Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Rescission of Review in Part, 6571-6573 [E9-2767]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 10, 2009 / Notices
from China and Korea: Investigation
Nos. 731–TA–1092 and 1093
(Final)(Remand), which can be accessed
directly at (https://www.usitc.gov/trade_
remedy/731_ad_701_cvd/investigations/
index_opinions/index.htm). The CIT
issued a confidential opinion regarding
the ITC’s determination on remand on
January 13, 2009. DSMC, Slip Op. 09–
05. The ITC informed the Department of
Commerce (‘‘Department’’) by letter
dated January 22, 2009, that the CIT’s
January 13, 2009, opinion in DSMC
sustains the ITC’s threat–of-material–
injury determination. Accordingly,
upon notice from the ITC of no appeal
or, if appealed, of a ‘‘conclusive’’
decision by the CAFC affirming DSMC,
antidumping duty orders on diamond
sawblades from the PRC and Korea will
be issued.
erowe on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Suspension of Liquidation
In Timken, the CAFC held that,
pursuant to section 516A(c)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), the Department must publish
notice of a court decision that is not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with an ITC determination.
Timken, 893 F.2d at 341. The CIT’s
January 13, 2009, opinion in DSMC
constitutes a decision not in harmony
with the ITC’s Final Determination. See
ITC January 22, 2009, Letter. Thus,
publication of this notice fulfills the
obligation arising under Timken. The
CAFC also held that the Department
must suspend liquidation of the subject
merchandise until there is a
‘‘conclusive’’ decision in the case.
Timken, 893 F.2d at 341; Smith Corona
Corp. v. United States, 915 F.2d 683,
688 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Therefore, effective
January 23, 2009, the Department is
suspending liquidation pending the
expiration of the period to appeal or
pending a final decision of the CAFC if
DSMC is appealed.
Comments submitted by interested
parties are addressed in the
Memorandum from John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, for Import Administration,
to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting
Assistant Secretary for Import
Adminstration, dated February 3, 2009,
which is available in Room 1117 of the
Department of Commerce building.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of
the Act.
Dated: February 3, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–2642 Filed 2–9–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Feb 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A–570–848
Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From
the People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Rescission
of Review in Part
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 6, 2008, the
Department of Commerce published the
preliminary results of the administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on freshwater crawfish tail meat from
the People’s Republic of China. The
review covers one exporter. The period
of review is September 1, 2006, through
August 31, 2007.
Based on our analysis of the
comments received, we have made no
changes to our margin calculations.
Therefore, the final results do not differ
from the preliminary results. The final
weighted–average dumping margin for
the reviewed firm is listed below in the
section entitled ‘‘Final Results of the
Review.’’
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 10, 2009
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dmitry Vladimirov 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) 482–0665 or (202) 482–
1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 6, 2008, the Department
of Commerce (the Department)
published the preliminary results of
review of the antidumping duty order
on freshwater crawfish tail meat from
the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat
From the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review and Intent
to Rescind Review in Part, 73 FR 58115
(October 6, 2008) (Preliminary Results).
The administrative review covers
Yancheng Hi–King Agriculture
Developing Co., Ltd. (Hi–King). We
invited interested parties to comment on
the preliminary results. On November 5,
2008, we received a case brief from the
petitioners, the Crawfish Processors
Alliance and the Louisiana Department
of Agriculture and Forestry. On
November 10, 2008, we received a
rebuttal brief from Hi–King. The
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6571
Department has conducted this
administrative review in accordance
with section 751 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act).
Scope of the Order
The product covered by the
antidumping duty order is freshwater
crawfish tail meat, in all its forms
(whether washed or with fat on,
whether purged or unpurged), grades,
and sizes; whether frozen, fresh, or
chilled; and regardless of how it is
packed, preserved, or prepared.
Excluded from the scope of the order are
live crawfish and other whole crawfish,
whether boiled, frozen, fresh, or chilled.
