Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Ecuador: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 47201-47204 [E9-22186]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 15, 2009 / Notices
Dated: September 2, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I
List of Comments in the Decision
Memorandum
Comment 1: Whether to Collapse Venus and
Affiliated Producer Sieves
Comment 2: Whether Certain U.S. Sales by
Venus are Constructed Export Price
(‘‘CEP’’) or Export Price (‘‘EP’’) Sales and
Whether A Principal-Agent Relationship
Exists
Comment 3: Alleged Reporting Deficiencies
for Venus and Sieves
3a: Bahubali’s and Venus Metal’s
Involvement in the Production/Sale of
Stainless Steel Bar
3b: Hindustan’s Involvement in the
Production/Sale of Stainless Steel Bar
3c: Hitech’s Involvement in the
Production/Sale of Stainless Steel Bar
3d: Affiliated Party Loans
3e: Affiliated Party Transactions
Comment 4: Whether Respondents Failed to
Follow the Procedural Requirements of
the Department’s Regulations
Comment 5: Venus’ Request to Revise Its U.S.
Sales Database to Reflect a Billing
Adjustment
Comment 6: Comparison of Certain Similar
Merchandise Sold in the Home Market
Comment 7: Whether Certain Home Market
Sales are Outside the Ordinary Course of
Trade and Whether the Department
Should Make a Level of Trade
Adjustment
Comment 8: Offsetting Negative Margins
Comment 9: Whether to Rely on DoubleBracketed Information
[FR Doc. E9–22069 Filed 9–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–331–802]
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp
from Ecuador: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On March 9, 2009, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on certain
frozen warmwater shrimp (shrimp) from
Ecuador. This review covers 81
producers/exporters of the subject
merchandise to the United States. The
period of review (POR) is February 1,
2007, through August 14, 2007.
Based on our analysis of the
comments received, we have made
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:12 Sep 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
certain changes in the margin
calculations for Promarisco, S.A.
(Promarisco) and Sociedad Nacional de
Galapagos, S.A. (Songa), producer/
exporters selected for individual review.
Therefore, the final results for
Promarisco and Songa differ from the
preliminary results. The final weighted–
average dumping margins for the
reviewed firms are listed below in the
section entitled ‘‘Final Results of
Review.’’
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 15, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Goldberger or Gemal Brangman,
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) 482–4136 or (202) 482–
3773, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This review covers 81 producers/
exporters. The respondents which the
Department selected for individual
review are Promarisco and Songa. The
respondents which were not selected for
individual review are listed in the
‘‘Final Results of Review’’ section of this
notice.
On March 9, 2009, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
preliminary results of the 2007
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on shrimp from
Ecuador. See Certain Frozen Warmwater
Shrimp from Ecuador: Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 74 FR 9983
(March 9, 2009) (Preliminary Results).
We invited parties to comment on those
Preliminary Results. In May 2009, we
received case briefs from the domestic
producers of frozen warmwater shrimp
(i.e., the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action
Committee, hereafter ‘‘Domestic
Producers’’), the respondents,
Promarisco and Songa, and the domestic
processors of frozen warmwater shrimp
(‘‘the Processors’’), an interested party
in this proceeding. Rebuttal briefs were
received from the Domestic Producers,
Promarisco, Songa, and the Processors.
In June 2009, we extended the
deadline for the final results, due no
later than September 8, 2009. See
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from
Ecuador: Notice of Extension of Time
Limit for the Final Results of the Third
Administrative Review, 74 FR 28018
(June 12, 2009).
The Department has conducted this
administrative review in accordance
with section 751 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act).
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
47201
Scope of the Order
The scope of this order includes
certain frozen warmwater shrimp and
prawns, whether wild–caught (ocean
harvested) or farm–raised (produced by
aquaculture), head–on or head–off,
shell–on or peeled, tail–on or tail–off,1
deveined or not deveined, cooked or
raw, or otherwise processed in frozen
form.
The frozen warmwater shrimp and
prawn products included in the scope of
this order, regardless of definitions in
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS), are products
which are processed from warmwater
shrimp and prawns through freezing
and which are sold in any count size.
The products described above may be
processed from any species of
warmwater shrimp and prawns.
Warmwater shrimp and prawns are
generally classified in, but are not
limited to, the Penaeidae family. Some
examples of the farmed and wild–
caught warmwater species include, but
are not limited to, whiteleg shrimp
(Penaeus vannemei), banana prawn
(Penaeus merguiensis), fleshy prawn
(Penaeus chinensis), giant river prawn
(Macrobrachium rosenbergii), giant tiger
prawn (Penaeus monodon), redspotted
shrimp (Penaeus brasiliensis), southern
brown shrimp (Penaeus subtilis),
southern pink shrimp (Penaeus
notialis), southern rough shrimp
(Trachypenaeus curvirostris), southern
white shrimp (Penaeus schmitti), blue
shrimp (Penaeus stylirostris), western
white shrimp (Penaeus occidentalis),
and Indian white prawn (Penaeus
indicus).
