a) In each five-year review in which the Commission has not issued

an expedited determination, the Director shall circulate draft

questionnaires to the parties for comment.

(b) Any party desiring to comment on the draft questionnaires shall

submit such comments in writing to the Commission within a time

specified by the Director. All requests for collecting new data must be

presented at this time. The Commission will disregard subsequent

arguments that are premised on requests for collection of new data if

such requests were not included in the comments on the draft

questionnaires.

Sec. 207.64 Staff reports.

(a) Prehearing staff report. The Director shall prepare and place

in the record, prior to the hearing, a prehearing staff report

containing information concerning the subject matter of the five-year

review. A version of the staff report containing business proprietary

information shall be placed in the nonpublic record and made available

to persons authorized to receive business proprietary information under

Sec. 207.7, and a nonbusiness proprietary version of the staff report

shall be placed in the public record.

(b) Final staff report. After the hearing, the Director shall

revise the prehearing staff report and submit to the Commission, prior

to the Commission's determination, a final version of the staff report.

The final staff report is intended to supplement and correct the

information contained in the prehearing staff report. A public version

of the final staff report shall be made available to the public and a

business proprietary version shall also be made available to persons

authorized to receive business proprietary information under

Sec. 207.7.

Sec. 207.65 Prehearing briefs.

Each party to a five-year review may submit a prehearing brief to

the Commission on the date specified in the scheduling notice. A

prehearing brief shall be signed and shall include a table of contents.

The prehearing brief should present a party's case concisely and shall,

to the extent possible, refer to the record and include information and

arguments which the party believes relevant to the subject matter of

the Commission's determination.

Sec. 207.66 Hearing.

(a) In general. The Commission shall hold a hearing in each five-

year review in which it does not make an expedited determination. The

date of the hearing

shall be specified in the scheduling notice.

(b) Procedures. Hearing procedures in five-year reviews will

conform to those for final phase antidumping and countervailing duty

investigations set forth in Sec. 207.24.

Sec. 207.67 Posthearing briefs and statements.

(a) Briefs from parties. Any party to a five-year review may file

with the Secretary a posthearing brief concerning the information

adduced at or after the hearing within a time specified in the

scheduling notice or by the presiding official at the hearing. No such

posthearing brief shall exceed fifteen (15) pages of textual material,

double spaced and single sided, on stationery measuring 8\1/2\ x 11

inches. In addition, the presiding official may permit persons to file

answers to questions or requests made by the Commission at the hearing

within a specified time. The Secretary shall not accept for filing

posthearing briefs or answers which do not comply with this section.

(b) Statements from nonparties. Any person other than a party may

submit a brief written statement of information pertinent to the review

within the time specified for the filing of posthearing briefs.

Sec. 207.68 Final comments on information.

(a) The Commission shall specify a date after the filing of

posthearing briefs on which it will disclose to all parties to the

five-year review all information it has obtained on which the parties

have not previously had an opportunity to comment. Any such information

that is business proprietary information will be released to persons

authorized to obtain such information pursuant to Sec. 207.7.

(b) The parties shall have an opportunity to file comments on any

information disclosed to them after they have filed their posthearing

brief pursuant to Sec. 207.67. Comments shall only concern such

information, and shall not exceed 15 pages of textual material, double

spaced and single-sided, on stationery measuring 8\1/2\ x 11 inches.

A comment may address the accuracy, reliability, or probative value of

such information by reference to information elsewhere in the record,

in which case the comment shall identify where in the record such

information is found. Comments containing new factual information shall

be disregarded. The date on which such comments must be filed will be

specified by the Commission when it specifies the time that information

will be disclosed pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section. The record

shall close on the date such comments are due, except with respect to

changes in bracketing of business proprietary information in the

comments permitted by Sec. 207.3(c).

Sec. 207.69 Publication of determinations.

Whenever the Commission makes a determination concluding a five-

year review, the Secretary shall serve copies of the determination and,

when applicable, the nonbusiness proprietary version of the final staff

report on all parties to the review, and on the administering

authority. The Secretary shall publish notice of such determination in

the Federal Register.

By order of the Commission.

Issued: October 20, 1997.

Donna R. Koehnke,

Secretary.

Note: The following annexes would not appear in the Code of

Federal Regulations.

Annex A--Notice of Institution of Five-Year Review

Definitions

(1) Subject Merchandise is the class or kind of merchandise that

is within the scope of the five-year review. In this review, the

Department of Commerce has defined the Subject Merchandise as

DEFINE.

(2) The Subject Country in this review is COUNTRY.

(3) The Domestic Like Product is the domestically produced

product or products which are like, or in the absence of like, most

similar in characteristics or uses with, the Subject Merchandise. In

its original determination, the Commission defined the Domestic Like

Product as DEFINE. One Commissioner/certain Commissioners defined

the Domestic Like Product differently.

