Suspension Agreement on Sugar From Mexico; Administrative Review of the Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty Investigation on Sugar From Mexico, 87539-87541 [2016-29075]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 233 / Monday, December 5, 2016 / Notices
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
confidentiality, latency, and
consistency;
—Opportunities and risks related to the
combination of public and private
data sources and the development of
joint data products and services
resulting from public-private
partnerships;
—External uses of Commerce data and
similar federal, state, and private data
sets by businesses; and,
—Methods to enhance communication
and collaboration between
stakeholders and subject-matter
experts at Commerce on data access
and use.
The Council meets up to four times a
year, budget permitting. Special
meetings may be called when
appropriate.
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. Appendix 2), which sets forth
standards for the formation and use of
advisory committees, is the governing
instrument for the CDAC.
III. Membership
1. The Council shall consist of up to
20 members.
2. The Secretary shall select and
appoint members and members shall
serve at the pleasure of the Secretary.
3. Members shall represent a crosssection of business, academic, nonprofit, and non-governmental
organizations.
4. The Secretary will choose members
of the Council who ensure objectivity
and balance, a diversity of perspectives,
and guard against potential for conflicts
of interest.
5. Members shall be prominent
experts in their fields, recognized for
their professional and other relevant
achievements and their objectivity.
6. In order to ensure the continuity of
the Commerce Data Advisory Council,
the Council shall be appointed so that
each year the terms expire of
approximately one-third of the members
of the Council.
7. Council members serve for terms of
two years and may be reappointed to
any number of additional terms. Initial
appointments may be for 12-, 18- and
24-month increments to provide
staggered terms.
8. Nominees must be able to actively
participate in the tasks of the Council,
including, but not limited to regular
meeting attendance, Council meeting
discussant responsibilities, and review
of materials, as well as participation in
conference calls, webinars, working
groups, and special Council activities.
9. Should a council member be unable
to complete a two-year term and when
vacancies occur, the Secretary will
select replacements who can best either
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:12 Dec 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
replicate the expertise of the departing
member or provide the CDAC with a
new, identified needed area of expertise.
An individual chosen to fill a vacancy
shall be appointed for the remainder of
the term of the member replaced or for
a two-year term as deemed. A vacancy
shall not affect the exercise of any
power of the remaining members to
execute the duties of the Council.
10. No employee of the federal
government can serve as a member of
the Census Scientific Advisory
Committee.
All members of the Commerce Data
Advisory Council shall adhere to the
conflict of interest rules applicable to
Special Government Employees as such
employees are defined in 18 U.S.C.
202(a). These rules include relevant
provisions in 18 U.S.C. related to
criminal activity, Standards of Ethical
Conduct for Employees of the Executive
Branch (5 CFR part 2635), and Executive
Order 12674 (as modified by Executive
Order 12731).
IV. Compensation
1. Membership is under voluntary
circumstances and therefore members
do not receive compensation for service
on the Commerce Data Advisory
Council.
2. Members shall receive per diem
and travel expenses as authorized by 5
U.S.C. 5703, as amended, for persons
employed intermittently in the
Government service.
V. Nominations Information
The Secretary will consider
nominations of all qualified individuals
to ensure that the CDAC includes the
areas of subject matter expertise noted
above (see ’’Background and
Membership’’). Individuals may
nominate themselves or other
individuals, and professional
associations and organizations may
nominate one or more qualified persons
for membership on the CDAC.
Nominations shall state that the
nominee is willing to serve as a member
of the Council. A nomination package
should include the following
information for each nominee:
1. A letter of nomination stating the
name, affiliation, and contact
information for the nominee, the basis
for the nomination (i.e., what specific
attributes recommend him/her for
service in this capacity), and the
nominee’s field(s) of expertise;
2. A biographical sketch of the
nominee and a copy of his/her resume
or curriculum vitae; and
3. The name, return address, email
address, and daytime telephone number
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
87539
at which the nominator can be
contacted.
The Department of Commerce is
committed to equal opportunity in the
workplace and seeks diverse Committee
membership. The Department has
special interest in assuring that women,
minority groups, and the physically
disabled are adequately represented on
advisory committees; and therefore,
extends particular encouragement to
nominations for appropriately qualified
female, minority, or disabled
candidates. The Department of
Commerce also encourages geographic
diversity in the composition of the
Council. All nomination information
should be provided in a single,
complete package and received by the
stated deadline, December 16, 2016.
