Sugar From Mexico: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 57341-57343 [2015-24189]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 184 / Wednesday, September 23, 2015 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–201–845] Sugar From Mexico: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that imports of sugar from Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The period of investigation is January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013. The final weighted-average dumping margins are listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Final Determination Margins.’’ DATES: Effective Date: September 23, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Lindgren, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3870. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Background On November 3, 2014, the Department published in the Federal Register the Preliminary Determination of sales at LTFV in the antidumping duty investigation of sugar from Mexico.1 The following events occurred since the Preliminary Determination was issued. Between December 3 and 16, 2014, we conducted sales and cost verifications of the two respondents in this investigation, FEESA 2 and the GAM Group.3 The verification reports were issued between January 29 and March 31, 2015. On December 19, 2014, the Department and a representative of the 1 See Sugar From Mexico: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 79 FR 65189 (November 3, 2014) (Preliminary Determination). 2 Fondo de Empresas Expropiadas del Sector Azucarero (FEESA) consists of FEESA and the following sugar mills: Fideicomiso Ingenio El Modelo, Fideicomiso Ingenio San Cristobal, Fideicomiso Ingenio Plan De San Luis, Fideicomiso Ingenio San Miguelito, Fideicomiso Ingenio La Providencia, Fideicomiso Ingenio Atencingo, Fideicomiso Ingenio Casasano, Fideicomiso Ingenio El Potrero, and Fideicomiso Ingenio Emiliano Zapata. 3 The GAM Group consists of the following sugar mills: Ingenio Tala S.A. de C.V.; Ingenio El Dorado S.A. de C.V.; and Ingenio Lazaro Cardenas S.A. de C.V. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 22, 2015 Jkt 235001 producers/exporters accounting for substantially all imports of sugar from Mexico, the Camara Nacional de Las Industrias Azucarera y Alcoholera, signed a suspension agreement in this investigation.4 On January 8, 2015, Imperial Sugar (Imperial) and AmCane Sugar LLC (AmCane) each notified the Department that they had petitioned the International Trade Commission (ITC) to conduct a review to determine whether the injurious effects of the imports of the subject merchandise are eliminated completely by the AD Suspension Agreement (a section 734(h) review).5 Additionally, on January 16, 2015, AmCane and Imperial submitted timely requests for the continuation of the instant investigation.6 On March 19, 2015, in a unanimous vote, the ITC found that the AD Suspension Agreement eliminated completely the injurious effects of imports of sugar from Mexico. On the same day, the Department announced that it would issue a decision regarding continuation of the investigations promptly after the ITC made its views and findings available.7 On March 24, 2015, the ITC notified the Department of its determination, and on April 10, 2015, provided a report of its views and findings to the Department.8 Subsequently, on April 24, 2015, the Department determined that AmCane and Imperial had standing to request continuation of this investigation and, as a result, published a continuation notice on May 4, 2015.9 Accordingly, on May 4, 2015, the Department announced the briefing schedule. Consistent with the schedule, case briefs were filed on May 29, 2015, and rebuttal briefs on June 12, 2015. Scope of the Investigation The product covered by this investigation is sugar from Mexico. Since the Preliminary Determination, the Department has updated the scope of the investigation. For a discussion of these changes, see ‘‘Scope Comments’’ section of the Issues and Decision 4 See Sugar From Mexico: Suspension of Antidumping Investigation, 79 FR 78093 (December 29, 2014) (AD Suspension Agreement). 5 See Sugar From Mexico: Continuation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 80 FR 25278, 25279 (May 4, 2015) (Continuation Notice). 6 Id. 7 See Continuation Notice, 80 FR at 25280. 8 Id. 9 See Memorandum to the Files regarding ‘‘Standing of Imperial Sugar and AmCane Sugar to Request Continuation of the AD and CVD Investigations on Sugar from Mexico,’’ dated April 24, 2015; see also Continuation Notice, 80 FR at 25278. PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 57341 Memorandum 10 and, for a complete description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix I to this notice. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as Appendix II. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http:// access.trade.gov and it is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/ frn/. