Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 44827-44830 [E7-15575]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Notices Notification Regarding APOs This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO as explained in the APO itself. See also 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are publishing these final results of administrative review and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: August 2, 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7–15570 Filed 8–8–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–851] Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On November 6, 2006, the Department of Commerce published the preliminary results of the 2005–2006 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). This review covers three exporters.1 The period of review (‘‘POR’’) is February 1, 2005, through January 31, 2006. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes to the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’ AGENCY: DATES: Effective Date: August 9, 2007. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian C. Smith or Terre Keaton Stefanova, AD/CVD Operations, Office 1 This figure does not include those companies which did not respond to the Department’s requests for information. See ‘‘Facts Available’’ section of this notice for further discussion. VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:25 Aug 08, 2007 Jkt 211001 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1766 or (202) 482–1280, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The review covers the following three exporters: (1) China Processed Food Import & Export Company (‘‘COFCO’’) and its affiliates China National Cereals, Oils & Foodstuffs Import & Export Corporation, COFCO (Zhangzhou) Food Industrial Co., Ltd. (‘‘COFCO Zhangzhou’’), Fujian Yu Xing Fruits & Vegetable Foodstuff Development Co. (‘‘Yu Xing’’), and Xiamen Jiahua Import & Export Trading Co., Ltd. (‘‘Xiamen Jiahua’’) (hereinafter collectively to referred to as ‘‘the COFCO entity’’) 2; (2) Guangxi Eastwing Trading Co., Ltd. (‘‘Guangxi Eastwing’’); and (3) Primera Harvest (Xiangfan) Co., Ltd. (‘‘Primera Harvest’’). The POR is February 1, 2005, through January 31, 2006. On November 6, 2006, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) published the preliminary results of this administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from the PRC. See Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 64930 (November 6, 2006) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On November 9, 2006, the COFCO entity requested that the Department extend the deadlines to submit new factual information, publicly available information (‘‘PAI’’), and case and rebuttal briefs, as well as the deadline for the final results. On November 17, 2006, we notified the COFCO entity and the other interested parties in this review that although we did not find it necessary at the time to extend the final results, we would extend the deadline to submit new factual information and PAI until January 26, 2007, and extend the deadlines for submitting case and 2 In the Preliminary Results, we determined it appropriate to treat COFCO and its affiliates, China National, COFCO Zhangzhou, Xiamen Jiahua and Yu Xing, as one entity for margin calculation purposes because they met the regulatory criteria for collapsing. See October 31, 2006, Memorandum from the Team to The File, entitled ‘‘Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People’s Republic of China: Whether to Continue to Collapse COFCO with Some or All of Its Affiliates.’’ No party objected to this preliminary determination. Therefore, we have continued to treat these affiliated companies as one entity in the final results. PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44827 rebuttal briefs until February 9 and 14, 2007, respectively. On January 22, 2007, the COFCO entity submitted a second request to further extend the deadline for submitting new factual information, PAI, and case and rebuttal briefs, and also requested that the Department fully extend the final results. On January 24, 2007, we notified the COFCO entity and the other interested parties in this review that the Department would provide new deadlines for submitting PAI, case and rebuttal briefs once the Department issued a Federal Register notice postponing the final results. On January 29, 2007, we partially extended the time limit for the final results in this review until August 3, 2007. See Notice of Partial Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People’s Republic of China, 72 FR 5268 (February 5, 2007). On January 31, 2007, the Department provided the COFCO entity and the other interested parties in this review revised deadlines for submitting PAI and case and rebuttal briefs. On February 5, 2007, the Department placed on the record a revised nonmarket-economy (‘‘NME’’) wage rate applicable to the PRC for consideration in the final results.3 On March 19, 2007, the Department placed on the record an additional brokerage and handling surrogate value for consideration in the final results.4 On March 30, 2007, the COFCO entity submitted PAI for consideration in the final results. No other party submitted PAI. The COFCO entity filed its case brief on April 13, 2007. No other party (including the petitioner 5) filed case or rebuttal briefs in the review. No party requested a hearing. On June 29, 2007, the Department placed on the record information obtained from the Web site of an Indian producer of the subject merchandise and provided an opportunity for the 3 See Memorandum from Brian Smith, Team Leader, to The File, entitled ‘‘Antidumping Duty Administrative Review on Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People’s Republic of China: Revised Non-Market-Economy Wage Rate Applicable to the PRC,’’ dated February 5, 2007. 4 See Memorandum from Brian Smith, Team Leader, to The File, entitled ‘‘Antidumping Duty Administrative Review on Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People’s Republic of China: Additional Brokerage and Handling Surrogate Value Placed on the Record,’’ dated March 19, 2007. 