Frozen shrimp and prawns that are
packed with marinade, spices or sauce
are included in the scope of this order.
In addition, food preparations, which
are not ‘‘prepared meals,’’ that contain
more than 20 percent by weight of
shrimp or prawn are also included in
the scope of this order.
Excluded from the scope are: 1)
breaded shrimp and prawns (HTSUS
subheading 1605.20.10.20); 2) shrimp
and prawns generally classified in the
Pandalidae family and commonly
referred to as coldwater shrimp, in any
state of processing; 3) fresh shrimp and
prawns whether shell–on or peeled
(HTSUS subheadings 0306.23.00.20 and
0306.23.00.40); 4) shrimp and prawns in
prepared meals (HTSUS subheading
1605.20.05.10); 5) dried shrimp and
prawns; 6) canned warmwater shrimp
and prawns (HTSUS subheading
1605.20.10.40); 7) certain dusted
shrimp; and 8) certain battered shrimp.
1 ‘‘Tails’’ in this context means the tail fan, which
includes the telson and the uropods.
E:\FR\FM\15SEN1.SGM
15SEN1
47202
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 15, 2009 / Notices
Dusted shrimp is a shrimp–based
product: 1) that is produced from fresh
(or thawed–from-frozen) and peeled
shrimp; 2) to which a ‘‘dusting’’ layer of
rice or wheat flour of at least 95 percent
purity has been applied; 3) with the
entire surface of the shrimp flesh
thoroughly and evenly coated with the
flour; 4) with the non–shrimp content of
the end product constituting between
four and 10 percent of the product’s
total weight after being dusted, but prior
to being frozen; and 5) that is subjected
to IQF freezing immediately after
application of the dusting layer.
Battered shrimp is a shrimp–based
product that, when dusted in
accordance with the definition of
dusting above, is coated with a wet
viscous layer containing egg and/or
milk, and par–fried.
The products covered by this order
are currently classified under the
following HTSUS subheadings:
0306.13.00.03, 0306.13.00.06,
0306.13.00.09, 0306.13.00.12,
0306.13.00.15, 0306.13.00.18,
0306.13.00.21, 0306.13.00.24,
0306.13.00.27, 0306.13.00.40,
1605.20.10.10, and 1605.20.10.30. These
HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and for customs purposes
only and are not dispositive, but rather
the written description of the scope of
this order is dispositive.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Period of Review
The POR is February 1, 2007, through
August 14, 2007.
Cost of Production
As discussed in the Preliminary
Results, we conducted this
administrative review to determine
whether Promarisco and Songa made
third country sales of the foreign like
product during the POR at prices below
their costs of production (COP) within
the meaning of section 773(b)(1) of the
Act. For Promarisco and Songa, we
performed the cost test for these final
results following the same methodology
as in the Preliminary Results, except as
discussed in the decision memorandum
accompanying this notice (the Decision
Memo).
We found that 20 percent or more of
each respondent’s sales of a given
product during the reporting period
were at prices less than the weighted–
average COP for this period. Thus, we
determined that these below–cost sales
were made in ‘‘substantial quantities’’
within an extended period of time and
at prices which did not permit the
recovery of all costs within a reasonable
period of time in the normal course of
trade. See sections 773(b)(2)(B) - (D) of
the Act.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:12 Sep 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
Therefore, for purposes of these final
results, we find that Promarisco and
Songa made below–cost sales not in the
ordinary course of trade. Consequently,
we disregarded these sales for each
respondent and used the remaining
sales as the basis for determining
normal value pursuant to section
773(b)(1) of the Act.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case briefs by
parties to this administrative review,
and to which we have responded, are
listed in the Appendix to this notice and
addressed in the Decision Memo, which
is adopted by this notice. Parties can
find a complete discussion of all issues
raised in this review and the
corresponding recommendations in this
public memorandum, which is on file in
the Central Records Unit, HCHB Room
1117, of the main Department building.
In addition, a complete version of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum
(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
Based on our analysis of the
comments received, we have made
certain changes in the margin
calculations for Promarisco and Songa.
These changes are discussed in the
relevant sections of the Decision Memo.
In addition, we have changed our
calculation of the margins and
assessment rates applicable to the
companies not selected for individual
examination to reflect the simple
average of the margins calculated for the
respondents selected for individual
examination in this review, rather than
the weighted average of these margins,
excluding de minimis margins or
margins based entirely on facts available
(FA). This is consistent with our current
practice with respect to the calculation
of the margins and assessment rates
applicable to non–mandatory
respondents in cases such as the instant
one, where there are only two
mandatory respondents with above de
minimis margins, or margins based
entirely upon FA. See Ball Bearings and
Parts Thereof from France, Germany,
Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom:
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Reviews and Intent
to Rescind Reviews in Part, 73 FR
25654, 25655 (May 7, 2008); unchanged
in Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from
France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the
United Kingdom: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Reviews and Rescission of Reviews in
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Part, 73 FR 52823, 52824 (September 11,
2008).