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Determination Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at verification, we made certain changes to the margin calculations. For a discussion of these changes, see the ‘‘Margin Calculations’’ section of the Issues and Decision Memorandum. Verification As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in December, 2014, we verified the sales and cost information submitted by FEESA and the GAM Group for use in our final determination. We used standard verification procedures including an examination of relevant accounting and production records, and original source documents provided by the two respondents.11 10 See Memorandum to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Affirmative Determination in the Less than Fair Value Investigation of Sugar from Mexico’’ (Issues and Decision Memorandum), which is dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice. 11 See Memorandum to the File regarding ‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of Ingenio Tala de C.V. and its affiliates Ingenio Lazaro Cardenas S.A. de C. V. and Ingenio El Dorado S.A. de C. V. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Sugar from Mexico,’’ dated January 29, 2015; see also Memorandum to the File regarding ‘‘Verification of the Cost Response of Fondo de Empresas Expropiadas del Sector Azucarero in the Less-Than- E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM Continued 23SEN1 57342 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 184 / Wednesday, September 23, 2015 / Notices Final Determination Margins The weighted-average dumping margins are as follows: Weighted-average dumping margin (%) Exporter/Producer FEESA ........................................................................................................................................................................................... Ingenio Tala S.A. de C.V. and certain affiliated sugar mills of Grupo Azucarero Mexico S.A. de C.V. (collectively, the GAM Group) ........................................................................................................................................................................................ All-Others ....................................................................................................................................................................................... Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated ‘‘all-others’’ rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero or de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. As we calculated weighted-average dumping margins for both mandatory respondents that are above de minimis and which are not based on total facts available, they are the basis for the ‘‘all others’’ rate. However, a weighted average would reveal proprietary information regarding the respondents’ sales information. As such, we have calculated the weightedaverage ‘‘all others’’ rate by relying on publicly-ranged information reported by FEESA and the GAM Group.12 Disclosure We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of any public announcement of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Termination of Suspension of Liquidation As noted above, on December 19, 2014, the Department signed the AD Suspension Agreement. Pursuant to section 734(h)(3) of the Act, suspension of liquidation ordered in the Preliminary Determination continued to be in effect pending the ITC’s section 734(h) review. Following the ITC’s affirmative determination, i.e., that the AD Suspension Agreement completely eliminated the injurious effects of imports of sugar from Mexico, on March 27, 2015, the Department, in accordance with section 734(h)(3) of the Act, instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to terminate the suspension of liquidation of all entries Fair-Value Investigation of Sugar from Mexico,’’ dated January 30, 2015; Memoranda to the File regarding ‘‘Verification of the Sales and Subsidy Responses of FEESA in the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations of Sugar from Mexico,’’ and ‘‘Verification of the Sales and VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 22, 2015 Jkt 235001 40.48 42.14 40.74 of sugar from Mexico and refund all cash deposits. Pursuant to the requests for continuation discussed above, we have continued and completed the investigation in accordance with section 734(g) of the Act. We found the antidumping duty margins noted above in the ‘‘Final Determination Margins’’ section. The Department will not instruct CBP to suspend liquidation or collect cash deposits calculated herein unless the AD Suspension Agreement is terminated and the Department issues an antidumping duty order.13 In the event that Department issues an order, consistent with sections 735(c)(1) and 736(a) of the Act, as well as 19 CFR 351.210(d) and 351.211, we will instruct CBP to suspend liquidation and require a cash deposit equal to the weightedaverage amount by which normal value exceeds U.S. price, as indicated in the chart above, as follows: (1) The rate for FEESA, when adjusted for export subsidies, is 40.33 percent; (2) the rate for the GAM Group, when adjusted for export subsidies, is 41.97 percent; (3) if the exporter is not a firm identified in this investigation, but the producer is, then the rate will be the rate established for the producer of the subject merchandise; (4) the rate for all other producers or exporters, when adjusted for export subsidies, will be 40.59 percent. injury does not exist, the AD Suspension Agreement shall have no force or effect, and the investigation shall be terminated.14 If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the AD Suspension Agreement shall remain in force but the Department shall not issue an antidumping order so long as (1) the AD Suspension Agreement remains in force, (2) the AD Suspension Agreement continues to meet the requirements of subsections (c) and (d) of the Act, and (3) the parties to the AD Suspension Agreement carry out their obligations under the AD Suspension Agreement in accordance with its terms.15 International Trade Commission Notification Dated: September 16, 2015. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our final determination. Because our final determination is affirmative, the ITC will, within 45 days, determine whether these imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the U.S. industry. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material Subsidy Responses of the GAM Group in the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations of Sugar from Mexico,’’ both dated March 31, 2015. 12 For more detail on this calculation, see Memorandum to the File regarding ‘‘Antidumping PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information This notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return/ destruction or 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 this determination and notice in accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the Act. Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation The product covered by this investigation is raw and refined sugar of all polarimeter readings derived from sugar cane or sugar beets. The chemical sucrose gives sugar its essential character. Sucrose is a nonreducing disaccharide composed of glucose and Duty Investigation of Sugar from Mexico: Final Determination Calculation for the ‘‘All-Others’’ Rate,’’ dated September 16, 2015. 13 See section 734(f)(3)(B) of the Act. 14 See section 734(f)(3)(A) of the Act. 15 See section 734(f)(3)(B) of the Act. E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM 23SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 184 / Wednesday, September 23, 2015 / Notices mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES fructose linked by a glycosidic bond via their anomeric carbons. The molecular formula for sucrose is C12H22O11; the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) International Chemical Identifier (InChI) for sucrose is 1S/C12H22O11/c13-1-46(16)8(18)9(19)11(21-4)23-12(315)10(20)7(17)5(2-14)22-12/h4-11,13-20H,13H2/t4-,5-,6-,7-,8+,9-,10+,11-,12+/m1/s1; the InChI Key for sucrose is CZMRCDWAGMRECN–UGDNZRGBSA–N; the U.S. National Institutes of Health PubChem Compound Identifier (CID) for sucrose is 5988; and the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Number of sucrose is 57-50-1. Sugar described in the previous paragraph includes products of all polarimeter readings described in various forms, such as raw sugar, estandar or standard sugar, high polarity or semi-refined sugar, special white sugar, refined sugar, brown sugar, edible molasses, desugaring molasses, organic raw sugar, and organic refined sugar. Other sugar products, such as powdered sugar, colored sugar, flavored sugar, and liquids and syrups that contain 95 percent or more sugar by dry weight are also within the scope of this investigation. The scope of the investigation does not include (1) sugar imported under the Refined Sugar Re-Export Programs of the U.S. Department of Agriculture; 16 (2) sugar products produced in Mexico that contain 95 percent or more sugar by dry weight that originated outside of Mexico; (3) inedible molasses (other than inedible desugaring molasses noted above); (4) beverages; (5) candy; (6) certain specialty sugars; and (7) processed food products that contain sugar (e.g., cereals). Specialty sugars excluded from the scope of this investigation are limited to the following: caramelized slab sugar candy, pearl sugar, rock candy, dragees for cooking and baking, fondant, golden syrup, and sugar decorations. Merchandise covered by this investigation is typically imported under the following headings of the HTSUS: 1701.12.1000, 1701.12.5000, 1701.13.1000, 1701.13.5000, 1701.14.1000, 1701.14.5000, 1701.91.1000, 1701.91.3000, 1701.99.1010, 1701.99.1025, 1701.99.1050, 1701.99.5010, 1701.99.5025, 1701.99.5050, 1702.90.4000 and 1703.10.3000. The tariff classification is provided for convenience and customs purposes; however, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive. Appendix II—List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope Comments IV. Scope of the Investigation V. Margin Calculations VI. Discussion of the Issues 1. Imperial and AmCane’s Standing to Request Continuation of the Investigation 2. Use of Revised Scope for Final Determination 16 This exclusion applies to sugar imported under the Refined Sugar Re-Export Program, the SugarContaining Products Re-Export Program, and the Polyhydric Alcohol Program administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 22, 2015 Jkt 235001 3. Selection of FEESA as a Mandatory Respondent 4. Treatment of Certain FEESA Employee Expenses 5. FEESA’s G&A and Financial Expenses Denominator 6. FEESA’s Sales and Cost Verification Minor Corrections 7. FEESA Cost Changes Based on Verification Information 8. FEESA’s Depreciation Expenses 9. Calculation of the GAM Group’s Electricity Expenses 10. Offsets for Sugar Mills’ Interest Income 11. Exclusion of Seedling Costs from ITLC’s Cost of Production 12. The GAM Group’s Final Sugar Cane Prices 13. Adjustments to Administrative Services Provided by ESOSA 