5 The petitioner is the Coalition for Fair Preserved Mushroom Trade, which includes the following domestic companies: L.K. Bowman, Inc., Monterey Mushrooms, Inc., Mushroom Canning Company, and Sunny Dell Foods, Inc. E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM 09AUN1 44828 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Notices parties to comment on that information.6 No comments were filed. We have conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). Scope of the Order mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES The products covered by this order are certain preserved mushrooms, whether imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. The certain preserved mushrooms covered under this order are the species Agaricus bisporus and Agaricus bitorquis. ‘‘Certain Preserved Mushrooms’’ refer to mushrooms that have been prepared or preserved by cleaning, blanching, and sometimes slicing or cutting. These mushrooms are then packed and heated in containers including, but not limited to, cans or glass jars in a suitable liquid medium, including, but not limited to, water, brine, butter or butter sauce. Certain preserved mushrooms may be imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. Included within the scope of this order are ‘‘brined’’ mushrooms, which are presalted and packed in a heavy salt solution to provisionally preserve them for further processing. Excluded from the scope of this order are the following: (1) All other species of mushroom, including straw mushrooms; (2) all fresh and chilled mushrooms, including ‘‘refrigerated’’ or ‘‘quick blanched mushrooms’’; (3) dried mushrooms; (4) frozen mushrooms; and (5) ‘‘marinated,’’ ‘‘acidified,’’ or ‘‘pickled’’ mushrooms, which are prepared or preserved by means of vinegar or acetic acid, but may contain oil or other additives.7 The merchandise subject to this order is classifiable under subheadings: 2003.10.0127, 2003.10.0131, 2003.10.0137, 2003.10.0143, 2003.10.0147, 2003.10.0153 and 0711.51.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the HTSUS 6 See Memorandum from Brian Smith, Team Leader, to The File, entitled ‘‘Antidumping Duty Administrative Review on Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People’s Republic of China: Additional Data Placed on the Record for Comment,’’ dated June 29, 2007. 7 On June 19, 2000, the Department affirmed that ‘‘marinated,’’ ‘‘acidified,’’ or ‘‘pickled’’ mushrooms containing less than 0.5 percent acetic acid are within the scope of the antidumping duty order. See ‘‘Recommendation Memorandum-Final Ruling of Request by Tak Fat, et al. for Exclusion of Certain Marinated, Acidified Mushrooms from the Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated June 19, 2000. On February 9, 2005, this decision was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. See Tak Fat v. United States, 396 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2005). VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:25 Aug 08, 2007 Jkt 211001 subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case brief submitted by the COFCO entity in this antidumping duty administrative review are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’ (‘‘Decision Memo’’) from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated August 3, 2007, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues that the COFCO entity has raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in the Decision Memo, is attached to this notice as an appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B–099 of the main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Facts Available In the Preliminary Results, the Department found that Gerber Food (Yunnan) Co., Ltd. (‘‘Gerber’’) and Green Fresh Foods (Zhangzhou) Co., Ltd. (‘‘Green Fresh’’) were uncooperative because Gerber did not respond to supplemental requests for information relevant to its no-shipment claim, whereas Green Fresh failed to file its response to the Department’s quantity and value questionnaire in accordance with the Department’s regulations. As a result, the Department considered the information both companies provided either incomplete, unreliable, or improperly filed. Moreover, the Department found that Guangxi Hengxian Pro-Light Foods, Inc. (‘‘Guangxi Hengxian’’) and Guangxi Yulin Oriental Food Co., Ltd. (‘‘Guangxi Yulin’’) were uncooperative as well because Guangxi Hengxian did not respond to the Department’s antidumping duty questionnaire and Guangxi Yulin did not respond to the Department’s quantity and value questionnaire. Because all four of these companies failed to provide responses to the Department’s questionnaires, the Department could not determine whether they were eligible for a separate rate in this review and, therefore, treated them as part of the PRC-wide PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 entity. In the Preliminary Results, the Department based the margin for the PRC-wide entity, including the four companies mentioned above, on total adverse facts available (‘‘AFA’’) because of the PRC-wide entity’s failure to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability in providing responses to the Department’s request for information. As AFA, the Department applied the prior PRC-wide entity rate of 198.63 percent. See Preliminary Results, 71 FR at 64933. A complete explanation of the selection, corroboration, and application of the AFA rate can be found in the Preliminary Results. See Preliminary Results, 71 FR at 64933. The Department did not receive comments with regard to its preliminary findings that Gerber, Green Fresh, Guangxi Hengxian, and Guangxi Yulin are part of the PRC-wide entity. Further, no information was submitted since the Preliminary Results that calls into question the reliability of the Department’s selection, corroboration, and application of AFA in this review. Accordingly, for the final results, we continue to apply AFA to the PRC-wide entity, including Gerber, Green Fresh, Guangxi Hengxian, and Guangxi Yulin, consistent with our Preliminary Results. Changes From the Preliminary Results Based on the information submitted and our analysis of the comments received, we have made certain changes to the margin calculations for the COFCO entity as follows. (1) We used the COFCO entity’s January 26, 2007, revised factors of production database in our margin calculations. (2) To value fresh mushrooms, we used data contained in the 2005–2006 financial report of Agro Dutch Industries Limited (‘‘Agro Dutch’’). See Decision Memo at Comment 1 for further discussion. (3) To value spawn, we used data contained in the 2004–2005 financial report of Agro Dutch. See