Final Results of Review
We determine that weighted–average
dumping margins exist for the
respondents for the period February 1,
2007, through August 14, 2007, as
follows:
Manufacturer/Exporter
Percent Margin
Promarisco, S.A. ...........
Sociedad Nacional de
Galapagos C.A.
(Songa) .....................
0.85
0.75
Review–Specific Average Rate
Applicable to the Following
Companies:2
Manufacturer/Exporter
Agricola e Industrial
Ecuaplantation SA ....
Agrol SA .......................
Alberto Xavier
Mosquera Rosado .....
Alquimia Marina SA ......
Babychic SA .................
Biolife SA ......................
Braistar .........................
Camaronera Jenn
Briann ........................
Camarones ...................
Comar Cia Ltda. ...........
Doblertel SA .................
Dumary SA ...................
Dunci SA .......................
El Rosario Ersa SA ......
Empacadora Bilbo SA
(Bilbosa) ....................
Empacadora del
Pacifico SA
(EDPACIF SA) ..........
Empacadora Dufer Cia.
Ltda. (DUFER) ..........
Empacadora Grupo
Gran Mar (Empagran)
SA .............................
Empacadora Nacional
CA .............................
Empacadora y
Exportadora Calvi
Cia. Ltda. ...................
Emprede SA .................
Estar CA .......................
Exporclam SA ...............
Exporklore SA ...............
Exportadora Bananera
Noboa ........................
Exportadora de
Productos de Mar
(Produmar) ................
Exportadora del Oceano
(Oceanexa) CA .........
Exportadora Langosmar
SA .............................
Percent Margin
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80
2 This rate is based on the simple average of the
margins calculated for those companies selected for
individual examination, excluding de minimis
margins or margins based entirely on FA, as
discussed above.
E:\FR\FM\15SEN1.SGM
15SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 15, 2009 / Notices
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Manufacturer/Exporter
See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1). The
Department will issue assessment
Transcity SA .................
0.80 instructions to CBP 15 days after the
Transmarina CA ...........
0.80 date of publication of these final results
0.80 Transocean Ecuador
of review.
SA .............................
0.80
0.80
The Department clarified its
0.80 Uniline Transport Sys‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
tem ............................
0.80
0.80
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and
0.80
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
0.80 Assessment
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
0.80
The Department shall determine, and
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment
CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on Policy Notice). This clarification will
0.80 all appropriate entries.
apply to entries of subject merchandise
Because Promarisco and Songa each
0.80
during the POR produced by companies
reported the entered value of all of their included in these final results of review
0.80 U.S. sales, we have calculated an
for which the reviewed companies did
0.80 importer–specific ad valorem duty
not know that the merchandise they
0.80 assessment rate based on the ratio of the
sold to the intermediary (e.g., a reseller,
0.80
total amount of antidumping duties
trading company, or exporter) was
0.80
destined for the United States. In such
0.80 calculated for the examined sales to the
total entered value of the examined
instances, we will instruct CBP to
sales for each respective importer. We
liquidate unreviewed entries at the all–
0.80 have calculated a single importer–
others rate established in the LTFV
specific assessment rate for Promarisco
investigation if there is no rate for the
0.80 and Songa, consistent with our practice
intermediary involved in the
0.80 in the final results of the 2006 2007
transaction. See Assessment Policy
administrative review (see Certain
Notice for a full discussion of this
Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from
clarification.
0.80
0.80 Ecuador: Final Results and Partial
Discontinuation of Cash Deposit
0.80 Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Requirements
0.80 Administrative Review, 73 FR 39945
On August 15, 2007, in accordance
0.80 (July 11, 2008)). See also Ball Bearings
0.80 and Parts Thereof from France,
with sections 129(b)(4) and 129(c)(1)(B)
Germany, Italy, Japan, and Singapore:
of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act,
Final Results of the Antidumping
the U.S. Trade Representative, after
Administrative Reviews, Rescission of
consulting with the Department and
0.80
Administrative Review in part, and
Congress, directed the Department to
0.80
implement its determination to revoke
0.80 Determination Not to Revoke Order in
the antidumping duty order on certain
0.80 Part, 68 FR 35623 (June 16, 2003), and
accompanying Issues and Decision
frozen warmwater shrimp from Ecuador.
See Implementation of the Findings of
0.80 Memorandum at Comment 9B; and
0.80 Notice of Final Results of Antidumping
the WTO Panel in United States
0.80 Duty Administrative Review and Notice
Antidumping Measure on Shrimp from
of Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Ecuador: Notice of Determination Under
0.80 Changed Circumstances Review: Certain section 129 of the Uruguay Round
0.80
Softwood Lumber Products From
Agreements Act and Revocation of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Frozen
0.80 Canada, 69 FR 75921 (December 20,
2004), and accompanying Issues and
Warmwater Shrimp from Ecuador, 72
FR 48257 (August 23, 2007).
