Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 12150-12152 [2014-04643]

Download as PDF 12150 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board Foreign-Trade Zones Board Dated: February 20, 2014. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Rockbridge, Smyth, Tazewell and Wythe, and the Cities of Bedford, Buena Vista, Covington, Danville, Galax, Lynchburg, Martinsville, Radford, Roanoke and Salem, as described in the application. If approved, the grantee would be able to serve sites throughout the service area based on companies’ needs for FTZ designation. The proposed service area is within/adjacent to the New River Valley Airport Customs and Border Protection port of entry. The applicant is requesting authority to reorganize its existing zone to include all of the existing sites as ‘‘magnet’’ sites. The ASF allows for the possible exemption of one magnet site from the ‘‘sunset’’ time limits that generally apply to sites under the ASF, and the applicant proposes that Site 1 be so exempted. The application would have no impact on FTZ 238’s previously authorized subzone. In accordance with the FTZ Board’s regulations, Kathleen Boyce of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to evaluate and analyze the facts and information presented in the application and case record and to report findings and recommendations to the FTZ Board. Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the FTZ Board’s Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is May 5, 2014. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to May 19, 2014. A copy of the application will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230–0002, and in the ‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the FTZ Board’s Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz. For further information, contact Kathleen Boyce at Kathleen.Boyce@trade.gov or (202) 482– 1346. [FR Doc. 2014–04751 Filed 3–3–14; 8:45 am] [B–92–2013] [Docket B–54–2012] Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 143—West Sacramento, California; Application for Extended Production Authority; Mitsubishi Rayon Carbon Fiber and Composites, Inc. (formerly Grafil, Inc.), Subzone 143D; Opening of Comment Period on New Evidence Production authority and subzone status were approved at the facilities of Mitsubishi Rayon Carbon Fiber and Composites, Inc. (MRCFC) for a period of five years, until May 7, 2014 (Board Order 1620, May 7, 2009; 74 FR 24798, 5/26/2009). The current application is requesting to extend indefinitely FTZ authority to produce carbon fiber from foreign-status polyacrylonitrile (PAN) precursor (B–54–2012, 77 FR 45575– 44575, 8/1/2012). On February 21, 2014, MRCFC made a submission to the FTZ Board that included new evidence in response to the examiner’s preliminary recommendation for export only authority. Public comment is invited on MRCFC’s new submission through April 3, 2014. Rebuttal comments may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period, until April 18, 2014. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board’s Executive Secretary at: ForeignTrade Zones Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 21013, 1401 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20230. A copy of MRCFC’s February 21, 2014, submission will be available for public inspection at the address above, and in the ‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the Board’s Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz. For further information, contact Diane Finver at Diane.Finver@trade.gov or (202) 482–1367. Dated: February 20, 2014. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P [FR Doc. 2014–04750 Filed 3–3–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:07 Mar 03, 2014 Foreign-Trade Zone 235—Lakewood, New Jersey; Authorization of Production Activity; Cosmetic Essence Innovations, LLC (Fragrance Bottling); Holmdel, New Jersey On October 30, 2013, Cosmetic Essence Innovations, LLC submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board for its facility within FTZ 235—Site 8, in Holmdel, New Jersey. The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (78 FR 66330, 11–5– 2013). The FTZ Board has determined that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification is authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations, including Section 400.14. Dated: February 27, 2014. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2014–04749 Filed 3–3–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–851] Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012–2013 Enforcement and Compliance, formerly Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: On November 21, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) covering the period February 1, 2012 through January 31, 2013.1 This review covers the PRC- SUMMARY: 1 See Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results and Rescission In Part of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012–2013, 78 FR 69817 (November 21, 2013) (Preliminary Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (Preliminary Decision Memorandum). Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Notices wide entity, which includes Blue Field (Sichuan) Food Industrial Co., Ltd. (Blue Field), among other companies. The Department gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results, but we received no comments. Hence, these final results are unchanged from the Preliminary Results. The final dumping margin for this review is listed below in the ‘‘Final Results of Review’’ section of this notice. DATES: Effective March 4, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Scott or Robert James, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2657 or (202) 482– 0649, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Background On November 21, 2013, the Department published the Preliminary Results of the instant review.2 By virtue of its failure to respond to the Department’s questionnaire, Blue Field failed to establish that it was separate from the PRC-wide entity.3 Consequently, the Department examined the PRC-wide entity, which included Blue Field, among other companies, for the Preliminary Results and assigned the entity a preliminary dumping margin of 308.33 percent.4 The dumping margin applied to the PRCwide entity was based on adverse facts available because the Department determined that an element of the entity, Blue Field, failed to act to the best of its ability in complying with the Department’s request for information in this review and, consequently, significantly impeded the proceeding.5 We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results.6 We received no comments from interested parties. The Department conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Scope of the Order The products covered by this antidumping order are certain preserved mushrooms, whether imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. The certain preserved mushrooms covered under this order are the species 2 Id. 3 See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 8–12. 4 Id. 5 Id. 6 See Preliminary Results, 78 FR at 69819. VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:07 Mar 03, 2014 Jkt 232001 Agaricus bisporus and Agaricus bitorquis. ‘‘Certain Preserved Mushrooms’’ refer to mushrooms that have been prepared or preserved by cleaning, blanching, and sometimes slicing or cutting. These mushrooms are then packed and heated in containers including, but not limited to, cans or glass jars in a suitable liquid medium, including, but not limited to, water, brine, butter or butter sauce. Certain preserved mushrooms may be imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. Included within the scope of this order are ‘‘brined’’ mushrooms, which are presalted and packed in a heavy salt solution to provisionally preserve them for further processing. Excluded from the scope of this order are the following: (1) All other species of mushroom, including straw mushrooms; (2) All fresh and chilled mushrooms, including ‘‘refrigerated’’ or ‘‘quick blanched mushrooms;’’ (3) Dried mushrooms; (4) Frozen mushrooms; and (5) ‘‘Marinated,’’ ‘‘acidified,’’ or ‘‘pickled’’ mushrooms, which are prepared or preserved by means of vinegar or acetic acid, but may contain oil or other additives.7 The merchandise subject to this order is classifiable under subheadings: 2003.10.0127, 2003.10.0131, 2003.10.0137, 2003.10.0143, 2003.10.0147, 2003.10.0153, and 0711.51.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive. Final Determination as to the PRC-Wide Entity As explained above, in the Preliminary Results, the Department found that the use of adverse facts available is warranted with respect to the PRC-wide entity.8 Also in the Preliminary Results, consistent with its practice,9 the Department stated its intent not to rescind the review for the following 7 On June 19, 2000, the Department affirmed that ‘‘marinated,’’ ‘‘acidified,’’ or ‘‘pickled’’ mushrooms containing less than 0.5 percent acetic acid are within the scope of the antidumping duty order. See ‘‘Recommendation Memorandum-Final Ruling of Request by Tak Fat, et al. for Exclusion of Certain Marinated, Acidified Mushrooms from the Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated June 19, 2000. On February 9, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld this decision. See Tak Fat v. United States, 396 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2005). 8 See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 8–12. 9 See, e.g., Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2011– 2012, 78 FR 55680, 55681 (September 11, 2013). PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 12151 exporters that remain a part of the PRCwide entity: (1) Ayecue (Liaocheng) Foodstuff Co., Ltd.; (2) China National Cereals, Oils & Foodstuffs Import & Export Corp.; (3) China Processed Food Import & Export Co.; (4) Dujiangyan Xingda Foodstuff Co., Ltd.; (5) Fujian Pinghe Baofeng Canned Foods; (6) Fujian Yuxing Fruits and Vegetables Foodstuffs Development Co., Ltd.; (7) Fujian Zishan Group Co., Ltd.; (8) Guangxi Eastwing Trading Co., Ltd.; (9) Inter-Foods (Dongshan) Co., Ltd.; (10) Longhai Guangfa Food Co., Ltd.; (11) Primera Harvest (Xiangfan) Co., Ltd.; (12) Shandong Fengyu Edible Fungus Corporation Ltd.; (13) Shandong Jiufa Edible Fungus Corporation, Ltd.; (14) Shandong Yinfeng Rare Fungus Corporation, Ltd.; (15) Sun Wave Trading Co., Ltd.; (16) Xiamen Greenland Import & Export Co., Ltd.; (17) Xiamen Gulong Import & Export Co., Ltd.; (18) Xiamen Jiahua Import & Export Trading Co., Ltd.; (19) Xiamen Longhuai Import & Export Co., Ltd.; (20) Zhangzhou Golden Banyan Foodstuffs Industrial Co., Ltd. (Zhangzhou Golden Banyan); 10 (21) Zhangzhou Long Mountain Foods Co., Ltd.; (22) Zhejiang Iceman Food Co., Ltd.; 11 and (23) Zhejiang Iceman Group Co., Ltd. We explained that, although the requests for review of these exporters were timely withdrawn, we would not rescind the review with respect to these exporters because the PRC-wide entity remains under review.12 After issuing the Preliminary Results, the Department received no comments 10 The Department considers Zhangzhou Golden Banyan to be distinct from another company with a similar name for which a review was originally requested, Fujian Golden Banyan Foodstuffs Industrial Co., Ltd. (Golden Banyan). In the administrative review covering the period February 1, 2010 through January 31, 2011, the Department considered Zhangzhou Golden Banyan to remain a part of the PRC-wide entity, while it calculated a separate rate for Golden Banyan. See Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 55808 (September 11, 2012). The record of this review does not contain any evidence that suggests these two companies should be considered a single entity. In the Preliminary Results, we rescinded this administrative review with respect to Golden Banyan because it has a separate rate and all review requests had been withdrawn for Golden Banyan. See Preliminary Results, 78 FR at 69818. 