Decision Memo at Comment 3 for further discussion. (4) To value foreign brokerage and handling, we used Agro Dutch’s publicly summarized data submitted in the 2004–2005 administrative review of certain preserved mushrooms from India. See Decision Memo at Comment 4 for further discussion. (5) We calculated average surrogate percentages for factory overhead, selling, general, and administrative expenses, and profit using the 2005– 2006 financial reports of Agro Dutch and Flex Foods Limited. See Decision E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM 09AUN1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Notices Memo at Comment 5 for further discussion. (6) We used the most recently calculated NME wage rate for the PRC of 0.83 U.S. dollars per hour in our normal value calculations in accordance with Department practice (see, e.g., Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Final Results and Rescission, in Part, of 2004/2005 Antidumping Duty Administrative and New Shipper Reviews, 72 FR 19174 (April 17, 2007), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2). (7) Consistent with our regressionbased PRC wage rate calculation, we have treated the bonuses and gratuity line items noted in the surrogate producers’ financial reports as part of direct labor and included these expense items in the calculation of the denominator 8 used to derive the factory overhead ratio. See Memorandum from Brian Smith, Senior Case Analyst, to The File, entitled ‘‘7th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People’s Republic of China: Surrogate Values for the Final Results,’’ dated August 3, 2007, for further details. Final Results of Review We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentages exist: mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Manufacturer/exporter China Processed Food Import & Export Company (which includes its affiliates China National Cereals, Oils & Foodstuffs Import & Export Corporation, COFCO (Zhangzhou) Food Industrial Co., Ltd., Xiamen Jiahua Import & Export Trading Co., Ltd., and Fujian Yu Xing Fruit & Vegetable Foodstuff Development Co.) 9 ........................ Primera Harvest (Xiangfan) Co., Ltd ................................. Guangxi Eastwing Trading Co., Ltd 10 ..................................... PRC-Wide Rate (which includes Gerber, Green Fresh, Guangxi Hengxian, Guangxi Yulin and Fujian Zishan Group Co., Ltd. (‘‘Fujian Zishan’’) 11) ............................ Margin (percent) 19.02 19.02 19.02 198.63 8 The denominator includes costs for direct materials, labor, energy and material freight costs. VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:25 Aug 08, 2007 Jkt 211001 Assessment Rates The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department will issue appropriate appraisement instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of these final results of review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c), we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review if any importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above de minimis (i.e., is not less than 0.50 percent ad valorem). For entries made by the COFCO entity, the respondent was unable to provide the entered value. Therefore, we calculated the importerspecific-per-unit duty assessment rate by aggregating the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales and divided this amount by the total quantity of those sales. To determine whether the per-unit duty assessment rate is de minimis, in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we calculated an importer-specific ad valorem ratio based on the estimated entered value. For Guangxi Eastwing and Primera Harvest (i.e., respondents which are being assigned the margin calculated for the COFCO entity), we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on entries from these companies equal to the margin these companies received in the final results, regardless of the importer or customer. Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The 9 For this review, we consider COFCO, COFCO Zhangzhou, Xiamen Jiahua, and Yu Xing to constitute a single entity. 10 The margin assigned to Primera Harvest (Xiangfan) Co., Ltd. (‘‘Primera Harvest’’) and Guangxi Eastwing Trading Co., Ltd. (‘‘Guangxi Eastwing’’), the two non-mandatory respondents in this review, which demonstrated their entitlement to a separate rate, is based on the weighted average of the calculated margins of the mandatory respondents which are not de minimis or based on AFA, in accordance with Department practice (i.e., the margin calculated for the COFCO entity which is the only mandatory respondent entitled to a separate rate in this case). See Preliminary Results, 71 FR at 64930–64931, 64937. 11 As discussed in the Preliminary Results, 72 FR at 64934, Fujian Zishan is neither subject to this review nor entitled to a separate rate, as it is no longer part of the COFCO entity. PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44829 cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates indicated above; (2) for any previously reviewed or investigated PRC or non-PRC exporter, not covered in this review, with a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the company-specific rate established in the most recent segment of this proceeding; (3) for all other PRC exporters, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate established in the final results of this review; and (4) the cash deposit rate for any non-PRC exporter of subject merchandise from the PRC will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that nonPRC exporter. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further notice. Notification to Interested Parties This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return/ destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221. Dated: August 3, 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix—List of Issues Comment 1: Selection of Fresh Mushroom Value Comment 2: Selection of Glass Jar Value Comment 3: Selection of Spawn Value Comment 4: Selection of Brokerage and Handling Value Comment 5: Selection of Financial Statements Comment 6: Reclassification and Adjustments to Certain Financial Data E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM 09AUN1 44830 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Notices Comment 7: Method of Adjusting U.S. Prices for Glass Jars/Caps Provided Free-of-Charge [FR Doc. E7–15575 Filed 8–8–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–580–844] Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from South Korea: Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 1, 2006, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) initiated a sunset review of the antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’) order on steel concrete reinforcing bars (‘‘rebar’’) from South Korea. Pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), the International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’) determined that revocation of this order would not be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. Therefore, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.222(i)(1)(iii), the Department is revoking the AD order on rebar from South Korea. EFFECTIVE DATE: September 7, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brandon Farlander or Audrey Twyman, AD/CVD Operations Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0182, (202) 482– 3534, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Background On September 7, 2001, the Department issued the AD order on rebar from South Korea. See Antidumping Duty Orders: Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Belarus, Indonesia, Latvia, Moldova, People’s Republic of China, Poland, Republic of Korea and Ukraine, 66 FR 46777 (September 7, 2001). On August 1, 2006, the Department initiated, and the ITC instituted, a sunset review of the order on rebar from South Korea. See Initiation of Five-year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews, 71 FR 43443 (August 1, 2006); and Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Belarus, China, Indonesia, Korea, Latvia, Moldova, Poland, and Ukraine, Investigations Nos. 731–TA–873–875, VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:25 Aug 08, 2007 Jkt 211001 877–880, and 882 (Review), 71 FR 43523 (August 1, 2006). As a result of the sunset review of this order, the Department found that revocation of the order would be likely to lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping. See Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Moldova, the People’s Republic of China, South Korea, Indonesia, Poland, and Belarus; Final Results of the Expedited Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders, 71 FR 70509 (December 5, 2006). The Department notified the ITC of the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail were the order to be revoked. On August 1, 2007, the ITC determined, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, that revocation of the order would not be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. See Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Belarus, China, Indonesia, Korea, Latvia, Moldova, Poland, and Ukraine, Investigations Nos. 731–TA– 873–875, 877–880, and 882 (Review), 72 FR 42110, (August 1, 2007). Scope of the Order The product covered by this order is all steel concrete reinforcing bars sold in straight lengths, currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) under item numbers 7214.20.00, 7228.30.8050, 7222.11.0050, 7222.30.0000, 7228.60.6000, 7228.20.1000, or any other tariff item number. Specifically excluded are plain rounds (i.e., non– deformed or smooth bars) and rebar that has been further processed through bending or coating. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. Determination As a result of the determination by the ITC that revocation of the order is not likely to lead to the continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States, the Department, pursuant to section 751(d) of the Act, is revoking the order on rebar from South Korea. Pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.222(i)(2)(i), the effective date of revocation is September 7, 2006 (i.e., the fifth anniversary of the date of publication in the Federal Register of the order). The Department will notify U.S. Customs and Border Protection to discontinue suspension of liquidation and collection of cash deposits on entries of the subject merchandise entered or withdrawn from warehouse PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 on or after September 7, 2006, the effective date of revocation of the order. The Department will complete any pending administrative reviews of the order and will conduct administrative reviews of subject merchandise entered prior to the effective date of revocation in response to appropriately filed requests for review. This five-year sunset review and notice are in accordance with section 751(d)(2) and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: August 2, 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7–15571 Filed 8–8–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–822–804, A–560–811, A–449–804, A–841– 804, A–570–860, A–455–803, A–823–809] Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Belarus, Indonesia, Latvia, Moldova, the People’s Republic of China, Poland and Ukraine: Continuation of Antidumping Duty Orders Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 1, 2006, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) initiated sunset reviews of the antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’) orders on steel concrete reinforcing bars (‘‘rebar’’) from Belarus, Indonesia, Latvia, Moldova, the People’s Republic of China, Poland and Ukraine. As a result of the determinations by the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) and the International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’) that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on steel concrete reinforcing bars (‘‘rebar’’) from Belarus, Indonesia, Latvia, Moldova, the People’s Republic of China, Poland and Ukraine would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, the Department is publishing a notice of continuation of these antidumping duty orders. EFFECTIVE DATE: August 9, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Audrey Twyman or Brandon Farlander, AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3534 and (202) 482–0182, respectively. AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM 09AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 153 (Thursday, August 9, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44827-44830]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-15575]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-851]


Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China: 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 6, 2006, the Department of Commerce published the 
preliminary results of the 2005-2006 administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from the People's 
Republic of China (``PRC''). This review covers three exporters.\1\ The 
period of review (``POR'') is February 1, 2005, through January 31, 
2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This figure does not include those companies which did not 
respond to the Department's requests for information. See ``Facts 
Available'' section of this notice for further discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made 
changes to the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ 
from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping 
margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled 
``Final Results of Review.''

DATES: Effective Date: August 9, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian C. Smith or Terre Keaton 
Stefanova, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 
(202) 482-1766 or (202) 482-1280, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The review covers the following three exporters: (1) China 
Processed Food Import & Export Company (``COFCO'') and its affiliates 
China National Cereals, Oils & Foodstuffs Import & Export Corporation, 
COFCO (Zhangzhou) Food Industrial Co., Ltd. (``COFCO Zhangzhou''), 
Fujian Yu Xing Fruits & Vegetable Foodstuff Development Co. (``Yu 
Xing''), and Xiamen Jiahua Import & Export Trading Co., Ltd. (``Xiamen 
Jiahua'') (hereinafter collectively to referred to as ``the COFCO 
entity'') \2\; (2) Guangxi Eastwing Trading Co., Ltd. (``Guangxi 
Eastwing''); and (3) Primera Harvest (Xiangfan) Co., Ltd. (``Primera 
Harvest''). The POR is February 1, 2005, through January 31, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In the Preliminary Results, we determined it appropriate to 
treat COFCO and its affiliates, China National, COFCO Zhangzhou, 
Xiamen Jiahua and Yu Xing, as one entity for margin calculation 
purposes because they met the regulatory criteria for collapsing. 
See October 31, 2006, Memorandum from the Team to The File, entitled 
``Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: 
Whether to Continue to Collapse COFCO with Some or All of Its 
Affiliates.'' No party objected to this preliminary determination. 
Therefore, we have continued to treat these affiliated companies as 
one entity in the final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 6, 2006, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') published the preliminary results of this administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms 
from the PRC. See Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's 
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 71 FR 64930 (November 6, 2006) (``Preliminary 
Results''). We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary 
Results.
    On November 9, 2006, the COFCO entity requested that the Department 
extend the deadlines to submit new factual information, publicly 
available information (``PAI''), and case and rebuttal briefs, as well 
as the deadline for the final results. On November 17, 2006, we 
notified the COFCO entity and the other interested parties in this 
review that although we did not find it necessary at the time to extend 
the final results, we would extend the deadline to submit new factual 
information and PAI until January 26, 2007, and extend the deadlines 
for submitting case and rebuttal briefs until February 9 and 14, 2007, 
respectively.
    On January 22, 2007, the COFCO entity submitted a second request to 
further extend the deadline for submitting new factual information, 
PAI, and case and rebuttal briefs, and also requested that the 
Department fully extend the final results. On January 24, 2007, we 
notified the COFCO entity and the other interested parties in this 
review that the Department would provide new deadlines for submitting 
PAI, case and rebuttal briefs once the Department issued a Federal 
Register notice postponing the final results.
    On January 29, 2007, we partially extended the time limit for the 
final results in this review until August 3, 2007. See Notice of 
Partial Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review: Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's 
Republic of China, 72 FR 5268 (February 5, 2007).
    On January 31, 2007, the Department provided the COFCO entity and 
the other interested parties in this review revised deadlines for 
submitting PAI and case and rebuttal briefs.
    On February 5, 2007, the Department placed on the record a revised 
non-market-economy (``NME'') wage rate applicable to the PRC for 
consideration in the final results.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Memorandum from Brian Smith, Team Leader, to The File, 
entitled ``Antidumping Duty Administrative Review on Certain 
Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Revised 
Non-Market-Economy Wage Rate Applicable to the PRC,'' dated February 
5, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 19, 2007, the Department placed on the record an 
additional brokerage and handling surrogate value for consideration in 
the final results.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Memorandum from Brian Smith, Team Leader, to The File, 
entitled ``Antidumping Duty Administrative Review on Certain 
Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Additional 
Brokerage and Handling Surrogate Value Placed on the Record,'' dated 
March 19, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 30, 2007, the COFCO entity submitted PAI for consideration 
in the final results. No other party submitted PAI.
    The COFCO entity filed its case brief on April 13, 2007. No other 
party (including the petitioner \5\) filed case or rebuttal briefs in 
the review. No party requested a hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The petitioner is the Coalition for Fair Preserved Mushroom 
Trade, which includes the following domestic companies: L.K. Bowman, 
Inc., Monterey Mushrooms, Inc., Mushroom Canning Company, and Sunny 
Dell Foods, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 29, 2007, the Department placed on the record information 
obtained from the Web site of an Indian producer of the subject 
merchandise and provided an opportunity for the