0.80 Decision Memorandum at Comment 13.
For the responsive companies which
Accordingly, the antidumping duty
were not selected for individual review, order on certain frozen warmwater
0.80 we have calculated an assessment rate
shrimp from Ecuador was revoked
based on the simple average of the
effective August 15, 2007. As a result,
margins calculated for the companies
we have instructed CBP to discontinue
0.80 selected for individual review excluding
collection of cash deposits of
0.80
any which are de minimis or
antidumping duties on entries of the
0.80
determined entirely on FA.
subject merchandise.
We will instruct Customs and Border
0.80
Notification to Importers
Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries covered
This notice serves as a final reminder
0.80 by this review if any importer–specific
to importers of their responsibility,
assessment rate calculated in the final
under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2), to file a
0.80 results of this review is above de
certificate regarding the reimbursement
0.80 minimis (i.e., at or above 0.50 percent).
of antidumping duties prior to
0.80
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we
liquidation of the relevant entries
will instruct CBP to liquidate without
during this review period. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
0.80 regard to antidumping duties any
result in the Secretary’s presumption
0.80 entries for which the assessment rate is
0.80 de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent).
that reimbursement of antidumping
Percent Margin
Exportadora del Oceano
Pacifico SA
(OCEANPAC) ............
Exports Langosmar SA
Fortumar Ecuador SA ...
Gambas del Pacifico SA
Gondi SA ......................
Hector Canino Marty ....
Hectorosa SA ...............
Industrial Pesquera
Santa Priscila SA
(Santa Priscila) ..........
Inepexa SA ...................
Jorge Luis Benitez
Lopez ........................
Karpicorp SA ................
Luis Loaiza Alvarez ......
Mardex Cia. Ltda. .........
Marine ...........................
Marines CA ...................
Mariscos de
Chupadores
Chupamar .................
Mariscos del Ecuador
C. Ltda. (Marecuador)
Natural Select SA .........
Negocios Industriales
Real Nirsa SA
(NIRSA) .....................
Novapesca SA ..............
Ocean Fish ...................
Oceaninvest SA ............
Oceanmundo SA ..........
Oceanpro SA ................
Operadora y
Procesadora de
Productos Marinos
SA (Omarsa) .............
Oyerly SA .....................
P.C. Seafood SA ..........
Pacfish SA ....................
PCC Congelados &
Frescos SA ...............
Pescazul SA .................
Peslasa SA ...................
Phillips Seafoods of Ecuador CA (Phillips) ....
Pisacua SA ...................
Procesadora del Rio SA
(Proriosa) ..................
Productos Cultivados
del Mar Proc. ............
Productos Cultivados
del Mar Proculmar
Cia. Ltda. ...................
Productos del Mar
Santa Rosa Cia. Ltda.
(Promarosa) ..............
Propemar SA ................
Provefrut .......................
Rommy Roxana Alvarez
Anchundia .................
Sea Pronto Hector
Marty Canino (Sea
Pronto) ......................
Sociedad Atlantico
Pacifico SA ................
Soitgar SA ....................
Studmark SA ................
Tecnica y Comercio de
la Pesca CA
(TECOPESCA) ..........
Tolyp SA .......................
Trans Ocean .................
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:12 Sep 14, 2009
47203
Jkt 217001
Manufacturer/Exporter
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Percent Margin
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\15SEN1.SGM
15SEN1
47204
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 15, 2009 / Notices
Songa
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of
their responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of return/
destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and the terms of an
APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these
final results of review in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of
the Act.
September 8, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Background
Comment 15: Revision of Count–Size
Range Model–Match Coding for Certain
Head–On Shrimp Products
Comment 16: Completeness of Indirect
Selling Expense Reporting
Comment 17: Inclusion of Foreign
Exchange Losses in Songa’s Financial
Expense Ratio
Comment 18: Treatment of Depreciation
for Revalued Fixed Assets in Fixed
Overhead Costs
Comment 19: Amortization of the Cost
of Export Certificates in Financial
Expenses
On July 24, 1996, the Department
published a CVD order on certain pasta
(‘‘pasta’’ or ‘‘subject merchandise’’) from
Italy. See Notice of Countervailing Duty
Order and Amended Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination:
Certain Pasta From Italy, 61 FR 38544
(July 24, 1996). On July 11, 2008, the
Department published a notice of
‘‘Opportunity to Request Administrative
Review’’ of this CVD order for calendar
year 2007, the period of review (‘‘POR’’).
See Antidumping or Countervailing
Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation; Opportunity To Request
Administrative Review, 73 FR 39948
(July 11, 2008). On July 28, 2008, we
received such a request from F.lli De
Cecco di Filippo Fara San Martino
S.p.A. (‘‘De Cecco’’). On July 31, 2008,
we received a review request for review
from De Matteis. On July 31, 2008, we
received a collective request from New
World Pasta Company, American Italian
Pasta Company, and Dakota Growers
Pasta Company (‘‘petitioners’’) for a
review of De Matteis. In accordance
with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we
published a notice of initiation of this
review on August 26, 2008. See
Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews, 73 FR 50308 (August 26, 2008).
