Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 5792-5793 [E8-1794]

Download as PDF 5792 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 21 / Thursday, January 31, 2008 / Notices a regulatory flexibility analysis has not been prepared. Dated: January 25, 2008. Deborah A. Jefferson, Director for Human Resources Management, Department of Commerce. [FR Doc. E8–1659 Filed 1–30–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–BS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A–570–888 Floor–standing, Metal–top Ironing Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Second Antidumping Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 31, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bobby Wong, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0409. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES On September 11, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of this antidumping administrative review. Floor–Standing, Metal–Top Ironing Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 51781 (September 11, 2007). On December 28, 2007, the Department extended the deadline for these results by 23 days. Floor–standing, Metal–top Ironing Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Second Antidumping Administrative Review, 72 FR 73758 (December 28, 2007). The period of review for this administrative review is August 1, 2005, to July 31, 2006. Extension of Time Limits for Final Results Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and section 351.213(h)(1) of the Department’s regulations, the Department shall issue the preliminary VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:05 Jan 30, 2008 Jkt 214001 results of an administrative review within 245 days after the last day of the Error! Main Document Only.anniversary month of the date of publication of the order. The Act further provides that the Department shall issue the final results of review within 120 days after the date on which the notice of the preliminary results was published in the Federal Register. However, if the Department determines that it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and section 351.213(h)(2) of the Department’s regulations allow the Department to extend the 245–day period to 365 days and the 120–day period to 180 days. In the instant review, the Department finds that the current deadline for the final results of February 1, 2008, is not practicable. The Department requires additional time to conduct surrogate value research and review and analyze interested party comments. As a result, the Department has determined to extend the current time limits of this administrative review by an additional 37 days. Since a 37–day extension would result in the deadline for the final results falling on March 9, 2008, which is a Sunday, the new deadline for the final results will be the next business day, March 10, 2008. Notice of Clarification: Application of ‘‘Next Business Day’’ Rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005). This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(I) of the Act. Dated: January 24, 2008. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8–1800 Filed 1–30–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A–549–813 Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 8, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on canned pineapple fruit (CPF) from Thailand. AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 See Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 44490 (August 8, 2007) (Preliminary Results). This review covers shipments of subject merchandise to the United States for the period July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006, made by Vita Food Factory (1989) Ltd. (Vita) and Tropical Food Industries Co. Ltd. (Trofco). The Department determines that Vita and Trofco made sales to the U.S. at less than normal value. The final results are listed below in the section titled ‘‘Final Results of Review’’. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 31, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Kirby or Myrna Lobo, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3782 or (202) 482– 2371, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On August 8, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on CPF from Thailand. See Preliminary Results. We conducted a sales and cost verification of Vita from September 17 through September 25, 2007. See Verification of the U.S. and Comparison Market Sales Information and the Cost Information in the Response of Vita Food Factory (1989) Co., Ltd. for the 2005–06 Administrative Review of Canned Pineapple Fruit (CPF) from Thailand, issued on November 30, 2007 (Vita Verification Report). Furthermore, we conducted a sales verification of Trofco on September 26 through September 28, 2007. See Verification of the U.S. and Comparison Market Sales Information of Tropical Food Industries Co., Ltd. for the 2005–06 Administrative Review of Canned Pineapple Fruit (CPF) from Thailand, issued on November 30, 2007 (Trofco Verification Report). We invited interested parties to comment on the preliminary results and the verification reports. We received no comments. Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order The product covered by this order is CPF, defined as pineapple processed and/or prepared into various product forms, including rings, pieces, chunks, tidbits, and crushed pineapple, that is packed and cooked in metal cans with either pineapple juice or sugar syrup added. CPF is currently classifiable E:\FR\FM\31JAN1.SGM 31JAN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 21 / Thursday, January 31, 2008 / Notices under subheadings 2008.20.0010 and 2008.20.0090 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). HTSUS 2008.20.0010 covers CPF packed in a sugar–based syrup; HTSUS 2008.20.0090 covers CPF packed without added sugar (i.e., juice– packed). Although these HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and for customs purposes, the written description of the scope is dispositive. There have been no scope rulings for the subject order. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our findings at verification, we have made minor adjustments in the methodology that was used in the Preliminary Results for Trofco and Vita and accounted for corrections to their reported data. At verification, Vita provided minor corrections relating to its reported commissions in the comparison market. Moreover, the Department identified additional minor corrections to Vita’s reported commissions data. As a result, we have made adjustments to certain comparison market commissions made by Vita. Vita also provided minor corrections to its packing expenses and its direct selling expenses. As a result, we have made adjustments to Vita’s packing expenses and direct selling expenses. For a further explanation of these changes, see Vita Verification Report at pages 3–4. Furthermore, based on information obtained since the preliminary results of this review, we have determined that Vita’s reported commissions are more appropriately treated as discounts for the majority of sales by Vita to the United States. See Vita Verification Report at page 7; see also the Memorandum to the File, from Douglas Kirby through Dana Mermelstein (Program Manager) re: Analysis of Vita for the Final Results, dated January 24, 2008, on file in the Central Record Unit, room B–099 of the main Department of Commerce building (CRU). Trofco also provided minor corrections at verification to its reported packing expenses. As a result, we have revised Trofco’s packing expenses. Furthermore, Trofco provided minor corrections to its direct selling expenses for U.S. sales. As a result, we have revised Trofco’s direct selling expenses for U.S. sales. See Trofco Verification Report at page 2; see also the Memorandum to the File, from Myrna Lobo through Dana Mermelstein (Program Manager) re: Analysis of Trofco for the Final Results, dated January 24, 2008, on file in the Central Record Unit, room B–099 of the main VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:05 Jan 30, 2008 Jkt 214001 Department of Commerce building (CRU). 5793 rate listed above; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will Final Results of Review continue to be the company–specific As a result of this review, we rate published for the most recent determine that the following weighted– period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm average dumping margins exist for the covered in this review, a prior review, period July 1, 2005 through June 30, or the investigation, but the producer is, 2006: the cash deposit rate will be that established for the producer of the Weighted Average Manufacturer/Exporter merchandise in these final results of Margin review, a prior review, or in the final Vita Food Factory determination; and (4) if neither the (1989) Ltd. ................. 7.13 percent exporter nor the producer is a firm Tropical Food Industries covered in this review, a prior review, Co., Ltd. .................... 10.40 percent or the investigation, the cash deposit rate will be 24.64 percent, the ‘‘all– Assessment others’’ rate established in the less– The Department will determine, and than-fair–value investigation. These U.S. Customs and Border Protection deposit requirements shall remain in (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties effect until publication of the final on all appropriate entries, pursuant to results of the next administrative section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of review. 1930 (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.212(b). Certificate on Reimbursement The Department calculated importerspecific duty assessment rates (or, when This notice also serves as a final the importer was unknown by the reminder to importers of their respondent, customer–specific duty responsibility under 19 CFR assessment rates) on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of antidumping 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate duties calculated for the examined sales regarding the reimbursement of observations involving each importer to antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this the total entered value of the examined sales observations for that importer. The review period. Failure to comply with Department intends to issue assessment this requirement could result in the Secretary’s presumption that instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred, and in the subsequent of review. assessment of double antidumping The Department clarified its ‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on duties. May 6, 2003. This clarification will Notification Regarding Administrative apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by companies Protective Orders included in these final results of review This notice is the only reminder to for which the reviewed companies did parties subject to the administrative not know their merchandise was protective order (APO) of their destined for the United States. In such responsibility concerning the return or instances, we will instruct CBP to destruction of proprietary information liquidate unreviewed entries at the ‘‘All disclosed under the APO in accordance Others’’ rate if there is no rate for the with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written intermediate company(ies) involved in notification of the return or destruction the transaction. For a discussion of this of APO materials or conversion to clarification, see Notice of Policy judicial protective order is hereby Concerning Assessment of Antidumping requested. Failure to comply with the Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). regulations and the terms of an APO is Cash Deposits a sanctionable violation. Furthermore, the following deposit We are issuing and publishing these requirements will be effective upon results and this notice in accordance publication of these final results of this with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of administrative review for all shipments the Act. of canned pineapple fruit from Thailand Dated: January 24, 2008. entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, David M. Spooner, for consumption on or after the publication date of these final results, as Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. provided by section 751(a) of the Act: [FR Doc. E8–1794 Filed 1–30–08; 8:45 am] (1) for companies covered by this review, the cash deposit rate will be the BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JAN1.SGM 31JAN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 21 (Thursday, January 31, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5792-5793]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1794]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