11 The Department found that Zhejiang Iceman Food Co., Ltd. should be equated with Zhejiang Iceman Group Co., Ltd. See Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People’s Republic of China: Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 70112 (November 10, 2011). The Court of International Trade upheld that finding. See Xiamen Int’l Trade & Indus. Co., Ltd. v. United States, No. 11–00411, 2013 WL 6728248, at *14–15 (Ct. Int’l Trade Dec. 20, 2013). The record of this review does not contain any evidence that contradicts this finding. 12 See Preliminary Results, 78 FR at 69818–19. E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1 12152 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Notices from interested parties, nor has it received any information that would cause it to revisit its preliminary determinations as to the PRC-wide entity. Therefore, for these final results, the Department continues to find that Blue Field and the other 23 exporters named in this section are part of the PRC-wide entity and that the use of adverse facts available is warranted with respect to the PRC-wide entity. Final Determination of No Shipments In the Preliminary Results, we determined that Xiamen International Trade & Industrial Co., Ltd. (XITIC) and Zhangzhou Hongda Import & Export Trading Co., Ltd. (Zhangzhou Hongda) did not have any reviewable transactions during the period of review (POR) because (1) XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda submitted timely certifications of no shipments, entries, or sales of subject merchandise during the POR and (2) We did not receive any information from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) indicating that there were reviewable transactions for XITIC or Zhangzhou Hongda during the POR.13 Consistent with the Department’s assessment practice in non-market economy cases,14 we stated in the Preliminary Results that the Department would not rescind the review in these circumstances, but rather would complete the review with respect to XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of the review.15 As stated above, we did not receive any comments on our Preliminary Results, nor have we received any information that would cause us to revisit our preliminary determinations as to no shipments. Accordingly, in these final results, we continue to determine that XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda had no reviewable transactions of subject merchandise during the POR. Final Results of Review tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES The Department determined that the following dumping margin exists for the period February 1, 2012 through January 31, 2013: 13 Id., 78 FR at 69819. Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011) (Assessment Practice Refinement). 15 See Preliminary Results, 78 FR at 69819. 14 See VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:58 Mar 03, 2014 Jkt 232001 Exporter Dumping margin (percent) PRC-wide entity16 ..................... 308.33 16 The PRC-wide entity includes, among other exporters, Blue Field. Assessment Rates The Department determined, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review.17 The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review. For the PRC-wide entity, the Department will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on entries of subject merchandise at the PRC-wide rate of 308.33 percent. Additionally, consistent with the Department’s refinement to its assessment practice in NME cases, because the Department determined that XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda had no reviewable transactions of subject merchandise during the POR, any suspended entries that entered under XITIC’s or Zhangzhou Hongda’s antidumping duty case numbers (i.e., at those exporters’ rates) will be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.18 Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of this notice of final results of the administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda, which claimed no shipments, the cash deposit rate will remain unchanged from the rate assigned to each exporter in the most recentlycompleted review of each exporter; (2) For any previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters which are not under review in this segment of the proceeding that received a separate rate in a previous segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recentlycompleted period; (3) For all PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, including Blue Field, the cash deposit rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity (i.e., 308.33 percent); 17 See 18 See 19 CFR 351.212(b). Assessment Practice Refinement, 76 FR 65694. PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 and (4) For all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter(s) that supplied the nonPRC exporter. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. 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 POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. Administrative Protective Order This notice also serves as a 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 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 final results and this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: February 25, 2014. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2014–04643 Filed 3–3–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–588–704] Brass Sheet and Strip From Japan: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012–2013 Enforcement and Compliance, formerly 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 brass sheet and strip from Japan for the period August 1, 2012, through July 31, 2013. AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 42 (Tuesday, March 4, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12150-12152]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04643]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-851]


Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China: 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, formerly Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: On November 21, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published in the Federal Register the preliminary results 
of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain 
preserved mushrooms from the People's Republic of China (PRC) covering 
the period February 1, 2012 through January 31, 2013.\1\ This review 
covers the PRC-

[[Page 12151]]

wide entity, which includes Blue Field (Sichuan) Food Industrial Co., 
Ltd. (Blue Field), among other companies. The Department gave 
interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary 
Results, but we received no comments. Hence, these final results are 
unchanged from the Preliminary Results. The final dumping margin for 
this review is listed below in the ``Final Results of Review'' section 
of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic 
of China: Preliminary Results and Rescission In Part of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 78 FR 69817 (November 21, 
2013) (Preliminary Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision 
Memorandum (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective March 4, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Scott or Robert James, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
2657 or (202) 482-0649, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On November 21, 2013, the Department published the Preliminary 
Results of the instant review.\2\ By virtue of its failure to respond 
to the Department's questionnaire, Blue Field failed to establish that 
it was separate from the PRC-wide entity.\3\ Consequently, the 
Department examined the PRC-wide entity, which included Blue Field, 
among other companies, for the Preliminary Results and assigned the 
entity a preliminary dumping margin of 308.33 percent.\4\ The dumping 
margin applied to the PRC-wide entity was based on adverse facts 
available because the Department determined that an element of the 
entity, Blue Field, failed to act to the best of its ability in 
complying with the Department's request for information in this review 
and, consequently, significantly impeded the proceeding.\5\ We invited 
interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results.\6\ We 
received no comments from interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Id.
    \3\ See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 8-12.
    \4\ Id.
    \5\ Id.
    \6\ See Preliminary Results, 78 FR at 69819.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department conducted this review in accordance with section 
751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this antidumping order are certain 
preserved mushrooms, whether imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems 
and pieces. The certain preserved mushrooms covered under this order 
are the species Agaricus bisporus and Agaricus bitorquis. ``Certain 
Preserved Mushrooms'' refer to mushrooms that have been prepared or 
preserved by cleaning, blanching, and sometimes slicing or cutting. 
These mushrooms are then packed and heated in containers including, but 
not limited to, cans or glass jars in a suitable liquid medium, 
including, but not limited to, water, brine, butter or butter sauce. 
Certain preserved mushrooms may be imported whole, sliced, diced, or as 
stems and pieces. Included within the scope of this order are 
``brined'' mushrooms, which are presalted and packed in a heavy salt 
solution to provisionally preserve them for further processing.
    Excluded from the scope of this order are the following: (1) All 
other species of mushroom, including straw mushrooms; (2) All fresh and 
chilled mushrooms, including ``refrigerated'' or ``quick blanched 
mushrooms;'' (3) Dried mushrooms; (4) Frozen mushrooms; and (5) 
``Marinated,'' ``acidified,'' or ``pickled'' mushrooms, which are 
prepared or preserved by means of vinegar or acetic acid, but may 
contain oil or other additives.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ On June 19, 2000, the Department affirmed that 
``marinated,'' ``acidified,'' or ``pickled'' mushrooms containing 
less than 0.5 percent acetic acid are within the scope of the 
antidumping duty order. See ``Recommendation Memorandum-Final Ruling 
of Request by Tak Fat, et al. for Exclusion of Certain Marinated, 
Acidified Mushrooms from the Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order on 
Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China,'' 
dated June 19, 2000. On February 9, 2005, the United States Court of 
Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld this decision. See Tak Fat v. 
United States, 396 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The merchandise subject to this order is classifiable under 
subheadings: 2003.10.0127, 2003.10.0131, 2003.10.0137, 2003.10.0143, 
2003.10.0147, 2003.10.0153, and 0711.51.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings 
are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the written 
description of the scope of this order is dispositive.