On September 15, 2008, we issued
CVD questionnaires to the Commission
of the European Union (‘‘EU’’), the
Government of Italy (‘‘GOI’’), De
Matteis, and De Cecco. We received
responses to our questionnaires in
October and November 2008. On
December 22, 2008, De Cecco withdrew
its request for review. On January 27,
2009, we rescinded the review with
respect to De Cecco. See Certain Pasta
From Italy: Notice of Partial Rescission
of Twelfth (2007) Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review, 74 FR 4734
(January 27, 2009).
We issued supplemental
questionnaires to De Matteis and the
GOI in December 2008, January 2009,
and March 2009, and we received
responses to our supplemental
questionnaires in December 2008,
February 2009, March 2009, and April
2009.
Since the publication of the
Preliminary Results, we invited
interested parties to submit briefs. No
briefs were received.
Comment 21: Offset Adjustment to G&A
Expenses for Certain Non–Operating
Income Items
[FR Doc. E9–22186 Filed 9–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Appendix Issues in Decision Memo
General Comments:
[C–475–819]
Comment 1: Offsetting of Negative
Margins
Certain Pasta from Italy: Final Results
of the 12th (2007) Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review
Comment 2: Using CBP Data for
Respondent Selection
Comment 3: Restricting Count–Size
Comparisons Under the Model–
Matching Methodology
Comment 4: Assessment Rate Assigned
to Companies Receiving the Review–
Specific Average Rate
Comment 5: Reporting of Raw Material
Costs
Company–Specific Comments:
Promarisco
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Comment 6: Use of Adverse Facts
Available to Calculate Promarisco’s
Imputed Credit Expenses
Comment 7: Treatment of Promarisco’s
Bill of Lading Fees and Analysis and
Inspection Fees
Comment 8: Adjustment of Promarisco’s
Indirect Selling Expenses
Comment 9: Treatment of Promarisco’s
U.S. and Comparison–Market Billing
Adjustments
Comment 10: Payment Date Assigned
for Certain U.S. sales
Comment 11: Treatment of Write–offs in
G&A Expenses
Comment 12: Treatment of Promarisco’s
Interest Income Offset
Comment 13: Processing Costs for
Block–Frozen Products
Comment 14: Calculation of Entered
Value for a Certain U.S. Sale
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:12 Sep 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of
Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) has
completed its administrative review of
the countervailing duty (‘‘CVD’’) order
on certain pasta from Italy for the period
January 1, 2007, through December 31,
2007. On May 28, 2009, we published
the Preliminary Results of this review.
See Certain Pasta from Italy:
Preliminary Results of the 12th (2007)
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Review, 74 FR 25489 (May 28, 2009)
(‘‘Preliminary Results’’). We did not
receive any comments on the
Preliminary Results and have made no
revisions. We find that De Matteis
Agroalimentare S.p.A. (‘‘De Matteis’’)
received countervailable subsidies. The
final net subsidy rate for De Matteis is
listed below in the section entitled
‘‘Final Results of Review.’’
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 15, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shelly Atkinson or Brandon Farlander,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone (202) 482–0116 and (202)
482–0182, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Period of Review
The period for which we are
measuring subsidies, or POR, is January
1, 2007, through December 31, 2007.
E:\FR\FM\15SEN1.SGM
15SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 177 (Tuesday, September 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47201-47204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22186]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-331-802]
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Ecuador: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On March 9, 2009, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain frozen warmwater shrimp (shrimp) from
Ecuador. This review covers 81 producers/exporters of the subject
merchandise to the United States. The period of review (POR) is
February 1, 2007, through August 14, 2007.
Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made
certain changes in the margin calculations for Promarisco, S.A.
(Promarisco) and Sociedad Nacional de Galapagos, S.A. (Songa),
producer/exporters selected for individual review. Therefore, the final
results for Promarisco and Songa differ from the preliminary results.
The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are
listed below in the section entitled ``Final Results of Review.''
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 15, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Goldberger or Gemal Brangman,
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-
4136 or (202) 482-3773, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This review covers 81 producers/exporters. The respondents which
the Department selected for individual review are Promarisco and Songa.
The respondents which were not selected for individual review are
listed in the ``Final Results of Review'' section of this notice.
On March 9, 2009, the Department published in the Federal Register
the preliminary results of the 2007 administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on shrimp from Ecuador. See Certain Frozen
Warmwater Shrimp from Ecuador: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 74 FR 9983 (March 9, 2009) (Preliminary
Results). We invited parties to comment on those Preliminary Results.
In May 2009, we received case briefs from the domestic producers of
frozen warmwater shrimp (i.e., the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action
Committee, hereafter ``Domestic Producers''), the respondents,
Promarisco and Songa, and the domestic processors of frozen warmwater
shrimp (``the Processors''), an interested party in this proceeding.
Rebuttal briefs were received from the Domestic Producers, Promarisco,
Songa, and the Processors.