14. Adjusting the GAM Group’s G&A for Certain Affiliated Company Costs Recommendation [FR Doc. 2015–24189 Filed 9–22–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648–XE205 Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act Provisions; American Eel Fishery National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of determination of noncompliance; declaration of a moratorium. AGENCY: In accordance with the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act (Act), NMFS, upon a delegation of authority from the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary), has determined that the State of Delaware has failed to carry out its responsibilities under the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s (Commission) Interstate Fishery Management Plan for American Eel (Plan) and that the measures Delaware has failed to implement and enforce are necessary for the conservation of the American eel resource. This determination is consistent with the findings of the Commission on August 6, 2015. Pursuant to the Act, a Federal moratorium on fishing, possession, and landing of all American eel is hereby declared and will be effective on March 18, 2016. The moratorium will be withdrawn by NMFS when Delaware is found to have come back into compliance with the Commission’s Plan for American Eel. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 57343 Effective March 18, 2016. Alan Risenhoover, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13362, Silver Spring, MD 20910. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Derek Orner, Fishery Management Specialist, NMFS Office of Sustainable Fisheries, (301) 427–8567. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: ADDRESSES: Non-Compliance Statutory Background The Atlantic Coastal Act, 16 U.S.C. 5101 et seq., sets forth a non-compliance review and determination process that is triggered when the Commission finds that a State has not implemented measures specified in an Interstate Fishery Management Plan (ISFMP) and refers that determination to the Secretary for review and potential concurrence. The Atlantic Coastal Act’s noncompliance process involves two stages of decision-making. In the first stage, the Secretary (delegated to the AA) must make two findings: (1) Whether the State in question has failed to carry out its responsibility under the Commission’s ISFMP; and if so (2) whether the measures that the State failed to implement and enforce are necessary for the conservation of the fishery in question. These initial findings must be made within 30 days after receipt of the Commission’s noncompliance referral and consequently, this first stage of decision-making is referred to as the 30-Day Determination. A positive 30-Day Determination triggers the second stage of Atlantic Coastal Act non-compliance decisionmaking, which occurs contemporaneous with the first decision. That is, if the AA determines non-compliance in the first stage, the Act mandates that a moratorium on fishing in State waters in the fishery in question occur. The timing of the moratorium, however, is at the discretion of the AA, so long as it is implemented within six (6) months of the 30-Day Determination. In other words, although the implementation of the moratorium is non-discretionary, the AA has the discretion to decide when the moratorium will be implemented subject to the Act’s six (6) month deadline. Commission Referral of NonCompliance On August 6, 2015, the Commission found that the State of Delaware is out of compliance with the Commission Plan. Specifically, the Commission found that Delaware has not implemented regulations that are necessary to rebuild the depleted E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM 23SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 184 (Wednesday, September 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57341-57343]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-24189]



[[Page 57341]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-201-845]


Sugar From Mexico: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that 
imports of sugar from Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in 
the United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in 
section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The period 
of investigation is January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013. The 
final weighted-average dumping margins are listed below in the section 
entitled ``Final Determination Margins.''

DATES: Effective Date: September 23, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Lindgren, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
3870.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On November 3, 2014, the Department published in the Federal 
Register the Preliminary Determination of sales at LTFV in the 
antidumping duty investigation of sugar from Mexico.\1\ The following 
events occurred since the Preliminary Determination was issued. Between 
December 3 and 16, 2014, we conducted sales and cost verifications of 
the two respondents in this investigation, FEESA \2\ and the GAM 
Group.\3\ The verification reports were issued between January 29 and 
March 31, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Sugar From Mexico: Preliminary Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 79 FR 
65189 (November 3, 2014) (Preliminary Determination).
