L 351/6 Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 12. 97 COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2593/97 of 19 December 1997 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3482/92 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain large electrolytic aluminium capacitors originating in Japan THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Com- munity (') and in particular Article 11 (3) thereof, Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commis- sion after consulting the Advisory Committee, Whereas: A. PROCEDURE 1. Measures in force (1)  In December 1992, the Council, by Regulation (EEC) No 3482/92 (%), imposed a definitive anti- dumping duty on imports of certain large alu- minium electrolytic capacitors (hereinafter ‘LAECs’) originating in Japan. For Rubycon Corporation (hereinafter ‘Rubycon’), the rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty amounted to 30,1 % expressed as a percentage of the net, free-at-Community- frontier price, before duty. The investigation that led to the imposition of these measures is here- inafter referred to as ‘the initial investigation’. 2. Request for a review investigation 2  In September 1996, Rubycon lodged a request for an interim review pursuant to Article 11 (3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (hereinafter the ‘Basic Regulation’). Rubycon alleged that the continued imposition of the anti-dumping duty would no longer be necessary to offset the dumping as established in the initial investigation. 3. Review investigation (3  The Commission considered that Rubycon had submitted sufficient prima facie evidence to justify an interim review. Consequently, the Commission announced on 17 December 1996, by a notice (") OJ L 56, 6. 3. 1996, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regula- tion (EC) No 2331/96 (O] L 317, 6. 12. 1996, p. 1). () OJ L 353, 3. 12. 1992, p. 1. “ ©) ) published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (), the initiation of a review investiga- tion pursuant to Article 11 (3) of the Basic Regula- tion and commenced an investigation. Since no other interested party had submitted suf- ficient evidence justifying the initiation of a review investigation, the investigation was limited to Rubycon. The investigation solely concerned the dumping aspects. The Commission officially advised Rubycon, the representatives of the exporting country, two un- related importers and the complainant in the initial investigation (hereinafter ‘Farad’) of the initiation of the review. Interested parties were given the oppor- tunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing. All parties who so requested were granted a hearing. ‘ The investigation covered the period of 1 October 1995 to 30 September 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the investigation period’). For the purpose of this investigation, the geographical scope of the investigation was the Community as composed at the time of initiation of this review. The Commission sent questionnaires to all parties known to be concerned and received replies from Rubycon, its related importer in the Community (hereinafter ‘Rubycon UK’) and two unrelated importers in the Community. The Commission sought and verified all the infor- mation it considered necessary and carried out investigations at the premises of the following companies: (a) producer/exporter in Japan — Rubycon Corporation, Tokyo and Ina, (b) importer related to the producer/exporter — Rubycon UK, South Ruislip, United Kingdom, (c) importer not related to the producer/exporter — Codico Gesellschaft mbH & Co KG, Vienna, Austria (hereinafter Codico). () OJ L 381, 17. 12. 1996, p. 7.