(4) The Domestic Industry is the producers as a whole of a

Domestic Like Product, or those producers whose collective output of

a Domestic Like Product constitutes a major proportion of the total

domestic production of the product. In its original determination,

the Commission defined the Domestic Industry as producers of DEFINE.

(5) The Order Date is the date that the countervailing duty

order/antidumping duty order/suspension agreement under review

became effective. In this review, the Order Date is DATE.

(6) An Importer is any person or firm engaged, either directly

or through a parent company or subsidiary, in importing the Subject

Merchandise into the United States from a foreign manufacturer or

through its selling agent.

Certification

In accordance with Commission rule 207.3, any person submitting

information to the Commission in connection with this investigation

must certify that the information is accurate and complete to the

best of the submitter's knowledge. This certification must be

included in both the information to be submitted to the Commission's

Secretary and the information to be submitted to the Commission's

Office of Investigations specified below. In making the

certification, the submitter will be deemed to consent, unless

otherwise specified, for the Commission, its employees, and contract

personnel to use the information provided in any other

investigations of the same or comparable products which the

Commission conducts under Title VII of the Act, or in internal

audits and investigations relating to the programs and operations of

the Commission pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3.

Information to be Submitted to the Secretary

Responses filed with the Secretary must conform with the

provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission's rules. If business

proprietary treatment is desired for portions of a response,

submitters must follow the requirements set forth in sections 201.6,

207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. Also, in accordance with

sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission's rules, each

document filed by a party to the investigation must be served on all

other parties to the investigation (as identified by either the

public or BPI service list as appropriate), and a certificate of

service must accompany the document (if you are not a party to the

investigation you do not need to serve your response). Any

interested party that cannot furnish the information requested

should explain why it is unable to do so and indicate alternative

forms in which it can provide equivalent information. (Added if more

than one country is involved) If you are a domestic producer,

import/export Subject Merchandise from more than one Subject

Country, or produce Subject Merchandise in more than one Subject

Country, you may file a single response. If you do so, please ensure

that your response to each question includes the information

requested for each pertinent Subject Country.

The response to the Secretary should include:

(1) The name and address of your firm (including World Wide Web

address if available) and name, telephone number,

fax number, and E-mail address of the certifying official.

(2) A statement indicating whether your firm is a U.S. producer

of the Domestic Like Product, a U.S. importer of the Subject

Merchandise, a foreign producer/exporter of the Subject Merchandise,

or another interested party (including an explanation).

(3) A statement indicating whether your firm is willing to

participate in this review by providing information requested by the

Commission.

(4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the

countervailing duty order/antidumping duty order/termination of the

suspension agreement on the Domestic Industry in general and/or your

firm specifically.

(5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of

the Domestic Like Product.

(6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers

of the Subject Merchandise and producers of the Subject Merchandise

in COUNTRY that currently export or have exported Subject

Merchandise to the United States or other countries since (YEAR OF

PETITION).

(7) (OPTIONAL) A statement of whether you agree with the above

definitions of the Domestic Like Product and Domestic Industry; if

you disagree with either or both of these definitions, please

explain why and provide alternative definitions.

Information To Be Submitted to the Office of Investigations

Responses filed with the Office of Investigations will be

treated as business proprietary unless the information is otherwise

publicly available and should be submitted to INVESTIGATOR, Office

of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, Room 615,

500 E Street, SW, Washington, DC 20436. Only one copy of the

response needs to be submitted to the Office of Investigations, but

each document filed by a party to the investigation must be served

on all other parties to the investigation (as identified by the BPI

service list), and a certificate of service must accompany the

document (if you are not a party to the investigation you do not

need to serve your response). Any interested party that cannot

furnish the information requested should explain why it is unable to

do so and indicate alternative forms in which it can provide

equivalent information. (Added if more than one country is involved)

If you are a domestic producer, import/export Subject Merchandise

from more than one Subject Country, or produce Subject Merchandise

in more than one Subject Country, you may file a single response. If

you do so, please ensure that your response to each question

includes the information requested for each pertinent Subject

Country.

The response to the Office of Investigations should include:

(1) The name and address of your firm (including World Wide Web

address if available) and name, telephone number, fax number, and E-

mail address of the certifying official.

(2) If your firm is a U.S. producer of PRODUCT, provide the

following information on your firm's operations on that product

during calendar year PRECEDING YEAR and your projections, in

accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), for

calendar year CURRENT YEAR (report quantity data in UNITS and value

data in thousands of dollars):

(a) Annual production capacity (quantity) (report the practical

capacity of your plant(s) using the machinery and equipment in place

at the end of the year and specify that the capacity reported is

based on operating ____ hours per week, ____ weeks per year);

(b) end-of-year inventories (quantity);

(c) production (quantity) (including, if known, an estimate of

the percentage of total U.S. production of PRODUCT accounted for by

your firm's production in PRECEDING YEAR);

(d) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of

product produced in your U.S. plant(s);

(e) the quantity of product produced in your U.S. plant(s) that

you consumed internally or transferred within your company;

(f) the quantity and value of exports of product produced in

your U.S. plant(s);

(g) the average number of production workers;

(h) your firm's net sales and operating income or (loss); and

(i) average prices for SPECIFIC PRODUCT.

