Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77612-77614 [E8-30277]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
77612
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 245 / Friday, December 19, 2008 / Notices
Review in Part, 71 FR 65082, 65083
(Nov. 7, 2006) (Rebar from Turkey); see
also Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp
From India; Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 71 FR 41419 (July 21, 2006).
The Department also initiated
separate administrative reviews for the
following companies with the same
name but different addresses: 1) Apex
Exports; 2) Choice Trading Corporation
Pvt. Ltd.; 3) IFB Agro Industries
Limited; 4) Kings Marine Products; 5) K
V Marine Exports; 6) Navayuga Exports
Ltd.; 7) Sai Marine Exports Pvt. Ltd.;
and 8) Selvam Exports Private Limited.
Specifically, these are companies for
which we initiated multiple
administrative reviews because the
petitioner and/or the respondent listed
separate addresses for the same
companies in their review requests. See
Notice of Initiation, 73 FR at 18757–
18762. The Department sent out letters
asking for clarification of the multiple
addresses and same company names.
We received responses from the
companies verifying the correct address
and that the company is the same.
Therefore, we are rescinding the review
with respect to these duplicate company
addresses.
Finally, in the Notice of Initiation, the
Department mistakenly included Royal
Cold Storage India P Ltd. in the list of
companies for which the review was
initiated, in addition to the list of
companies for which the review was not
initiated. See Notice of Initiation, 73 FR
at 18760, 18765. We are clarifying that
the Department has not initiated an
administrative review with respect to
Royal Cold Storage India P Ltd. Id., 73
FR at 18765.
On October 23, 2008, the Department
received comments from 32 U.S.
producers regarding the Department’s
Intent to Rescind Memorandum. In
these comments, the U.S. producers
objected to the petitioner’s July 7, 2008,
filing withdrawing its request for
administrative reviews for certain
Indian producers/exporters because: 1)
these domestic producers, three of
which were previously part of the Ad
Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee,
have retained their own counsel; and 2)
as a result, the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade
Action Committee no longer represents
the majority of the U.S. domestic
industry. Thus, the U.S. producers
requested that the Department not
rescind the administrative reviews for
the companies for which the petitioner
withdrew its request. On October 30,
2008, the petitioner responded to the
U.S. producers’ comments by stating
that all of its actions in the review were
taken on behalf of the Ad Hoc Shrimp
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:29 Dec 18, 2008
Jkt 217001
Trade Action Committee as a corporate
entity, not on behalf of the individual
members. Thus, it urged the Department
to disregard the U.S. producers’ request.
After considering the U.S. producers’
October 23, 2008 submission, we
disagree with the arguments made by
these companies. The request for
administrative review at issue was made
by the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action
Committee, which is an interested party
to this proceeding under section
771(9)(E) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act) (i.e., the subsection
applicable to trade associations).
Contrary to the U.S. producers’
assertions, this section of the Act does
not require a trade association to
represent a majority of the industry
producing the domestic like product,
but rather it merely requires a majority
of the association’s members to
manufacture, produce, or wholesale a
domestic like product in the United
States. Further, 19 CFR 351.213(b)(1)
does not require that a domestic
interested party represent the majority
of the domestic industry before it may
request a review. In this case, both the
administrative review requests and the
corresponding withdrawal of certain of
these requests were made on behalf of
the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action
Committee, not the individual members
of this group. Consequently, because the
U.S. producers involved in the October
23, 2008, filing did not request any
administrative reviews in this segment
of the proceeding, we find that their
objection to the petitioner’s withdrawal
of its request for administrative reviews
of certain Indian producers/exporters
does not provide a basis for the
Department to maintain the review
request for these companies.
Assessment
The Department intends to issue
assessment instructions to CBP 15 days
after the date of publication of this
partial rescission of administrative
review. The Department will direct CBP
to assess antidumping duties at the cash
deposit rate in effect on the date of entry
for POR entries of the subject
merchandise produced/exported by the
companies for which we are rescinding
the review based on the timely
withdrawal of review requests.
With respect to POR entries of subject
merchandise produced by companies
for which we are rescinding the review
based on certifications of no shipments,
because these companies certified that
they made no POR shipments of subject
merchandise for which they had
knowledge of U.S. destination, we will
instruct CBP to liquidate these entries at
the all–others rate established in the
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
less–than-fair–value investigation if
there is no rate for the intermediary
(e.g., a reseller, trading company, or
exporter) involved in the transaction.
See Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Proceedings: Assessment of
Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May
6, 2003).
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a reminder to
importers for whom this review is being
rescinded, of their responsibility under
19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate
regarding 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 double antidumping duties.
This notice is published in
accordance with section 777(i) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).
Dated: December 12, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. E8–30269 Filed 12–18–08; 8:45 am]
Billing Code: 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A–549–822)
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp
from Thailand: Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is rescinding the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain
frozen warmwater shrimp from
Thailand for the period February 1,
2007, through January 31, 2008, for 29
companies, based on: 1) timely
withdrawals of the review requests; and
2) confirmed statements of no
shipments during the period of review
(POR).
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 19, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate
Johnson, 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) 482–4929.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM
19DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 245 / Friday, December 19, 2008 / Notices
Background
On February 4, 2008, the Department
published in the Federal Register a
notice of opportunity to request an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain
frozen warmwater shrimp from
Thailand for the period February 1,
2007, through January 31, 2008. See
Antidumping or Countervailing Duty
Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation; Opportunity to Request
Administrative Review, 73 FR 6477
(February 4, 2008). The Department
received timely requests from the
petitioner,1 the Louisiana Shrimp
Association (LSA), and certain
individual companies, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.213(b), during the
anniversary month of February 2008, for
administrative reviews of the
antidumping duty order on shrimp from
Thailand.
On April 7, 2008, the Department
initiated an administrative review for
165 companies. See Certain Frozen
Warmwater Shrimp from Brazil,
Ecuador, India, and Thailand: Notice of
Initiation of Administrative Reviews, 73
FR 18754 (April 7, 2008).
Between March and May 2008, the
Department received submissions from
certain companies that indicated they
had no shipments of subject
merchandise to the United States during
the POR.
On July 7, 2008, in accordance with
19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the petitioner
withdrew its request for review for the
following eighteen companies: Anglo–
Siam Seafoods Co., Ltd.; Applied DB
Ind; Chonburi LC; Gallant Ocean
(Thailand) Co., Ltd. (Gallant Ocean)2;
Haitai Seafood Co., Ltd.; High Way
International Co., Ltd.; Li–Thai Frozen
Foods Co., Ltd.; Merkur Co., Ltd.; Ming
Chao Ind Thailand; Nongmon SMJ
Products; Queen Marine Food Co., Ltd.;
SCT Co., Ltd.; Search & Serve; Smile
Heart Foods Co., Ltd.; Shianlin Bangkok
Co., Ltd.; Star Frozen Foods Co., Ltd.;
Thai World Imports & Exports; and
Wann Fisheries Co., Ltd.
On October 27, 2008, the Department
issued a memorandum indicating that it
intended to rescind the administrative
review with respect to 29 respondent
companies, and it invited comments on
this action from interested parties. See
October 27, 2008, Memorandum to The
File from Kate Johnson titled ‘‘Intent to
Rescind in Part the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review on Certain
Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from
Thailand’’ (Intent to Rescind
Memorandum). On November 3, 2008,
2 Gallant Ocean has not withdrawn its February
29, 2008, request for review.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:29 Dec 18, 2008
Jkt 217001
and November 13, 2008, the Department
received comments from 32 U.S.
producers opposing the rescission with
respect to the companies for which the
petitioner withdrew its review request.
On November 6, 2008, the petitioner
responded to the comments filed on
November 3, 2008.
Partial Rescission of Review
Pursant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the
Secretary will rescind an administrative
review, in whole or in part, if a party
requesting a review withdraws the
request within 90 days of the date of
publication of the notice of initiation.
Therefore, because all requests for
administrative reviews were timely
withdrawn for the following companies,
in accordance with 19 CFR
351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding this
review with regard to these companies:
1) Anglo–Siam Seafoods Co., Ltd.; 2)
Applied DB Ind; 3) Chonburi LC; 4)
Haitai Seafood Co., Ltd.; 5) High Way
International Co., Ltd.; 6) Li–Thai
Frozen Foods Co., Ltd.; 7) Merkur Co.,
Ltd.; 8) Ming Chao Ind Thailand; 9)
Nongmon SMJ Products; 10) Queen
Marine Food Co., Ltd.; 11) SCT Co.,
Ltd.; 12) Search & Serve; 13) Smile
Heart Foods Co., Ltd.; 14) Shianlin
Bangkok Co., Ltd.; 15) Star Frozen
Foods Co., Ltd.; 16) Thai World Imports
& Exports; and 17) Wann Fisheries Co.,
Ltd. As noted above, the review
requested by Gallant Ocean has not been
withdrawn. Therefore, we are not
rescinding the review with respect to
this company.