    \2\ Fondo de Empresas Expropiadas del Sector Azucarero (FEESA) 
consists of FEESA and the following sugar mills: Fideicomiso Ingenio 
El Modelo, Fideicomiso Ingenio San Cristobal, Fideicomiso Ingenio 
Plan De San Luis, Fideicomiso Ingenio San Miguelito, Fideicomiso 
Ingenio La Providencia, Fideicomiso Ingenio Atencingo, Fideicomiso 
Ingenio Casasano, Fideicomiso Ingenio El Potrero, and Fideicomiso 
Ingenio Emiliano Zapata.
    \3\ The GAM Group consists of the following sugar mills: Ingenio 
Tala S.A. de C.V.; Ingenio El Dorado S.A. de C.V.; and Ingenio 
Lazaro Cardenas S.A. de C.V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 19, 2014, the Department and a representative of the 
producers/exporters accounting for substantially all imports of sugar 
from Mexico, the Camara Nacional de Las Industrias Azucarera y 
Alcoholera, signed a suspension agreement in this investigation.\4\ On 
January 8, 2015, Imperial Sugar (Imperial) and AmCane Sugar LLC 
(AmCane) each notified the Department that they had petitioned the 
International Trade Commission (ITC) to conduct a review to determine 
whether the injurious effects of the imports of the subject merchandise 
are eliminated completely by the AD Suspension Agreement (a section 
734(h) review).\5\ Additionally, on January 16, 2015, AmCane and 
Imperial submitted timely requests for the continuation of the instant 
investigation.\6\ On March 19, 2015, in a unanimous vote, the ITC found 
that the AD Suspension Agreement eliminated completely the injurious 
effects of imports of sugar from Mexico. On the same day, the 
Department announced that it would issue a decision regarding 
continuation of the investigations promptly after the ITC made its 
views and findings available.\7\ On March 24, 2015, the ITC notified 
the Department of its determination, and on April 10, 2015, provided a 
report of its views and findings to the Department.\8\ Subsequently, on 
April 24, 2015, the Department determined that AmCane and Imperial had 
standing to request continuation of this investigation and, as a 
result, published a continuation notice on May 4, 2015.\9\ Accordingly, 
on May 4, 2015, the Department announced the briefing schedule. 
Consistent with the schedule, case briefs were filed on May 29, 2015, 
and rebuttal briefs on June 12, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Sugar From Mexico: Suspension of Antidumping 
Investigation, 79 FR 78093 (December 29, 2014) (AD Suspension 
Agreement).
    \5\ See Sugar From Mexico: Continuation of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Investigations, 80 FR 25278, 25279 (May 4, 2015) 
(Continuation Notice).
    \6\ Id.
    \7\ See Continuation Notice, 80 FR at 25280.
    \8\ Id.
    \9\ See Memorandum to the Files regarding ``Standing of Imperial 
Sugar and AmCane Sugar to Request Continuation of the AD and CVD 
Investigations on Sugar from Mexico,'' dated April 24, 2015; see 
also Continuation Notice, 80 FR at 25278.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is sugar from Mexico. 
Since the Preliminary Determination, the Department has updated the 
scope of the investigation. For a discussion of these changes, see 
``Scope Comments'' section of the Issues and Decision Memorandum \10\ 
and, for a complete description of the scope of the investigation, see 
Appendix I to this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Memorandum to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant 
Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance from Christian Marsh, 
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final 
Affirmative Determination in the Less than Fair Value Investigation 
of Sugar from Mexico'' (Issues and Decision Memorandum), which is 
dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in 
this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, 
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues raised is 
attached to this notice as Appendix II. The Issues and Decision 
Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via 
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to 
registered users at http://access.trade.gov and it is available to all 
parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department 
of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed and electronic versions of the 
Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at 
verification, we made certain changes to the margin calculations. For a 
discussion of these changes, see the ``Margin Calculations'' section of 
the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in December, 2014, we 
verified the sales and cost information submitted by FEESA and the GAM 
Group for use in our final determination. We used standard verification 
procedures including an examination of relevant accounting and 
production records, and original source documents provided by the two 
respondents.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Memorandum to the File regarding ``Verification of the 
Cost Response of Ingenio Tala de C.V. and its affiliates Ingenio 
Lazaro Cardenas S.A. de C. V. and Ingenio El Dorado S.A. de C. V. in 
the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Sugar from Mexico,'' dated 
January 29, 2015; see also Memorandum to the File regarding 
``Verification of the Cost Response of Fondo de Empresas Expropiadas 
del Sector Azucarero in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of 
Sugar from Mexico,'' dated January 30, 2015; Memoranda to the File 
regarding ``Verification of the Sales and Subsidy Responses of FEESA 
in the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations of Sugar 
from Mexico,'' and ``Verification of the Sales and Subsidy Responses 
of the GAM Group in the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Investigations of Sugar from Mexico,'' both dated March 31, 2015.