(3) If your firm is a U.S. importer of the Subject Merchandise,

provide the following information on your firm's operations on that

product FOR EACH COUNTRY SUBJECT TO THIS REVIEW INVESTIGATION during

calendar year PRECEDING YEAR and your projections, in accordance

with GAAP, for calendar year CURRENT YEAR (report quantity data in

UNITS and value data in thousands of dollars):

(a) The quantity and value of U.S. imports (including, if known,

an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of PRODUCT from

COUNTRY accounted for by your firm's imports in PRECEDING YEAR);

(b) end-of-year inventories (quantity);

(c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of

imported product; and

(d) average prices for SPECIFIC PRODUCT.

(4) If your firm is a producer of the Subject Merchandise in

COUNTRY, provide the following information on your firm's operations

on that product during calendar year PRECEDING YEAR and your

projections, in accordance with GAAP, for calendar year CURRENT YEAR

(report quantity data in UNITS and value data in thousands of

dollars):

(a) Annual production capacity (quantity) (report the practical

capacity of your plant(s) using the machinery and equipment in place

at the end of the year and specify that the capacity reported is

based on operating ____ hours per week, ____ weeks per year);

(b) end-of-year inventories (quantity);

(c) production (quantity) (including, if known, an estimate of

the percentage of total production of PRODUCT in COUNTRY accounted

for by your firm's production in PRECEDING YEAR);

(d) the quantity and value of home market shipments of product

produced in your plant(s) (including any internal consumption and

company transfers);

(e) the quantity and value of your firm's exports to the United

States of product produced in your plant(s) (including, if known, an

estimate of the percentage of total exports to the United States of

PRODUCT from COUNTRY accounted for by your firm's exports in

PRECEDING YEAR); and

(f) the quantity and value of your firm's exports to all other

countries of product produced in your plant(s).

(5) Identify any significant changes in the supply of and demand

for the Domestic Like Product that have occurred in the United

States since the Order Date. Address changes in factors such as

technology; production methods; the availability and price of major

production inputs; consumption patterns; new alternative products

that compete for sales; availability of imports from nonsubject

countries; the degree of interchangeability between the Domestic

Like Product, Subject Merchandise, and nonsubject imports; and

demand for U.S. products in export markets.

(6) (Asked in reviews involving multiple subject countries)

Explain (a) whether the Domestic Like Product and Subject

Merchandise from each Subject Country compete or are likely to

compete with each other in the United States and (b) whether Subject

Merchandise from each individual Subject Country competes or is

likely to

compete in the United States with Subject Merchandise from each

other Subject Country. In determining whether (likely) competition

exists between two products, you may consider such factors as (i)

the degree of (likely) fungibility between the products, (ii)

whether the products are (likely to be) sold in the same geographic

markets in the United States, (iii) whether the products are (likely

to be) sold in common channels of distribution, and (iv) whether the

products are (likely to be) sold in the U.S. market simultaneously.

(7) (OPTIONAL) Provide any other information or data that you

consider relevant to the Commission's determination.

Annex B--Proposed Schedule for Sunset Reviews\1\

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Action/Event Day

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notice of Institution (Published in the Federal Register)...... 0

Entries of Appearance/APO Applications Due..................... 21

Responses to Notice of Institution Due......................... 30

Comments on Appropriateness of Expedited Review Due............ 60

Notice of Inadequacy/Expedited Review or Adequacy/Full Review.. 95

------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ The Commission may extend its deadline by up to 90 days in all

transition reviews and other extraordinarily complicated cases.

Inadequate Responses/Expedited Review

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Action/Event Day

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Staff Report/Data Compilation to Commission and Parties........ 110

Commerce Expedited Determination (If Issued)................... 120

Written Submission on Merits (``Final Comments'') by Parties

Due........................................................... 130

Commission Vote................................................ 140

Commission Determination and Views to Commerce................. 150

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adequate Responses/Full Review

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Action/Event Day

------------------------------------------------------------------------

New Entries of Appearance/APO Applications Due................. 140

Draft Questionnaires to Parties for Comment.................... 150

Written Comments on Draft Questionnaires Due (Final Opportunity

for Parties to Raise Issues Affecting Data Collection)........ 180

Questionnaire Mail Date........................................ 225

Commerce Subsidy/Dumping Determination......................... 240

Questionnaire Return Date...................................... 265

Prehearing Report to Commission and Parties.................... 299

Prehearing Briefs Due.......................................... 305

Hearing........................................................ 313

Posthearing Briefs Due......................................... 320

Staff Report to Commission and Parties......................... 330

Final Comments Due............................................. 340

Commission Vote................................................ 348

Commission Determination and Views to Commerce................. 360

------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 97-28257 Filed 10-22-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P