Also excluded are saltwater crawfish of
any type, and parts thereof. Freshwater
crawfish tail meat is currently
classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)
under item numbers 1605.40.10.10 and
1605.40.10.90, which are the HTSUS
numbers for prepared foodstuffs,
indicating peeled crawfish tail meat and
other, as introduced by the CBP in 2000,
and HTSUS numbers 0306.19.00.10 and
0306.29.00.00, which are reserved for
fish and crustaceans in general. The
HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes
only. The written description of the
scope of the order is dispositive.
Partial Rescission of Administrative
Review
In the Preliminary Results, we
preliminarily found that Shanghai Now
Again International Trading Co., Ltd.
(Shanghai Now Again), and Xiping
Opeck Food Co., Ltd. (Xiping Opeck),
had no shipments of subject
merchandise during the period of
review and we stated our intent to
rescind the administrative review with
respect to these companies. See
Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 58116. We
have received no comments concerning
our intent to rescind this administrative
review in part. We continue to find that
Shanghai Now Again and Xiping Opeck
had no shipments of freshwater
crawfish tail meat from the PRC during
the period of review. In accordance with
19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we are rescinding
our review of Shanghai Now Again and
Xiping Opeck.
Surrogate Country
In the Preliminary Results, we treated
the PRC as a non–market-economy
(NME) country and, therefore, we
calculated normal value in accordance
with section 773(c) of the Act. Also, we
E:\FR\FM\10FEN1.SGM
10FEN1
6572
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 10, 2009 / Notices
stated that we selected India1 as the
appropriate surrogate country to use in
this review because (1) it is a significant
producer of merchandise comparable to
subject merchandise and (2) it is at a
level of economic development
comparable to the PRC, pursuant to
section 773(c)(4) of the Act. See
Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 58117. No
interested party commented on our
designation of the PRC as an NME
country or the selection of India as the
primary surrogate country. Therefore,
for the final results of review, we have
continued to treat the PRC as an NME
country and have used the same
primary surrogate country, India, for
these final results.
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving NME
countries, the Department begins with a
rebuttable presumption that all
companies within the country are
subject to government control and, thus,
should be assigned a single
antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the
Department’s policy to assign all
exporters of merchandise subject to
review in an NME country this single
rate unless an exporter can demonstrate
that it is sufficiently independent so as
to be entitled to a separate rate.
In the Preliminary Results, we found
that Hi–King demonstrated its eligibility
for separate–rate status. See Preliminary
Results, 73 FR at 58117–58118. We
received no comments from interested
parties regarding the separate–rate
status of this company. Therefore, in
these final results of review, we
continue to find that the evidence
placed on the record of this review by
Hi–King demonstrates an absence of
government control, both in law and in
fact, with respect to its exports of the
merchandise under review. Thus, we
have determined that Hi–King is eligible
to receive a separate rate.
erowe on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Duty Absorption
In the Preliminary Results, we stated
that we will not make a duty–absorption
determination with respect to
Jingdezhen Garay Foods Co., Ltd.,
Shanghai Now Again, Xiping Opeck,
Anhui Tongxin Aquatic Product & Food
Co., Ltd., and Xuzhou Jinjiang
Foodstuffs Co., Ltd., because we have
either rescinded or were announcing
our intent to rescind in part the review
1 We have selected India as the primary surrogate
country in which to value all inputs with the
exception of live crawfish, the primary input, and
the by-product, crawfish scrap shell. See
Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 58117, for a
discussion regarding the valuation of live crawfish
and the selection of Indonesia as the secondary
surrogate country.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Feb 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
with respect to these companies. See
Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 58117. In
addition, we stated that we have not
investigated whether Hi–King absorbed
duties because there is no record
evidence indicating that Hi–King sold
subject merchandise in the United
States through an affiliated importer.
See Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 58117.