[[Page 44828]]

parties to comment on that information.\6\ No comments were filed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Memorandum from Brian Smith, Team Leader, to The File, 
entitled ``Antidumping Duty Administrative Review on Certain 
Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Additional 
Data Placed on the Record for Comment,'' dated June 29, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have conducted this administrative review in accordance with 
section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'').

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are certain preserved mushrooms, 
whether imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. The 
certain preserved mushrooms covered under this order are the species 
Agaricus bisporus and Agaricus bitorquis. ``Certain Preserved 
Mushrooms'' refer to mushrooms that have been prepared or preserved by 
cleaning, blanching, and sometimes slicing or cutting. These mushrooms 
are then packed and heated in containers including, but not limited to, 
cans or glass jars in a suitable liquid medium, including, but not 
limited to, water, brine, butter or butter sauce. Certain preserved 
mushrooms may be imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. 
Included within the scope of this order are ``brined'' mushrooms, which 
are presalted and packed in a heavy salt solution to provisionally 
preserve them for further processing.
    Excluded from the scope of this order are the following: (1) All 
other species of mushroom, including straw mushrooms; (2) all fresh and 
chilled mushrooms, including ``refrigerated'' or ``quick blanched 
mushrooms''; (3) dried mushrooms; (4) frozen mushrooms; and (5) 
``marinated,'' ``acidified,'' or ``pickled'' mushrooms, which are 
prepared or preserved by means of vinegar or acetic acid, but may 
contain oil or other additives.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ On June 19, 2000, the Department affirmed that 
``marinated,'' ``acidified,'' or ``pickled'' mushrooms containing 
less than 0.5 percent acetic acid are within the scope of the 
antidumping duty order. See ``Recommendation Memorandum-Final Ruling 
of Request by Tak Fat, et al. for Exclusion of Certain Marinated, 
Acidified Mushrooms from the Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order on 
Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China,'' 
dated June 19, 2000. On February 9, 2005, this decision was upheld 
by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. See 
Tak Fat v. United States, 396 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The merchandise subject to this order is classifiable under 
subheadings: 2003.10.0127, 2003.10.0131, 2003.10.0137, 2003.10.0143, 
2003.10.0147, 2003.10.0153 and 0711.51.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the 
written description of the scope of this order is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case brief submitted by the COFCO entity 
in this antidumping duty administrative review are addressed in the 
``Issues and Decision Memorandum'' (``Decision Memo'') from Stephen J. 
Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to David 
M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated August 
3, 2007, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues 
that the COFCO entity has raised and to which we have responded, all of 
which are in the Decision Memo, is attached to this notice as an 
appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised 
in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public 
memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099 of 
the main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the 
Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the 
Decision Memo are identical in content.