In addition, in accordance with 19
CFR 351.213(d)(3), we are rescinding
the review with respect to the following
ten companies which submitted letters
indicating that they had no shipments of
subject merchandise during the POR: 1)
Dynamic Intertransport Co., Ltd.; 2)
Lucky Union Foods Co., Ltd.; 3) MKF
Interfood (2004) Co., Ltd.; 4) NR. Instant
Produce Co., Ltd.; 5) Siam Canadian
Foods Co., Ltd.; 6) Sky Fresh Co., Ltd.;
7) Songkla Canning (PCL); 8) Surat
Seafoods Co., Ltd.; 9) Tep Kinsho Foods
Co., Ltd.; and 10) Thai Excel Foods Co.,
Ltd. We reviewed U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) data and
confirmed that there were no entries of
subject merchandise from any of these
companies. Consequently, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3)
and consistent with our practice, we are
rescinding our review for the companies
listed above. See, e.g., Certain Steel
Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey;
Final Results and Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review in Part, 71 FR 65082, 65083
(November 7, 2006).
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77613
Finally, the Department received no–
shipment responses from the following
companies for which there appeared to
be U.S. customs entries of subject
merchandise: 1) Grobest Frozen Foods
Co., Ltd.; and 2) Thai Union
Manufacturing Co., Ltd. We requested
data on the relevant entries from CBP
and determined that the entries made by
Grobest Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. and Thai
Union Manufacturing Co., Ltd. were not
reportable transactions because they
were either: 1) free samples; or 2) sales
made by another producer/exporter.
Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.213(d)(3), and consistent with the
Department’s practice, we are
rescinding the review with respect to
these two companies. See, e.g., Certain
Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from
Turkey; Final Results, Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review in Part, and Determination to
Revoke in Part, 70 FR 67665, 67666
(November 8, 2005).
On November 3, 2008, the Department
received comments from 32 U.S.
producers regarding the Department’s
Intent to Rescind Memorandum. In
these comments, the U.S. producers
objected to the petitioner’s July 7, 2008,
filing withdrawing its request for
administrative reviews for certain Thai
producers/exporters because: 1) these
domestic producers, three of which
were previously part of the Ad Hoc
Shrimp Trade Action Committee, have
retained their own counsel; and 2) as a
result, the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action
Committee no longer represents the
majority of the U.S. domestic industry.
Thus, the U.S. producers requested that
the Department not rescind the
administrative reviews for the
companies for which the petitioner
withdrew its request. On November 6,
2008, the petitioner responded to the
U.S. producers’ comments by stating
that all actions in the review were taken
on behalf of the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade
Action Committee as a corporate entity,
not on behalf of the individual
members, and thus it urged the
Department to disregard the U.S.
producers’ request.
After considering the U.S. producers’
November 3, 2008, submission, we
disagree with the arguments made by
these companies. The request for
administrative review at issue was made
by the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action
Committee, which is an interested party
to this proceeding under section
771(9)(E) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act) (i.e., the subsection
applicable to trade associations).
Contrary to the U.S. producers’
assertions, this section of the Act does
not require a trade association to
E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM
19DEN1
77614
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 245 / Friday, December 19, 2008 / Notices
represent a majority of the industry
producing the domestic like product,
but rather it merely requires a majority
of the association’s members to
manufacture, produce, or wholesale a
domestic like product in the United
States. Further, 19 CFR 351.213(b)(1)
does not require that a domestic
interested party represent the majority
of the domestic industry before it may
request a review. In this case, both the
administrative review requests and the
corresponding withdrawal of certain of
these requests were made on behalf of
the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action
Committee, not the individual members
of this group. Consequently, because the
U.S. producers involved in the
November 3, 2008, filing did not request
any administrative reviews in this
segment of the proceeding, we find that
their objection to the petitioner’s
withdrawal of its request for
administrative reviews of certain Thai
producers/exporters does not provide a
basis for the Department to maintain the
review request for these companies.