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

[[Page 57342]]

Final Determination Margins

    The weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Weighted-average
                  Exporter/Producer                      dumping margin
                                                              (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEESA................................................              40.48
Ingenio Tala S.A. de C.V. and certain affiliated                   42.14
 sugar mills of Grupo Azucarero Mexico S.A. de C.V.
 (collectively, the GAM Group).......................
All-Others...........................................              40.74
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated ``all-
others'' rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the 
estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters 
and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero or de 
minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 
of the Act. As we calculated weighted-average dumping margins for both 
mandatory respondents that are above de minimis and which are not based 
on total facts available, they are the basis for the ``all others'' 
rate. However, a weighted average would reveal proprietary information 
regarding the respondents' sales information. As such, we have 
calculated the weighted-average ``all others'' rate by relying on 
publicly-ranged information reported by FEESA and the GAM Group.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For more detail on this calculation, see Memorandum to the 
File regarding ``Antidumping Duty Investigation of Sugar from 
Mexico: Final Determination Calculation for the ``All-Others'' 
Rate,'' dated September 16, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of any 
public announcement of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.224(b).

Termination of Suspension of Liquidation

    As noted above, on December 19, 2014, the Department signed the AD 
Suspension Agreement. Pursuant to section 734(h)(3) of the Act, 
suspension of liquidation ordered in the Preliminary Determination 
continued to be in effect pending the ITC's section 734(h) review. 
Following the ITC's affirmative determination, i.e., that the AD 
Suspension Agreement completely eliminated the injurious effects of 
imports of sugar from Mexico, on March 27, 2015, the Department, in 
accordance with section 734(h)(3) of the Act, instructed U.S. Customs 
and Border Protection (CBP) to terminate the suspension of liquidation 
of all entries of sugar from Mexico and refund all cash deposits. 
Pursuant to the requests for continuation discussed above, we have 
continued and completed the investigation in accordance with section 
734(g) of the Act. We found the antidumping duty margins noted above in 
the ``Final Determination Margins'' section.
    The Department will not instruct CBP to suspend liquidation or 
collect cash deposits calculated herein unless the AD Suspension 
Agreement is terminated and the Department issues an antidumping duty 
order.\13\ In the event that Department issues an order, consistent 
with sections 735(c)(1) and 736(a) of the Act, as well as 19 CFR 
351.210(d) and 351.211, we will instruct CBP to suspend liquidation and 
require a cash deposit equal to the weighted-average amount by which 
normal value exceeds U.S. price, as indicated in the chart above, as 
follows: (1) The rate for FEESA, when adjusted for export subsidies, is 
40.33 percent; (2) the rate for the GAM Group, when adjusted for export 
subsidies, is 41.97 percent; (3) if the exporter is not a firm 
identified in this investigation, but the producer is, then the rate 
will be the rate established for the producer of the subject 
merchandise; (4) the rate for all other producers or exporters, when 
adjusted for export subsidies, will be 40.59 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See section 734(f)(3)(B) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the 
ITC of our final determination. Because our final determination is 
affirmative, the ITC will, within 45 days, determine whether these 
imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the 
U.S. industry. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of 
material injury does not exist, the AD Suspension Agreement shall have 
no force or effect, and the investigation shall be terminated.\14\ If 
the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the AD Suspension 
Agreement shall remain in force but the Department shall not issue an 
antidumping order so long as (1) the AD Suspension Agreement remains in 
force, (2) the AD Suspension Agreement continues to meet the 
requirements of subsections (c) and (d) of the Act, and (3) the parties 
to the AD Suspension Agreement carry out their obligations under the AD 
Suspension Agreement in accordance with its terms.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See section 734(f)(3)(A) of the Act.