While we continue to not make a
duty–absorption determination for the
final results, we are clarifying our
analysis. Section 751(a)(4) of the Act
provides that, if requested, the
Department shall determine during an
administrative review initiated two or
four years after the publication of the
order ‘‘whether antidumping duties
have been absorbed by a foreign
producer or exporter. . . if the subject
merchandise is sold in the United
States’’ through an affiliated importer.
Because the order on crawfish tail meat
from the PRC was published on
September 15, 1997, and this review
was initiated ten years thereafter on
October 31, 2007, this review was not
initiated two or four years after the
publication of the order. Therefore,
pursuant to section 751(a)(4) of the Act,
the Department continues to not make a
duty–absorption determination in this
review.
Analysis of Comments Received
A single issue raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties in this review
is addressed in the ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum’’ (Decision Memo) from
John M. Andersen, Acting Deputy
Assistant Secretary, to Ronald K.
Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary,
dated February 3, 2009, which is hereby
adopted by this notice. The issue which
parties have raised and to which we
have responded in the Decision Memo
relates to the appropriate calculation of
surrogate values for inland–freight
expenses. Parties can find a complete
discussion of the issue raised in this
review and the corresponding
recommendation in this public
memorandum, which is on file in the
Department’s Central Records Unit,
Room 1117 of the main Commerce
building (CRU). 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.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
There are no changes in the
calculations from those we completed
for the Preliminary Results.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Final Results of the Review
The Department has determined that
the following final weighted–average
dumping margin exists for the period
September 1, 2006, through August 31,
2007:
Manufacturer/Exporter
Yancheng Hi–King Agriculture
Developing Co., Ltd. .............
Percent
Margin
0.00
Assessment Rates
The Department intends to issue
assessment instructions to U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days
after the date of publication of these
final results of review. Because we
calculated a margin of zero percent for
Hi–King, we will instruct CBP to
liquidate the entries of merchandise
exported by Hi–King without regard to
antidumping duties.
Cash–Deposit Requirements
The following cash–deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of this notice of final results
of administrative review for all
shipments of the subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the date of
publication as provided by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) for subject
merchandise exported by Hi–King, the
cash–deposit rate will be 0.00 percent;
(2) for previously reviewed or
investigated companies not listed above
that have separate rates, the cash–
deposit rate will continue to be the
company–specific rate published for the
most recent period; (3) for all other PRC
exporters of subject merchandise which
have not been found to be entitled to a
separate rate, the cash–deposit rate will
be PRC–wide rate of 223.01 percent; (4)
for all non–PRC exporters of subject
merchandise the cash–deposit rate will
be the rate applicable to the PRC entity
that supplied that exporter. These
deposit requirements shall remain in
effect until further notice.
Notifications
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 double antidumping duties.
E:\FR\FM\10FEN1.SGM
10FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 10, 2009 / Notices
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
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 terms of an APO is a
sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these
results in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: February 3, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–2767 Filed 2–9–09; 8:45 am]
Navneet Publication India Limited
(‘‘Navneet’’) received countervailable
subsidies during the POR. We received
comments on our preliminary results
from petitioners 2 and rebuttal
comments from respondent. The final
results are listed in the section ‘‘Final
Results of Review’’ below.
DATES: Effective Date: February 10,
2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jolanta Lawska at (202) 482–8362, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 3, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On September 28, 2006, the
Department published in the Federal
Register the CVD order on certain lined
paper products from India. See Notice of
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Amended Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Lined
International Trade Administration
Paper Products from the People’s
[C–533–844]
Republic of China; Notice of
Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain
Certain Lined Paper Products From
Lined Paper Products from India,
India: Final Results of Countervailing
Indonesia and the People’s Republic of
Duty Administrative Review
China; and Notice of Countervailing
AGENCY: Import Administration,
Duty Orders: Certain Lined Paper
International Trade Administration,
Products from India and Indonesia, 71
Department of Commerce.
FR 56949 (September 28, 2006). On
SUMMARY: On October 6, 2008, the U.S.