Facts Available

    In the Preliminary Results, the Department found that Gerber Food 
(Yunnan) Co., Ltd. (``Gerber'') and Green Fresh Foods (Zhangzhou) Co., 
Ltd. (``Green Fresh'') were uncooperative because Gerber did not 
respond to supplemental requests for information relevant to its no-
shipment claim, whereas Green Fresh failed to file its response to the 
Department's quantity and value questionnaire in accordance with the 
Department's regulations. As a result, the Department considered the 
information both companies provided either incomplete, unreliable, or 
improperly filed. Moreover, the Department found that Guangxi Hengxian 
Pro-Light Foods, Inc. (``Guangxi Hengxian'') and Guangxi Yulin Oriental 
Food Co., Ltd. (``Guangxi Yulin'') were uncooperative as well because 
Guangxi Hengxian did not respond to the Department's antidumping duty 
questionnaire and Guangxi Yulin did not respond to the Department's 
quantity and value questionnaire. Because all four of these companies 
failed to provide responses to the Department's questionnaires, the 
Department could not determine whether they were eligible for a 
separate rate in this review and, therefore, treated them as part of 
the PRC-wide entity. In the Preliminary Results, the Department based 
the margin for the PRC-wide entity, including the four companies 
mentioned above, on total adverse facts available (``AFA'') because of 
the PRC-wide entity's failure to cooperate by not acting to the best of 
its ability in providing responses to the Department's request for 
information. As AFA, the Department applied the prior PRC-wide entity 
rate of 198.63 percent. See Preliminary Results, 71 FR at 64933.
    A complete explanation of the selection, corroboration, and 
application of the AFA rate can be found in the Preliminary Results. 
See Preliminary Results, 71 FR at 64933. The Department did not receive 
comments with regard to its preliminary findings that Gerber, Green 
Fresh, Guangxi Hengxian, and Guangxi Yulin are part of the PRC-wide 
entity. Further, no information was submitted since the Preliminary 
Results that calls into question the reliability of the Department's 
selection, corroboration, and application of AFA in this review. 
Accordingly, for the final results, we continue to apply AFA to the 
PRC-wide entity, including Gerber, Green Fresh, Guangxi Hengxian, and 
Guangxi Yulin, consistent with our Preliminary Results.

Changes From the Preliminary Results

    Based on the information submitted and our analysis of the comments 
received, we have made certain changes to the margin calculations for 
the COFCO entity as follows.
    (1) We used the COFCO entity's January 26, 2007, revised factors of 
production database in our margin calculations.
    (2) To value fresh mushrooms, we used data contained in the 2005-
2006 financial report of Agro Dutch Industries Limited (``Agro 
Dutch''). See Decision Memo at Comment 1 for further discussion.
    (3) To value spawn, we used data contained in the 2004-2005 
financial report of Agro Dutch. See Decision Memo at Comment 3 for 
further discussion.
    (4) To value foreign brokerage and handling, we used Agro Dutch's 
publicly summarized data submitted in the 2004-2005 administrative 
review of certain preserved mushrooms from India. See Decision Memo at 
Comment 4 for further discussion.
    (5) We calculated average surrogate percentages for factory 
overhead, selling, general, and administrative expenses, and profit 
using the 2005-2006 financial reports of Agro Dutch and Flex Foods 
Limited. See Decision

[[Page 44829]]