Final Determination as to the PRC-Wide Entity

    As explained above, in the Preliminary Results, the Department 
found that the use of adverse facts available is warranted with respect 
to the PRC-wide entity.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 8-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also in the Preliminary Results, consistent with its practice,\9\ 
the Department stated its intent not to rescind the review for the 
following exporters that remain a part of the PRC-wide entity: (1) 
Ayecue (Liaocheng) Foodstuff Co., Ltd.; (2) China National Cereals, 
Oils & Foodstuffs Import & Export Corp.; (3) China Processed Food 
Import & Export Co.; (4) Dujiangyan Xingda Foodstuff Co., Ltd.; (5) 
Fujian Pinghe Baofeng Canned Foods; (6) Fujian Yuxing Fruits and 
Vegetables Foodstuffs Development Co., Ltd.; (7) Fujian Zishan Group 
Co., Ltd.; (8) Guangxi Eastwing Trading Co., Ltd.; (9) Inter-Foods 
(Dongshan) Co., Ltd.; (10) Longhai Guangfa Food Co., Ltd.; (11) Primera 
Harvest (Xiangfan) Co., Ltd.; (12) Shandong Fengyu Edible Fungus 
Corporation Ltd.; (13) Shandong Jiufa Edible Fungus Corporation, Ltd.; 
(14) Shandong Yinfeng Rare Fungus Corporation, Ltd.; (15) Sun Wave 
Trading Co., Ltd.; (16) Xiamen Greenland Import & Export Co., Ltd.; 
(17) Xiamen Gulong Import & Export Co., Ltd.; (18) Xiamen Jiahua Import 
& Export Trading Co., Ltd.; (19) Xiamen Longhuai Import & Export Co., 
Ltd.; (20) Zhangzhou Golden Banyan Foodstuffs Industrial Co., Ltd. 
(Zhangzhou Golden Banyan); \10\ (21) Zhangzhou Long Mountain Foods Co., 
Ltd.; (22) Zhejiang Iceman Food Co., Ltd.; \11\ and (23) Zhejiang 
Iceman Group Co., Ltd. We explained that, although the requests for 
review of these exporters were timely withdrawn, we would not rescind 
the review with respect to these exporters because the PRC-wide entity 
remains under review.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See, e.g., Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the 
People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2011-2012, 78 FR 55680, 55681 (September 11, 
2013).
    \10\ The Department considers Zhangzhou Golden Banyan to be 
distinct from another company with a similar name for which a review 
was originally requested, Fujian Golden Banyan Foodstuffs Industrial 
Co., Ltd. (Golden Banyan). In the administrative review covering the 
period February 1, 2010 through January 31, 2011, the Department 
considered Zhangzhou Golden Banyan to remain a part of the PRC-wide 
entity, while it calculated a separate rate for Golden Banyan. See 
Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China: 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 55808 
(September 11, 2012). The record of this review does not contain any 
evidence that suggests these two companies should be considered a 
single entity. In the Preliminary Results, we rescinded this 
administrative review with respect to Golden Banyan because it has a 
separate rate and all review requests had been withdrawn for Golden 
Banyan. See Preliminary Results, 78 FR at 69818.
    \11\ The Department found that Zhejiang Iceman Food Co., Ltd. 
should be equated with Zhejiang Iceman Group Co., Ltd. See Certain 
Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China: Amended 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 70112 
(November 10, 2011). The Court of International Trade upheld that 
finding. See Xiamen Int'l Trade & Indus. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 
No. 11-00411, 2013 WL 6728248, at *14-15 (Ct. Int'l Trade Dec. 20, 
2013). The record of this review does not contain any evidence that 
contradicts this finding.
    \12\ See Preliminary Results, 78 FR at 69818-19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After issuing the Preliminary Results, the Department received no 
comments