October 6, 2008, the Department
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
published in the Federal Register its
Department’’) published in the Federal
preliminary results of the administrative
Register its preliminary results of the
review of this order for the period
administrative review of the
February 15, 2006, through December
countervailing duty (‘‘CVD’’) order on
31, 2006. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR
certain lined paper products (‘‘lined
at 58121. In accordance with 19 CFR
paper’’) from India for the period of
351.213(b), this administrative review
review (‘‘POR’’) February 15, 2006,
covers Navneet, a producer and exporter
through December 31, 2006.1 See Certain of subject merchandise.
Lined Paper Products from India: Notice
In the Preliminary Results, we invited
of Preliminary Results of Countervailing interested parties to submit briefs or
Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR
request a hearing. On November 13,
58121 (October 6, 2008) (‘‘Preliminary
2008, we received comments from
Results’’). We found that respondent,
petitioners. On November 26, 2008, we
received rebuttal comments from
1 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(e)(2)(ii), because the
respondent. No party requested a
Department received Navneet’s request during the
hearing.
first anniversary month after publication of the
erowe on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
order, this administrative review covers entries
from February 15, 2006, the date of suspension of
liquidation through December 31, 2006, the end of
the most recently completed calendar year. The
date of suspension of liquidation corresponds to the
publication in the Federal Register of the Notice of
Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination and Preliminary Negative Critical
Circumstances Determination: Certain Lined Paper
Products from India, 71 FR 7916 (February 15,
2006) (Preliminary Determination of Lined Paper
Investigation). However, for purposes of this
administrative review, we will analyze data
corresponding to calendar year 2006 (January 1,
2006, through December 31, 2006) to determine the
subsidy rate for exports of subject merchandise
made during the period in which liquidation of
entries was suspended.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Feb 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
Scope of Order
The scope of this order includes
certain lined paper products, typically
school supplies,3 composed of or
including paper that incorporates
straight horizontal and/or vertical lines
2 Petitioners are the Association of American
School Paper Suppliers and its members Mead
Westvaco Corporation, Top Flight Inc., and Norcom
Inc.
3 For purposes of this scope definition, the actual
use or labeling of these products as school supplies
or non-school supplies is not a defining
characteristic.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6573
on ten or more paper sheets,4 including
but not limited to such products as
single- and multi-subject notebooks,
composition books, wireless notebooks,
looseleaf or glued filler paper, graph
paper, and laboratory notebooks, and
with the smaller dimension of the paper
measuring 6 inches to 15 inches
(inclusive) and the larger dimension of
the paper measuring 83⁄4 inches to 15
inches (inclusive). Page dimensions are
measured size (not advertised, stated, or
‘‘tear-out’’ size), and are measured as
they appear in the product (i.e., stitched
and folded pages in a notebook are
measured by the size of the page as it
appears in the notebook page, not the
size of the unfolded paper). However,
for measurement purposes, pages with
tapered or rounded edges shall be
measured at their longest and widest
points. Subject lined paper products
may be loose, packaged or bound using
any binding method (other than case
bound through the inclusion of binders
board, a spine strip, and cover wrap).
Subject merchandise may or may not
contain any combination of a front
cover, a rear cover, and/or backing of
any composition, regardless of the
inclusion of images or graphics on the
cover, backing, or paper. Subject
merchandise is within the scope of this
order whether or not the lined paper
and/or cover are hole punched, drilled,
perforated, and/or reinforced. Subject
merchandise may contain accessory or
informational items including but not
limited to pockets, tabs, dividers,
closure devices, index cards, stencils,
protractors, writing implements,
reference materials such as
mathematical tables, or printed items
such as sticker sheets or miniature
calendars, if such items are physically
incorporated, included with, or attached
to the product, cover and/or backing
thereto.
