L 302/22 Official Journal of the European Union 19.11.2005 COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1892/2005 of 14 November 2005 terminating the partial interim review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of bicycles originating in the People’s Republic of China THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, (5)  The request was based on the prima facie evidence, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 38496 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (!) (basic Regulation), and in particular Article 11(3) thereof, Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consulting the Advisory Committee, Whereas: A. PROCEDURE 1. Measures in force (1)  On 9 September 1993, the Council, by Regulation (EEC) No 2474[93 () imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty of 30,6 % on imports of bicycles originating in the People’s Republic of China (the PRC), (the original measures). On 18 January 1997, following an anti- circumvention investigation, this duty was extended by Council Regulation (EC) No 71/97 to imports of certain bicycle parts originating in the PRC. (20 On 14 July 2000, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the Council, by Regulation (EC) No 1524/2000 (}), decided that the abovementioned measures should be maintained. (3)  On 14 July 2005, following an interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation (the previous investigation), the Council by Regulation (EC) No 1095/2005, amended the definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of bicycles originating in the PRC. The amended rate of the duty applicable to the net, free-at- Community-frontier price, before duty, is 48,5 % for imports of bicycles originating in the PRC. 2. Current investigation (4)  The Commission received a request lodged by Giant China Co., Ltd (the applicant) for a partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation. () OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 (O] L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12). (®» OJ L 228, 9.9.1993, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 71/97 (O] L 16, 18.1.1997, p. 55). () OJ L 175, 14.7.2000, p. 39. Regulation as last amended by Regu- lation (EC) No 1095/2005 (O] L 183, 14.7.2005, p. 1). provided by the applicant, that the circumstances on the basis of which measures were established have changed and that these changes are of lasting nature. The applicant alleged, inter alia, that the circumstances with regard to market economy status (MES) had changed significantly. In particular, the applicant claimed that it now fulfilled the requirements to be granted MES pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation.  Furthermore, the applicant provided evidence showing that a comparison of normal value based on its own cost/domestic prices and its export prices to the enlarged European Union, would lead to a dumping margin significantly below the level of the current measure. Accordingly, the applicant alleged that the continued imposition of the measure at its current level was no longer necessary to offset dumping. (6)  The Commission, after consulting the Advisory Committee, initiated on 19 February 2005 by a notice (*) a partial interim review limited in scope to the examination of whether the applicant operated under market economy conditions as defined in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation or alternatively whether the applicant fulfilled the requirements to have an indi- vidual duty in accordance with Article 9(5) of the basic Regulation. (7  The Commission sent a questionnaire and a claim form for MES pursuant to Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation to the applicant. (8)  The investigation covered the period from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2004 (hereinafter referred to as investigation period or IP). 3. Parties concerned by the investigation (99  The Commission officially advised the exporting producer, the representatives of the exporting country and the Community producers of the initiation of the review. Interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing, to submit infor- mation and to provide supporting evidence and to request a hearing within the time-limit set out in the notice of initiation. All interested parties who so requested and showed that there were reasons why they should be heard were granted a hearing. () O] C 44, 19.2.2005, p. 24.