A-549-813


Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 8, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published the preliminary results of its administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on canned pineapple fruit (CPF) from Thailand. 
See Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand: Preliminary Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 44490 (August 8, 2007) 
(Preliminary Results). This review covers shipments of subject 
merchandise to the United States for the period July 1, 2005 through 
June 30, 2006, made by Vita Food Factory (1989) Ltd. (Vita) and 
Tropical Food Industries Co. Ltd. (Trofco).
    The Department determines that Vita and Trofco made sales to the 
U.S. at less than normal value. The final results are listed below in 
the section titled ``Final Results of Review''.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 31, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Kirby or Myrna Lobo, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
3782 or (202) 482-2371, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 8, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on CPF from Thailand. See Preliminary Results. 
We conducted a sales and cost verification of Vita from September 17 
through September 25, 2007. See Verification of the U.S. and Comparison 
Market Sales Information and the Cost Information in the Response of 
Vita Food Factory (1989) Co., Ltd. for the 2005-06 Administrative 
Review of Canned Pineapple Fruit (CPF) from Thailand, issued on 
November 30, 2007 (Vita Verification Report). Furthermore, we conducted 
a sales verification of Trofco on September 26 through September 28, 
2007. See Verification of the U.S. and Comparison Market Sales 
Information of Tropical Food Industries Co., Ltd. for the 2005-06 
Administrative Review of Canned Pineapple Fruit (CPF) from Thailand, 
issued on November 30, 2007 (Trofco Verification Report). We invited 
interested parties to comment on the preliminary results and the 
verification reports. We received no comments.

Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order

    The product covered by this order is CPF, defined as pineapple 
processed and/or prepared into various product forms, including rings, 
pieces, chunks, tidbits, and crushed pineapple, that is packed and 
cooked in metal cans with either pineapple juice or sugar syrup added. 
CPF is currently classifiable

[[Page 5793]]

under subheadings 2008.20.0010 and 2008.20.0090 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). HTSUS 2008.20.0010 
covers CPF packed in a sugar-based syrup; HTSUS 2008.20.0090 covers CPF 
packed without added sugar (i.e., juice-packed). Although these HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and for customs purposes, the 
written description of the scope is dispositive. There have been no 
scope rulings for the subject order.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our findings at verification, we have made minor 
adjustments in the methodology that was used in the Preliminary Results 
for Trofco and Vita and accounted for corrections to their reported 
data.
    At verification, Vita provided minor corrections relating to its 
reported commissions in the comparison market. Moreover, the Department 
identified additional minor corrections to Vita's reported commissions 
data. As a result, we have made adjustments to certain comparison 
market commissions made by Vita. Vita also provided minor corrections 
to its packing expenses and its direct selling expenses. As a result, 
we have made adjustments to Vita's packing expenses and direct selling 
expenses. For a further explanation of these changes, see Vita 
Verification Report at pages 3-4. Furthermore, based on information 
obtained since the preliminary results of this review, we have 
determined that Vita's reported commissions are more appropriately 
treated as discounts for the majority of sales by Vita to the United 
States. See Vita Verification Report at page 7; see also the Memorandum 
to the File, from Douglas Kirby through Dana Mermelstein (Program 
Manager) re: Analysis of Vita for the Final Results, dated January 24, 
2008, on file in the Central Record Unit, room B-099 of the main 
Department of Commerce building (CRU).
    Trofco also provided minor corrections at verification to its 
reported packing expenses. As a result, we have revised Trofco's 
packing expenses. Furthermore, Trofco provided minor corrections to its 
direct selling expenses for U.S. sales. As a result, we have revised 
Trofco's direct selling expenses for U.S. sales. See Trofco 
Verification Report at page 2; see also the Memorandum to the File, 
from Myrna Lobo through Dana Mermelstein (Program Manager) re: Analysis 
of Trofco for the Final Results, dated January 24, 2008, on file in the 
Central Record Unit, room B-099 of the main Department of Commerce 
building (CRU).

Final Results of Review

    As a result of this review, we determine that the following 
weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period July 1, 2005 
through June 30, 2006:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted Average
                Manufacturer/Exporter                       Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vita Food Factory (1989) Ltd........................        7.13 percent
Tropical Food Industries Co., Ltd...................       10.40 percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment

    The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries, pursuant to section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930 
(the Act), and 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department calculated importer- 
specific duty assessment rates (or, when the importer was unknown by 
the respondent, customer-specific duty assessment rates) on the basis 
of the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for 
the examined sales observations involving each importer to the total 
entered value of the examined sales observations for that importer. The 
Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days 
after the date of publication of these final results of review.
    The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on 
May 6, 2003. This clarification will apply to entries of subject 
merchandise during the POR produced by companies included in these 
final results of review for which the reviewed companies did not know 
their merchandise was destined for the United States. In such 
instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the 
``All Others'' rate if there is no rate for the intermediate 
company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a discussion of this 
clarification, see Notice of Policy Concerning Assessment of 
Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).

Cash Deposits

    Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective 
upon publication of these final results of this administrative review 
for all shipments of canned pineapple fruit from Thailand entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication 
date of these final results, as provided by section 751(a) of the Act: 
(1) for companies covered by this review, the cash deposit rate will be 
the rate listed above; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated 
companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be 
the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if 
the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or 
the investigation, but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be 
that established for the producer of the merchandise in these final 
results of review, a prior review, or in the final determination; and 
(4) if neither the exporter nor the producer is a firm covered in this 
review, a prior review, or the investigation, the cash deposit rate 
will be 24.64 percent, the ``all-others'' rate established in the less-
than-fair-value investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain 
in effect until publication of the final results of the next 
administrative review.

Certificate on Reimbursement

    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 in the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

    This notice is the only reminder to parties subject to the 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under the APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely 
written notification of the return or 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 these results and this notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: January 24, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-1794 Filed 1-30-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S