Specifically excluded from the scope
of this order are:
• Unlined copy machine paper;
• Writing pads with a backing
(including but not limited to products
commonly known as ‘‘tablets,’’ ‘‘note
pads,’’ ‘‘legal pads,’’ and ‘‘quadrille
pads’’), provided that they do not have
a front cover (whether permanent or
removable). This exclusion does not
apply to such writing pads if they
consist of hole-punched or drilled filler
paper;
• Three-ring or multiple-ring binders,
or notebook organizers incorporating
such a ring binder provided that they do
not include subject paper;
• Index cards;
4 There shall be no minimum page requirement
for looseleaf filler paper.
E:\FR\FM\10FEN1.SGM
10FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6571-6573]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-2767]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A-570-848
Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and
Rescission of Review in Part
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 6, 2008, the Department of Commerce published the
preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping
duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the People's Republic
of China. The review covers one exporter. The period of review is
September 1, 2006, through August 31, 2007.
Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made no
changes to our margin calculations. Therefore, the final results do not
differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping
margin for the reviewed firm is listed below in the section entitled
``Final Results of the Review.''
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 10, 2009
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dmitry Vladimirov 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-
0665 or (202) 482-1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 6, 2008, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
published the preliminary results of review of the antidumping duty
order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the People's Republic of
China (PRC). See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Intent to Rescind Review in Part, 73 FR 58115
(October 6, 2008) (Preliminary Results). The administrative review
covers Yancheng Hi-King Agriculture Developing Co., Ltd. (Hi-King). We
invited interested parties to comment on the preliminary results. On
November 5, 2008, we received a case brief from the petitioners, the
Crawfish Processors Alliance and the Louisiana Department of
Agriculture and Forestry. On November 10, 2008, we received a rebuttal
brief from Hi-King. The Department has conducted this administrative
review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act).
Scope of the Order
The product covered by the antidumping duty order is freshwater
crawfish tail meat, in all its forms (whether washed or with fat on,
whether purged or unpurged), grades, and sizes; whether frozen, fresh,
or chilled; and regardless of how it is packed, preserved, or prepared.
Excluded from the scope of the order are live crawfish and other whole
crawfish, whether boiled, frozen, fresh, or chilled. Also excluded are
saltwater crawfish of any type, and parts thereof. Freshwater crawfish
tail meat is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule
of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers 1605.40.10.10 and
1605.40.10.90, which are the HTSUS numbers for prepared foodstuffs,
indicating peeled crawfish tail meat and other, as introduced by the
CBP in 2000, and HTSUS numbers 0306.19.00.10 and 0306.29.00.00, which
are reserved for fish and crustaceans in general. The HTSUS subheadings
are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written
description of the scope of the order is dispositive.
Partial Rescission of Administrative Review
In the Preliminary Results, we preliminarily found that Shanghai
Now Again International Trading Co., Ltd. (Shanghai Now Again), and
Xiping Opeck Food Co., Ltd. (Xiping Opeck), had no shipments of subject
merchandise during the period of review and we stated our intent to
rescind the administrative review with respect to these companies. See
Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 58116. We have received no comments
concerning our intent to rescind this administrative review in part. We
continue to find that Shanghai Now Again and Xiping Opeck had no
shipments of freshwater crawfish tail meat from the PRC during the
period of review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we are
rescinding our review of Shanghai Now Again and Xiping Opeck.
Surrogate Country
In the Preliminary Results, we treated the PRC as a non-market-
economy (NME) country and, therefore, we calculated normal value in
accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. Also, we
[[Page 6572]]
stated that we selected India\1\ as the appropriate surrogate country
to use in this review because (1) it is a significant producer of
merchandise comparable to subject merchandise and (2) it is at a level
of economic development comparable to the PRC, pursuant to section
773(c)(4) of the Act. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 58117. No
interested party commented on our designation of the PRC as an NME
country or the selection of India as the primary surrogate country.
Therefore, for the final results of review, we have continued to treat
the PRC as an NME country and have used the same primary surrogate
country, India, for these final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We have selected India as the primary surrogate country in
which to value all inputs with the exception of live crawfish, the
primary input, and the by-product, crawfish scrap shell. See
Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 58117, for a discussion regarding the
valuation of live crawfish and the selection of Indonesia as the
secondary surrogate country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving NME countries, the Department begins with
a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are
subject to government control and, thus, should be assigned a single
antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the Department's policy to assign
all exporters of merchandise subject to review in an NME country this
single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is sufficiently
independent so as to be entitled to a separate rate.