    \15\ See section 734(f)(3)(B) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    This notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written 
notification of return/destruction or 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 this determination and notice in 
accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: September 16, 2015.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I--Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is raw and refined 
sugar of all polarimeter readings derived from sugar cane or sugar 
beets. The chemical sucrose gives sugar its essential character. 
Sucrose is a nonreducing disaccharide composed of glucose and

[[Page 57343]]

fructose linked by a glycosidic bond via their anomeric carbons. The 
molecular formula for sucrose is 
C12H22O11; the International Union 
of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) International Chemical 
Identifier (InChI) for sucrose is 1S/C12H22O11/c13-1-4-
6(16)8(18)9(19)11(21-4)23-12(3-15)10(20)7(17)5(2-14)22-12/h4-11,13-
20H,1-3H2/t4-,5-,6-,7-,8+,9-,10+,11-,12+/m1/s1; the InChI Key for 
sucrose is CZMRCDWAGMRECN-UGDNZRGBSA-N; the U.S. National Institutes 
of Health PubChem Compound Identifier (CID) for sucrose is 5988; and 
the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Number of sucrose is 57-50-1.
    Sugar described in the previous paragraph includes products of 
all polarimeter readings described in various forms, such as raw 
sugar, estandar or standard sugar, high polarity or semi-refined 
sugar, special white sugar, refined sugar, brown sugar, edible 
molasses, desugaring molasses, organic raw sugar, and organic 
refined sugar. Other sugar products, such as powdered sugar, colored 
sugar, flavored sugar, and liquids and syrups that contain 95 
percent or more sugar by dry weight are also within the scope of 
this investigation.
    The scope of the investigation does not include (1) sugar 
imported under the Refined Sugar Re-Export Programs of the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture; \16\ (2) sugar products produced in 
Mexico that contain 95 percent or more sugar by dry weight that 
originated outside of Mexico; (3) inedible molasses (other than 
inedible desugaring molasses noted above); (4) beverages; (5) candy; 
(6) certain specialty sugars; and (7) processed food products that 
contain sugar (e.g., cereals). Specialty sugars excluded from the 
scope of this investigation are limited to the following: 
caramelized slab sugar candy, pearl sugar, rock candy, dragees for 
cooking and baking, fondant, golden syrup, and sugar decorations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ This exclusion applies to sugar imported under the Refined 
Sugar Re-Export Program, the Sugar-Containing Products Re-Export 
Program, and the Polyhydric Alcohol Program administered by the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Merchandise covered by this investigation is typically imported 
under the following headings of the HTSUS: 1701.12.1000, 
1701.12.5000, 1701.13.1000, 1701.13.5000, 1701.14.1000, 
1701.14.5000, 1701.91.1000, 1701.91.3000, 1701.99.1010, 
1701.99.1025, 1701.99.1050, 1701.99.5010, 1701.99.5025, 
1701.99.5050, 1702.90.4000 and 1703.10.3000. The tariff 
classification is provided for convenience and customs purposes; 
however, the written description of the scope of this investigation 
is dispositive.

Appendix II--List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope Comments
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. Margin Calculations
VI. Discussion of the Issues
    1. Imperial and AmCane's Standing to Request Continuation of the 
Investigation
    2. Use of Revised Scope for Final Determination
    3. Selection of FEESA as a Mandatory Respondent
    4. Treatment of Certain FEESA Employee Expenses
    5. FEESA's G&A and Financial Expenses Denominator
    6. FEESA's Sales and Cost Verification Minor Corrections
    7. FEESA Cost Changes Based on Verification Information
    8. FEESA's Depreciation Expenses
    9. Calculation of the GAM Group's Electricity Expenses
    10. Offsets for Sugar Mills' Interest Income
    11. Exclusion of Seedling Costs from ITLC's Cost of Production
    12. The GAM Group's Final Sugar Cane Prices
    13. Adjustments to Administrative Services Provided by ESOSA
    14. Adjusting the GAM Group's G&A for Certain Affiliated Company 
Costs Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2015-24189 Filed 9-22-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P