In June 2009, we extended the deadline for the final results, due
no later than September 8, 2009. See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp
from Ecuador: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results
of the Third Administrative Review, 74 FR 28018 (June 12, 2009).
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 scope of this order includes certain frozen warmwater shrimp
and prawns, whether wild-caught (ocean harvested) or farm-raised
(produced by aquaculture), head-on or head-off, shell-on or peeled,
tail-on or tail-off,\1\ deveined or not deveined, cooked or raw, or
otherwise processed in frozen form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Tails'' in this context means the tail fan, which includes
the telson and the uropods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The frozen warmwater shrimp and prawn products included in the
scope of this order, regardless of definitions in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), are products which are processed
from warmwater shrimp and prawns through freezing and which are sold in
any count size.
The products described above may be processed from any species of
warmwater shrimp and prawns. Warmwater shrimp and prawns are generally
classified in, but are not limited to, the Penaeidae family. Some
examples of the farmed and wild-caught warmwater species include, but
are not limited to, whiteleg shrimp (Penaeus vannemei), banana prawn
(Penaeus merguiensis), fleshy prawn (Penaeus chinensis), giant river
prawn (Macrobrachium rosenbergii), giant tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon),
redspotted shrimp (Penaeus brasiliensis), southern brown shrimp
(Penaeus subtilis), southern pink shrimp (Penaeus notialis), southern
rough shrimp (Trachypenaeus curvirostris), southern white shrimp
(Penaeus schmitti), blue shrimp (Penaeus stylirostris), western white
shrimp (Penaeus occidentalis), and Indian white prawn (Penaeus
indicus).
Frozen shrimp and prawns that are packed with marinade, spices or
sauce are included in the scope of this order. In addition, food
preparations, which are not ``prepared meals,'' that contain more than
20 percent by weight of shrimp or prawn are also included in the scope
of this order.
Excluded from the scope are: 1) breaded shrimp and prawns (HTSUS
subheading 1605.20.10.20); 2) shrimp and prawns generally classified in
the Pandalidae family and commonly referred to as coldwater shrimp, in
any state of processing; 3) fresh shrimp and prawns whether shell-on or
peeled (HTSUS subheadings 0306.23.00.20 and 0306.23.00.40); 4) shrimp
and prawns in prepared meals (HTSUS subheading 1605.20.05.10); 5) dried
shrimp and prawns; 6) canned warmwater shrimp and prawns (HTSUS
subheading 1605.20.10.40); 7) certain dusted shrimp; and 8) certain
battered shrimp.
[[Page 47202]]
Dusted shrimp is a shrimp-based product: 1) that is produced from fresh
(or thawed-from-frozen) and peeled shrimp; 2) to which a ``dusting''
layer of rice or wheat flour of at least 95 percent purity has been
applied; 3) with the entire surface of the shrimp flesh thoroughly and
evenly coated with the flour; 4) with the non-shrimp content of the end
product constituting between four and 10 percent of the product's total
weight after being dusted, but prior to being frozen; and 5) that is
subjected to IQF freezing immediately after application of the dusting
layer. Battered shrimp is a shrimp-based product that, when dusted in
accordance with the definition of dusting above, is coated with a wet
viscous layer containing egg and/or milk, and par-fried.
The products covered by this order are currently classified under
the following HTSUS subheadings: 0306.13.00.03, 0306.13.00.06,
0306.13.00.09, 0306.13.00.12, 0306.13.00.15, 0306.13.00.18,
0306.13.00.21, 0306.13.00.24, 0306.13.00.27, 0306.13.00.40,
1605.20.10.10, and 1605.20.10.30. These HTSUS subheadings are provided
for convenience and for customs purposes only and are not dispositive,
but rather the written description of the scope of this order is
dispositive.
Period of Review
The POR is February 1, 2007, through August 14, 2007.
Cost of Production
As discussed in the Preliminary Results, we conducted this
administrative review to determine whether Promarisco and Songa made
third country sales of the foreign like product during the POR at
prices below their costs of production (COP) within the meaning of
section 773(b)(1) of the Act. For Promarisco and Songa, we performed
the cost test for these final results following the same methodology as
in the Preliminary Results, except as discussed in the decision
memorandum accompanying this notice (the Decision Memo).
We found that 20 percent or more of each respondent's sales of a
given product during the reporting period were at prices less than the
weighted-average COP for this period. Thus, we determined that these
below-cost sales were made in ``substantial quantities'' within an
extended period of time and at prices which did not permit the recovery
of all costs within a reasonable period of time in the normal course of
trade. See sections 773(b)(2)(B) - (D) of the Act.
Therefore, for purposes of these final results, we find that
Promarisco and Songa made below-cost sales not in the ordinary course
of trade. Consequently, we disregarded these sales for each respondent
and used the remaining sales as the basis for determining normal value
pursuant to section 773(b)(1) of the Act.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to this
administrative review, and to which we have responded, are listed in
the Appendix to this notice and addressed in the Decision Memo, which
is adopted by this notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of
all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations
in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records
Unit, HCHB Room 1117, of the main Department building.