Memo at Comment 5 for further discussion.
    (6) We used the most recently calculated NME wage rate for the PRC 
of 0.83 U.S. dollars per hour in our normal value calculations in 
accordance with Department practice (see, e.g., Freshwater Crawfish 
Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Final Results 
and Rescission, in Part, of 2004/2005 Antidumping Duty Administrative 
and New Shipper Reviews, 72 FR 19174 (April 17, 2007), and accompanying 
Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2).
    (7) Consistent with our regression-based PRC wage rate calculation, 
we have treated the bonuses and gratuity line items noted in the 
surrogate producers' financial reports as part of direct labor and 
included these expense items in the calculation of the denominator \8\ 
used to derive the factory overhead ratio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The denominator includes costs for direct materials, labor, 
energy and material freight costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    See Memorandum from Brian Smith, Senior Case Analyst, to The File, 
entitled ``7th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain 
Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Surrogate 
Values for the Final Results,'' dated August 3, 2007, for further 
details.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentages 
exist:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                   Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
China Processed Food Import & Export Company (which                19.02
 includes its affiliates China National Cereals, Oils &
 Foodstuffs Import & Export Corporation, COFCO (Zhangzhou)
 Food Industrial Co., Ltd., Xiamen Jiahua Import & Export
 Trading Co., Ltd., and Fujian Yu Xing Fruit & Vegetable
 Foodstuff Development Co.) \9\............................
Primera Harvest (Xiangfan) Co., Ltd........................        19.02
Guangxi Eastwing Trading Co., Ltd \10\.....................        19.02
PRC-Wide Rate (which includes Gerber, Green Fresh, Guangxi        198.63
 Hengxian, Guangxi Yulin and Fujian Zishan Group Co., Ltd.
 (``Fujian Zishan'') \11\).................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). The 
Department will issue appropriate appraisement instructions directly to 
CBP 15 days after publication of these final results of review. In 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c), we will instruct CBP to assess 
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review if 
any importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results 
of this review is above de minimis (i.e., is not less than 0.50 percent 
ad valorem). For entries made by the COFCO entity, the respondent was 
unable to provide the entered value. Therefore, we calculated the 
importer-specific-per-unit duty assessment rate by aggregating the 
total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales 
and divided this amount by the total quantity of those sales. To 
determine whether the per-unit duty assessment rate is de minimis, in 
accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we 
calculated an importer-specific ad valorem ratio based on the estimated 
entered value. For Guangxi Eastwing and Primera Harvest (i.e., 
respondents which are being assigned the margin calculated for the 
COFCO entity), we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on 
entries from these companies equal to the margin these companies 
received in the final results, regardless of the importer or customer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ For this review, we consider COFCO, COFCO Zhangzhou, Xiamen 
Jiahua, and Yu Xing to constitute a single entity.
    \10\ The margin assigned to Primera Harvest (Xiangfan) Co., Ltd. 
(``Primera Harvest'') and Guangxi Eastwing Trading Co., Ltd. 
(``Guangxi Eastwing''), the two non-mandatory respondents in this 
review, which demonstrated their entitlement to a separate rate, is 
based on the weighted average of the calculated margins of the 
mandatory respondents which are not de minimis or based on AFA, in 
accordance with Department practice (i.e., the margin calculated for 
the COFCO entity which is the only mandatory respondent entitled to 
a separate rate in this case). See Preliminary Results, 71 FR at 
64930-64931, 64937.
    \11\ As discussed in the Preliminary Results, 72 FR at 64934, 
Fujian Zishan is neither subject to this review nor entitled to a 
separate rate, as it is no longer part of the COFCO entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all 
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the 
final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 
751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the reviewed 
companies will be the rates indicated above; (2) for any previously 
reviewed or investigated PRC or non-PRC exporter, not covered in this 
review, with a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the 
company-specific rate established in the most recent segment of this 
proceeding; (3) for all other PRC exporters, the cash deposit rate will 
be the PRC-wide rate established in the final results of this review; 
and (4) the cash deposit rate for any non-PRC exporter of subject 
merchandise from the PRC will be the rate applicable to the PRC 
exporter that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit 
requirements shall remain in effect until further notice.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply 
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
    This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written 
notification of return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to 
judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with 
the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
    We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.221.

    Dated: August 3, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix--List of Issues

Comment 1: Selection of Fresh Mushroom Value
Comment 2: Selection of Glass Jar Value
Comment 3: Selection of Spawn Value
Comment 4: Selection of Brokerage and Handling Value
Comment 5: Selection of Financial Statements
Comment 6: Reclassification and Adjustments to Certain Financial 
Data

[[Page 44830]]

Comment 7: Method of Adjusting U.S. Prices for Glass Jars/Caps 
Provided Free-of-Charge

[FR Doc. E7-15575 Filed 8-8-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.