[[Page 12152]]

from interested parties, nor has it received any information that would 
cause it to revisit its preliminary determinations as to the PRC-wide 
entity. Therefore, for these final results, the Department continues to 
find that Blue Field and the other 23 exporters named in this section 
are part of the PRC-wide entity and that the use of adverse facts 
available is warranted with respect to the PRC-wide entity.

Final Determination of No Shipments

    In the Preliminary Results, we determined that Xiamen International 
Trade & Industrial Co., Ltd. (XITIC) and Zhangzhou Hongda Import & 
Export Trading Co., Ltd. (Zhangzhou Hongda) did not have any reviewable 
transactions during the period of review (POR) because (1) XITIC and 
Zhangzhou Hongda submitted timely certifications of no shipments, 
entries, or sales of subject merchandise during the POR and (2) We did 
not receive any information from U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(CBP) indicating that there were reviewable transactions for XITIC or 
Zhangzhou Hongda during the POR.\13\ Consistent with the Department's 
assessment practice in non-market economy cases,\14\ we stated in the 
Preliminary Results that the Department would not rescind the review in 
these circumstances, but rather would complete the review with respect 
to XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda and issue appropriate instructions to CBP 
based on the final results of the review.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id., 78 FR at 69819.
    \14\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment 
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011) (Assessment 
Practice Refinement).
    \15\ See Preliminary Results, 78 FR at 69819.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated above, we did not receive any comments on our Preliminary 
Results, nor have we received any information that would cause us to 
revisit our preliminary determinations as to no shipments. Accordingly, 
in these final results, we continue to determine that XITIC and 
Zhangzhou Hongda had no reviewable transactions of subject merchandise 
during the POR.

Final Results of Review

    The Department determined that the following dumping margin exists 
for the period February 1, 2012 through January 31, 2013:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Dumping
                         Exporter                              margin
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-wide entity\16\.......................................       308.33
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The PRC-wide entity includes, among other exporters, Blue Field.

Assessment Rates

    The Department determined, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties 
on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with 
the final results of this review.\17\ The Department intends to issue 
assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of 
these final results of review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the PRC-wide entity, the Department will instruct CBP to assess 
antidumping duties on entries of subject merchandise at the PRC-wide 
rate of 308.33 percent.
    Additionally, consistent with the Department's refinement to its 
assessment practice in NME cases, because the Department determined 
that XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda had no reviewable transactions of 
subject merchandise during the POR, any suspended entries that entered 
under XITIC's or Zhangzhou Hongda's antidumping duty case numbers 
(i.e., at those exporters' rates) will be liquidated at the PRC-wide 
rate.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Assessment Practice Refinement, 76 FR 65694.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all 
shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 
for consumption on or after the publication date of this notice of 
final results of the administrative review, as provided by section 
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda, which 
claimed no shipments, the cash deposit rate will remain unchanged from 
the rate assigned to each exporter in the most recently-completed 
review of each exporter; (2) For any previously investigated or 
reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters which are not under review in this 
segment of the proceeding that received a separate rate in a previous 
segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be 
the exporter-specific rate published for the most recently-completed 
period; (3) For all PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not 
been found to be entitled to a separate rate, including Blue Field, the 
cash deposit rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity (i.e., 308.33 
percent); and (4) For all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise 
which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be 
the rate applicable to the PRC exporter(s) that supplied the non-PRC 
exporter. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain 
in effect until further notice.

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 POR. Failure to comply with this 
requirement could result in the Department's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a 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 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 final results and this notice 
in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: February 25, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-04643 Filed 3-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P