In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum (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
Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made
certain changes in the margin calculations for Promarisco and Songa.
These changes are discussed in the relevant sections of the Decision
Memo.
In addition, we have changed our calculation of the margins and
assessment rates applicable to the companies not selected for
individual examination to reflect the simple average of the margins
calculated for the respondents selected for individual examination in
this review, rather than the weighted average of these margins,
excluding de minimis margins or margins based entirely on facts
available (FA). This is consistent with our current practice with
respect to the calculation of the margins and assessment rates
applicable to non-mandatory respondents in cases such as the instant
one, where there are only two mandatory respondents with above de
minimis margins, or margins based entirely upon FA. See Ball Bearings
and Parts Thereof from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United
Kingdom: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews
and Intent to Rescind Reviews in Part, 73 FR 25654, 25655 (May 7,
2008); unchanged in Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France,
Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Rescission of Reviews in
Part, 73 FR 52823, 52824 (September 11, 2008).
Final Results of Review
We determine that weighted-average dumping margins exist for the
respondents for the period February 1, 2007, through August 14, 2007,
as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer/Exporter Percent Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Promarisco, S.A..................................... 0.85
Sociedad Nacional de Galapagos C.A. (Songa)......... 0.75
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Review-Specific Average Rate Applicable to the Following Companies:\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ This rate is based on the simple average of the margins
calculated for those companies selected for individual examination,
excluding de minimis margins or margins based entirely on FA, as
discussed above.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer/Exporter Percent Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agricola e Industrial Ecuaplantation SA............. 0.80
Agrol SA............................................ 0.80
Alberto Xavier Mosquera Rosado...................... 0.80
Alquimia Marina SA.................................. 0.80
Babychic SA......................................... 0.80
Biolife SA.......................................... 0.80
Braistar............................................ 0.80
Camaronera Jenn Briann.............................. 0.80
Camarones........................................... 0.80
Comar Cia Ltda...................................... 0.80
Doblertel SA........................................ 0.80
Dumary SA........................................... 0.80
Dunci SA............................................ 0.80
El Rosario Ersa SA.................................. 0.80
Empacadora Bilbo SA (Bilbosa)....................... 0.80
Empacadora del Pacifico SA (EDPACIF SA)............. 0.80
Empacadora Dufer Cia. Ltda. (DUFER)................. 0.80
Empacadora Grupo Gran Mar (Empagran) SA............. 0.80
Empacadora Nacional CA.............................. 0.80
Empacadora y Exportadora Calvi Cia. Ltda............ 0.80
Emprede SA.......................................... 0.80
Estar CA............................................ 0.80
Exporclam SA........................................ 0.80
Exporklore SA....................................... 0.80
Exportadora Bananera Noboa.......................... 0.80
Exportadora de Productos de Mar (Produmar).......... 0.80
Exportadora del Oceano (Oceanexa) CA................ 0.80
Exportadora Langosmar SA............................ 0.80
[[Page 47203]]
Exportadora del Oceano Pacifico SA (OCEANPAC)....... 0.80
Exports Langosmar SA................................ 0.80
Fortumar Ecuador SA................................. 0.80
Gambas del Pacifico SA.............................. 0.80
Gondi SA............................................ 0.80
Hector Canino Marty................................. 0.80
Hectorosa SA........................................ 0.80
Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila SA (Santa 0.80
Priscila)..........................................
Inepexa SA.......................................... 0.80
Jorge Luis Benitez Lopez............................ 0.80
Karpicorp SA........................................ 0.80
Luis Loaiza Alvarez................................. 0.80
Mardex Cia. Ltda.................................... 0.80
Marine.............................................. 0.80
Marines CA.......................................... 0.80
Mariscos de Chupadores Chupamar..................... 0.80
Mariscos del Ecuador C. Ltda. (Marecuador).......... 0.80
Natural Select SA................................... 0.80
Negocios Industriales Real Nirsa SA (NIRSA)......... 0.80
Novapesca SA........................................ 0.80
Ocean Fish.......................................... 0.80
Oceaninvest SA...................................... 0.80
Oceanmundo SA....................................... 0.80
Oceanpro SA......................................... 0.80
Operadora y Procesadora de Productos Marinos SA 0.80
(Omarsa)...........................................
Oyerly SA........................................... 0.80
P.C. Seafood SA..................................... 0.80
Pacfish SA.......................................... 0.80
PCC Congelados & Frescos SA......................... 0.80
Pescazul SA......................................... 0.80
Peslasa SA.......................................... 0.80
Phillips Seafoods of Ecuador CA (Phillips).......... 0.80
Pisacua SA.......................................... 0.80
Procesadora del Rio SA (Proriosa)................... 0.80
Productos Cultivados del Mar Proc................... 0.80
Productos Cultivados del Mar Proculmar Cia. Ltda.... 0.80
Productos del Mar Santa Rosa Cia. Ltda. (Promarosa). 0.80
Propemar SA......................................... 0.80
Provefrut........................................... 0.80
Rommy Roxana Alvarez Anchundia...................... 0.80
Sea Pronto Hector Marty Canino (Sea Pronto)......... 0.80
Sociedad Atlantico Pacifico SA...................... 0.80
Soitgar SA.......................................... 0.80
Studmark SA......................................... 0.80
Tecnica y Comercio de la Pesca CA (TECOPESCA)....... 0.80
Tolyp SA............................................ 0.80
Trans Ocean......................................... 0.80
Transcity SA........................................ 0.80
Transmarina CA...................................... 0.80
Transocean Ecuador SA............................... 0.80
Uniline Transport System............................ 0.80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries.