Assessment
The Department intends to issue
assessment instructions to CBP 15 days
after the date of publication of this
partial rescission of administrative
review. The Department will direct CBP
to assess antidumping duties at the cash
deposit rate in effect on the date of entry
for POR entries of the subject
merchandise produced/exported by the
companies for which we are rescinding
the review based on the timely
withdrawal of review requests.
With respect to POR entries of subject
merchandise produced by companies
for which we are rescinding the review
based on certifications of no–shipments,
because these companies certified that
they made no POR shipments of subject
merchandise for which they had
knowledge of U.S. destination, we will
instruct CBP to liquidate these entries at
the all–others rate established in the
less–than-fair–value investigation if
there is no rate for the intermediary
(e.g., a reseller, trading company, or
exporter) involved in the transaction.
See Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Proceedings: Assessment of
Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May
6, 2003).
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a reminder to
importers for whom this review is being
rescinded, of their responsibility under
19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate
regarding reimbursement of
antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this
review period. Failure to comply with
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:29 Dec 18, 2008
Jkt 217001
this requirement could result in the
Secretary’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
This notice is published in
accordance with section 777(i) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).
Dated: December 15, 2008.
Gary Taverman,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
[FR Doc. E8–30277 Filed 12–18–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A–580–836
Certain Cut–to-Length Carbon–Quality
Steel Plate Products From the
Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to requests by
interested parties, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) is
conducting an administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on certain
cut–to-length carbon–quality steel plate
products from the Republic of Korea
(Korea). This review covers one
producer/exporter of the subject
merchandise, Dongkuk Steel Mill Co.,
Ltd. (DSM). The period of review (POR)
is February 1, 2007, through January 31,
2008.
The Department has preliminarily
determined that DSM made U.S. sales at
prices less than normal value. If these
preliminary results are adopted in our
final results of administrative review,
we will instruct U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) to assess
antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries. Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results of
review. We intend to issue the final
results of review no later than 120 days
from the publication date of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 19, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lyn
Johnson or Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 5, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230,
telephone: (202) 482–5287 and (202)
482–1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Background
On February 10, 2000, the Department
published in the Federal Register an
antidumping duty order on certain cut–
to-length carbon–quality steel plate
products (steel plate) from the Republic
of Korea (Korea). See Notice of
Amendment of Final Determinations of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Cut–
To-Length Carbon–Quality Steel Plate
Products From France, India, Indonesia,
Italy, Japan and the Republic of Korea,
65 FR 6585 (February 10, 2000). On
February 4, 2008, the Department
published in the Federal Register a
notice of ‘‘Opportunity to Request
Administrative Review’’ of the order.
See Antidumping or Countervailing
Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation; Opportunity To Request
Administrative Review, 73 FR 6477
(February 4, 2008).
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.213(b)(2), on February 29, 2008,
DSM requested that the Department
conduct an administrative review of its
sales and entries of subject merchandise
into the United State during the POR.
Additionally, on February 29, 2008, and
in accordance with 19 CFR
351.213(b)(1), domestic producers and
interested parties, Nucor Corporation
(Nucor) and ArcelorMittal Steel USA
Inc. (ArcelorMittal), requested that the
Department conduct a review of DSM.
On March 31, 2008, the Department
initiated an administrative review of
DSM. See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews, Request for Revocation in Part,
and Deferral of Administrative Review,
73 FR 16837 (March 31, 2008). On
October 15, 2008, we extended the due
date for the preliminary results of
review by 45 days to December 15,
2008. See Certain Cut–to-Length
Carbon–Quality Steel Plate Products
From the Republic of Korea: Extension
of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 73 FR 62477 (October 21, 2008).
The Department is conducting this
administrative review in accordance
with section 751 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act).
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the
antidumping duty order are certain hot–
rolled carbon–quality steel: (1)
Universal mill plates (i.e., flat–rolled
products rolled on four faces or in a
closed box pass, of a width exceeding
150 mm but not exceeding 1250 mm,
and of a nominal or actual thickness of
not less than 4 mm, which are cut–tolength (not in coils) and without
E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM
19DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 245 (Friday, December 19, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77612-77614]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-30277]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A-549-822)
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand: Partial Rescission
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is rescinding the
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain frozen
warmwater shrimp from Thailand for the period February 1, 2007, through
January 31, 2008, for 29 companies, based on: 1) timely withdrawals of
the review requests; and 2) confirmed statements of no shipments during
the period of review (POR).