In the Preliminary Results, we found that Hi-King demonstrated its
eligibility for separate-rate status. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR at
58117-58118. We received no comments from interested parties regarding
the separate-rate status of this company. Therefore, in these final
results of review, we continue to find that the evidence placed on the
record of this review by Hi-King demonstrates an absence of government
control, both in law and in fact, with respect to its exports of the
merchandise under review. Thus, we have determined that Hi-King is
eligible to receive a separate rate.
Duty Absorption
In the Preliminary Results, we stated that we will not make a duty-
absorption determination with respect to Jingdezhen Garay Foods Co.,
Ltd., Shanghai Now Again, Xiping Opeck, Anhui Tongxin Aquatic Product &
Food Co., Ltd., and Xuzhou Jinjiang Foodstuffs Co., Ltd., because we
have either rescinded or were announcing our intent to rescind in part
the review with respect to these companies. See Preliminary Results, 73
FR at 58117. In addition, we stated that we have not investigated
whether Hi-King absorbed duties because there is no record evidence
indicating that Hi-King sold subject merchandise in the United States
through an affiliated importer. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR at
58117.
While we continue to not make a duty-absorption determination for
the final results, we are clarifying our analysis. Section 751(a)(4) of
the Act provides that, if requested, the Department shall determine
during an administrative review initiated two or four years after the
publication of the order ``whether antidumping duties have been
absorbed by a foreign producer or exporter. . . if the subject
merchandise is sold in the United States'' through an affiliated
importer. Because the order on crawfish tail meat from the PRC was
published on September 15, 1997, and this review was initiated ten
years thereafter on October 31, 2007, this review was not initiated two
or four years after the publication of the order. Therefore, pursuant
to section 751(a)(4) of the Act, the Department continues to not make a
duty-absorption determination in this review.
Analysis of Comments Received
A single issue raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in
this review is addressed in the ``Issues and Decision Memorandum''
(Decision Memo) from John M. Andersen, Acting Deputy Assistant
Secretary, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary, dated
February 3, 2009, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The issue
which parties have raised and to which we have responded in the
Decision Memo relates to the appropriate calculation of surrogate
values for inland-freight expenses. Parties can find a complete
discussion of the issue raised in this review and the corresponding
recommendation in this public memorandum, which is on file in the
Department's Central Records Unit, Room 1117 of the main Commerce
building (CRU). 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.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
There are no changes in the calculations from those we completed
for the Preliminary Results.
Final Results of the Review
The Department has determined that the following final weighted-
average dumping margin exists for the period September 1, 2006, through
August 31, 2007:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent
Manufacturer/Exporter Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yancheng Hi-King Agriculture Developing Co., Ltd........... 0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days after the date of
publication of these final results of review. Because we calculated a
margin of zero percent for Hi-King, we will instruct CBP to liquidate
the entries of merchandise exported by Hi-King without regard to
antidumping duties.
Cash-Deposit Requirements
The following cash-deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review
for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication as
provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) for subject
merchandise exported by Hi-King, the cash-deposit rate will be 0.00
percent; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not
listed above that have separate rates, the cash-deposit rate will
continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent
period; (3) for all other PRC exporters of subject merchandise which
have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash-deposit
rate will be PRC-wide rate of 223.01 percent; (4) for all non-PRC
exporters of subject merchandise the cash-deposit rate will be the rate
applicable to the PRC entity that supplied that exporter. These deposit
requirements shall remain in effect until further notice.
Notifications
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 double antidumping duties.
[[Page 6573]]
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
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 terms of an APO is a sanctionable
violation.
We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: February 3, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-2767 Filed 2-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