Because Promarisco and Songa each reported the entered value of all
of their U.S. sales, we have calculated an importer-specific ad valorem
duty assessment rate based on the ratio of the total amount of
antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total
entered value of the examined sales for each respective importer. We
have calculated a single importer-specific assessment rate for
Promarisco and Songa, consistent with our practice in the final results
of the 2006 2007 administrative review (see Certain Frozen Warmwater
Shrimp from Ecuador: Final Results and Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR 39945 (July 11, 2008)).
See also Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France, Germany, Italy,
Japan, and Singapore: Final Results of the Antidumping Administrative
Reviews, Rescission of Administrative Review in part, and Determination
Not to Revoke Order in Part, 68 FR 35623 (June 16, 2003), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 9B; and Notice
of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice
of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review:
Certain Softwood Lumber Products From Canada, 69 FR 75921 (December 20,
2004), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 13.
For the responsive companies which were not selected for individual
review, we have calculated an assessment rate based on the simple
average of the margins calculated for the companies selected for
individual review excluding any which are de minimis or determined
entirely on FA.
We will instruct Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review if
any importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results
of this review is above de minimis (i.e., at or above 0.50 percent).
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate
without regard to antidumping duties any entries for which the
assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent). See 19
CFR 351.106(c)(1). The Department will 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. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment
Policy Notice). 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
that the merchandise they sold to the intermediary (e.g., a reseller,
trading company, or exporter) was destined for the United States. In
such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at
the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation if there is
no rate for the intermediary involved in the transaction. See
Assessment Policy Notice for a full discussion of this clarification.
Discontinuation of Cash Deposit Requirements
On August 15, 2007, in accordance with sections 129(b)(4) and
129(c)(1)(B) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, the U.S. Trade
Representative, after consulting with the Department and Congress,
directed the Department to implement its determination to revoke the
antidumping duty order on certain frozen warmwater shrimp from Ecuador.
See Implementation of the Findings of the WTO Panel in United States
Antidumping Measure on Shrimp from Ecuador: Notice of Determination
Under section 129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act and Revocation of
the Antidumping Duty Order on Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Ecuador, 72
FR 48257 (August 23, 2007). Accordingly, the antidumping duty order on
certain frozen warmwater shrimp from Ecuador was revoked effective
August 15, 2007. As a result, we have instructed CBP to discontinue
collection of cash deposits of antidumping duties on entries of the
subject merchandise.
Notification to Importers
This notice 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
[[Page 47204]]
duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping
duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written
notification of return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to
judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with
the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these final results of review in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
September 8, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix Issues in Decision Memo
General Comments:
Comment 1: Offsetting of Negative Margins
Comment 2: Using CBP Data for Respondent Selection
Comment 3: Restricting Count-Size Comparisons Under the Model-Matching
Methodology
Comment 4: Assessment Rate Assigned to Companies Receiving the Review-
Specific Average Rate
Comment 5: Reporting of Raw Material Costs
Company-Specific Comments:
Promarisco
Comment 6: Use of Adverse Facts Available to Calculate Promarisco's
Imputed Credit Expenses
Comment 7: Treatment of Promarisco's Bill of Lading Fees and Analysis
and Inspection Fees
Comment 8: Adjustment of Promarisco's Indirect Selling Expenses
Comment 9: Treatment of Promarisco's U.S. and Comparison-Market Billing
Adjustments
Comment 10: Payment Date Assigned for Certain U.S. sales
Comment 11: Treatment of Write-offs in G&A Expenses
Comment 12: Treatment of Promarisco's Interest Income Offset
Comment 13: Processing Costs for Block-Frozen Products
Comment 14: Calculation of Entered Value for a Certain U.S. Sale
Songa
Comment 15: Revision of Count-Size Range Model-Match Coding for Certain
Head-On Shrimp Products
Comment 16: Completeness of Indirect Selling Expense Reporting
Comment 17: Inclusion of Foreign Exchange Losses in Songa's Financial
Expense Ratio
Comment 18: Treatment of Depreciation for Revalued Fixed Assets in
Fixed Overhead Costs
Comment 19: Amortization of the Cost of Export Certificates in
Financial Expenses
Comment 21: Offset Adjustment to G&A Expenses for Certain Non-Operating
Income Items
[FR Doc. E9-22186 Filed 9-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