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 19, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate Johnson, 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) 482-4929.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 77613]]
Background
On February 4, 2008, the Department published in the Federal
Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on certain frozen warmwater shrimp from
Thailand for the period February 1, 2007, through January 31, 2008. See
Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 73 FR 6477
(February 4, 2008). The Department received timely requests from the
petitioner,\1\ the Louisiana Shrimp Association (LSA), and certain
individual companies, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), during the
anniversary month of February 2008, for administrative reviews of the
antidumping duty order on shrimp from Thailand.
On April 7, 2008, the Department initiated an administrative review
for 165 companies. See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Brazil,
Ecuador, India, and Thailand: Notice of Initiation of Administrative
Reviews, 73 FR 18754 (April 7, 2008).
Between March and May 2008, the Department received submissions
from certain companies that indicated they had no shipments of subject
merchandise to the United States during the POR.
On July 7, 2008, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the
petitioner withdrew its request for review for the following eighteen
companies: Anglo-Siam Seafoods Co., Ltd.; Applied DB Ind; Chonburi LC;
Gallant Ocean (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (Gallant Ocean)\2\; Haitai Seafood
Co., Ltd.; High Way International Co., Ltd.; Li-Thai Frozen Foods Co.,
Ltd.; Merkur Co., Ltd.; Ming Chao Ind Thailand; Nongmon SMJ Products;
Queen Marine Food Co., Ltd.; SCT Co., Ltd.; Search & Serve; Smile Heart
Foods Co., Ltd.; Shianlin Bangkok Co., Ltd.; Star Frozen Foods Co.,
Ltd.; Thai World Imports & Exports; and Wann Fisheries Co., Ltd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Gallant Ocean has not withdrawn its February 29, 2008,
request for review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 27, 2008, the Department issued a memorandum indicating
that it intended to rescind the administrative review with respect to
29 respondent companies, and it invited comments on this action from
interested parties. See October 27, 2008, Memorandum to The File from
Kate Johnson titled ``Intent to Rescind in Part the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review on Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from
Thailand'' (Intent to Rescind Memorandum). On November 3, 2008, and
November 13, 2008, the Department received comments from 32 U.S.
producers opposing the rescission with respect to the companies for
which the petitioner withdrew its review request. On November 6, 2008,
the petitioner responded to the comments filed on November 3, 2008.
Partial Rescission of Review
Pursant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Secretary will rescind an
administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party requesting a
review withdraws the request within 90 days of the date of publication
of the notice of initiation. Therefore, because all requests for
administrative reviews were timely withdrawn for the following
companies, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding
this review with regard to these companies: 1) Anglo-Siam Seafoods Co.,
Ltd.; 2) Applied DB Ind; 3) Chonburi LC; 4) Haitai Seafood Co., Ltd.;
5) High Way International Co., Ltd.; 6) Li-Thai Frozen Foods Co., Ltd.;
7) Merkur Co., Ltd.; 8) Ming Chao Ind Thailand; 9) Nongmon SMJ
Products; 10) Queen Marine Food Co., Ltd.; 11) SCT Co., Ltd.; 12)
Search & Serve; 13) Smile Heart Foods Co., Ltd.; 14) Shianlin Bangkok
Co., Ltd.; 15) Star Frozen Foods Co., Ltd.; 16) Thai World Imports &
Exports; and 17) Wann Fisheries Co., Ltd. As noted above, the review
requested by Gallant Ocean has not been withdrawn. Therefore, we are
not rescinding the review with respect to this company.
In addition, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we are
rescinding the review with respect to the following ten companies which
submitted letters indicating that they had no shipments of subject
merchandise during the POR: 1) Dynamic Intertransport Co., Ltd.; 2)
Lucky Union Foods Co., Ltd.; 3) MKF Interfood (2004) Co., Ltd.; 4) NR.
