Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 5792-5793 [E8-1794]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
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