Instant Produce Co., Ltd.; 5) Siam Canadian Foods Co., Ltd.; 6) Sky
Fresh Co., Ltd.; 7) Songkla Canning (PCL); 8) Surat Seafoods Co., Ltd.;
9) Tep Kinsho Foods Co., Ltd.; and 10) Thai Excel Foods Co., Ltd. We
reviewed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data and confirmed
that there were no entries of subject merchandise from any of these
companies. Consequently, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and
consistent with our practice, we are rescinding our review for the
companies listed above. See, e.g., Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing
Bars From Turkey; Final Results and Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review in Part, 71 FR 65082, 65083 (November 7, 2006).
Finally, the Department received no-shipment responses from the
following companies for which there appeared to be U.S. customs entries
of subject merchandise: 1) Grobest Frozen Foods Co., Ltd.; and 2) Thai
Union Manufacturing Co., Ltd. We requested data on the relevant entries
from CBP and determined that the entries made by Grobest Frozen Foods
Co., Ltd. and Thai Union Manufacturing Co., Ltd. were not reportable
transactions because they were either: 1) free samples; or 2) sales
made by another producer/exporter. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.213(d)(3), and consistent with the Department's practice, we are
rescinding the review with respect to these two companies. See, e.g.,
Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey; Final Results,
Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part, and
Determination to Revoke in Part, 70 FR 67665, 67666 (November 8, 2005).
On November 3, 2008, the Department received comments from 32 U.S.
producers regarding the Department's Intent to Rescind Memorandum. In
these comments, the U.S. producers objected to the petitioner's July 7,
2008, filing withdrawing its request for administrative reviews for
certain Thai producers/exporters because: 1) these domestic producers,
three of which were previously part of the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action
Committee, have retained their own counsel; and 2) as a result, the Ad
Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee no longer represents the majority of
the U.S. domestic industry. Thus, the U.S. producers requested that the
Department not rescind the administrative reviews for the companies for
which the petitioner withdrew its request. On November 6, 2008, the
petitioner responded to the U.S. producers' comments by stating that
all actions in the review were taken on behalf of the Ad Hoc Shrimp
Trade Action Committee as a corporate entity, not on behalf of the
individual members, and thus it urged the Department to disregard the
U.S. producers' request.
After considering the U.S. producers' November 3, 2008, submission,
we disagree with the arguments made by these companies. The request for
administrative review at issue was made by the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade
Action Committee, which is an interested party to this proceeding under
section 771(9)(E) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act)
(i.e., the subsection applicable to trade associations). Contrary to
the U.S. producers' assertions, this section of the Act does not
require a trade association to
[[Page 77614]]
represent a majority of the industry producing the domestic like
product, but rather it merely requires a majority of the association's
members to manufacture, produce, or wholesale a domestic like product
in the United States. Further, 19 CFR 351.213(b)(1) does not require
that a domestic interested party represent the majority of the domestic
industry before it may request a review. In this case, both the
administrative review requests and the corresponding withdrawal of
certain of these requests were made on behalf of the Ad Hoc Shrimp
Trade Action Committee, not the individual members of this group.
Consequently, because the U.S. producers involved in the November 3,
2008, filing did not request any administrative reviews in this segment
of the proceeding, we find that their objection to the petitioner's
withdrawal of its request for administrative reviews of certain Thai
producers/exporters does not provide a basis for the Department to
maintain the review request for these companies.
Assessment
The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15
days after the date of publication of this partial rescission of
administrative review. The Department will direct CBP to assess
antidumping duties at the cash deposit rate in effect on the date of
entry for POR entries of the subject merchandise produced/exported by
the companies for which we are rescinding the review based on the
timely withdrawal of review requests.
With respect to POR entries of subject merchandise produced by
companies for which we are rescinding the review based on
certifications of no-shipments, because these companies certified that
they made no POR shipments of subject merchandise for which they had
knowledge of U.S. destination, we will instruct CBP to liquidate these
entries at the all-others rate established in the less-than-fair-value
investigation if there is no rate for the intermediary (e.g., a
reseller, trading company, or exporter) involved in the transaction.
See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of
Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a reminder to importers for whom this review
is being rescinded, of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to
file a certificate regarding 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 double antidumping duties.
This notice is published in accordance with section 777(i) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).
Dated: December 15, 2008.
Gary Taverman,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. E8-30277 Filed 12-18-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