Interested applicants should send their
nomination package to the email or
postal address provided above.
Potential candidates will be asked to
provide detailed information concerning
financial interests, consultancies,
research grants, and/or contracts that
might be affected by recommendations
of the Council to permit evaluation of
possible sources of conflicts of interest.
Finally, nominees will be required to
certify that they are not subject to the
Foreign Agents Registration Act (22
U.S.C. 611) or the Lobbying Disclosure
Act (2 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.).
Dated: November 28, 2016.
Burton Reist,
Director of External Affairs, Economics and
Statistics Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016–29037 Filed 12–2–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–201–846]
Suspension Agreement on Sugar From
Mexico; Administrative Review of the
Agreement Suspending the
Countervailing Duty Investigation on
Sugar From Mexico
Enforcement & Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective December 5, 2016.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the Agreement
Suspending the Countervailing Duty
Investigation of Sugar from Mexico (the
CVD Agreement) for the period
December 19, 2014, through December
31, 2015 (CVD review). Based upon the
current record of this review, there is
some indication that certain individual
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
87540
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 233 / Monday, December 5, 2016 / Notices
transactions of subject merchandise may
not be in compliance with the CVD
Agreement, and further, that the CVD
Agreement may no longer be meeting all
of the statutory requirements, as set
forth in sections 704(c) and (d) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
The Department, therefore, needs to
obtain additional information in order
to confirm whether the Government of
Mexico (GOM)—the signatory to the
CVD Agreement—is in compliance with
the terms of the CVD Agreement, and
whether the current CVD Agreement
continues to meet the relevant statutory
requirements referenced above. The
preliminary results are set forth in the
section titled ‘‘Methodology and
Preliminary Results,’’ infra. Absent the
issuance of a revised suspension
agreement, we intend to issue a postpreliminary finding on these issues as
soon as practicable. In addition, we
expect to issue the final results of
review within 120 days after publication
of these preliminary results in the
Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sally C. Gannon or David Cordell,
Enforcement & Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202)
482–0162 or (202) 482–0408.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
investigation on sugar from Mexico.2 On
January 8, 2015, Imperial Sugar
Company (Imperial) and AmCane Sugar
LLC (AmCane) each notified the
Department that they had petitioned the
U.S. International Trade Commission
(the ITC) to conduct a review to
determine whether the injurious effects
of imports of the subject merchandise
are eliminated completely by the CVD
Agreement (a section 704(h) review).3
On January 16, 2015, Imperial and
AmCane also submitted timely requests
for continuation of the CVD
investigation.4 On March 19, 2015, in a
unanimous vote, the ITC found that the
CVD Agreement eliminates completely
the injurious effects of imports of sugar
from Mexico.5 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, 2015.6
On September 23, 2015, the Department
issued a final affirmative determination
in the CVD investigation.7 On November
16, 2015, the ITC published its final
affirmative finding that an industry in
the United States is materially injured
by reason of imports of sugar from
Mexico found to be subsidized by the
GOM.8 Because the ITC determined that
such injury did exist, consistent with
section 704(f)(3)(B) of the Act, the CVD
Agreement remained in force.9
Scope of Review
2 See Agreement Suspending the Countervailing
Duty Investigation on Sugar from Mexico, 79 FR
78044 (December 29, 2014), at Attachment,
‘‘Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty
Investigation on Sugar from Mexico’’ (the CVD
Agreement).
3 See Letter from Imperial, ‘‘Sugar from Mexico—
Notice of Filing of Petition for Review of
Suspension Agreements to Eliminate the Injurious
Effect of Subject Imports,’’ January 8, 2015; see also
Letter from AmCane, ‘‘Sugar from Mexico: Notice
of Petition for Review of Suspension Agreements,’’
January 8, 2015.
4 See Letter from Imperial, ‘‘Sugar from Mexico,
Inv. Nos. A–201–845 and C–201–846—Request for
Continuation of Investigations,’’ January 16, 2015;
see also Letter from AmCane, ‘‘Sugar from Mexico:
Request for Continuation of Investigations,’’ January
16, 2015.
5 See Department Memorandum, ‘‘Requests to
Continue the Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Investigations on Sugar from Mexico,’’ March
19, 2015.
6 See id.
7 See Sugar from Mexico: Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination, 80 FR 57337
(September 23, 2015).
8 See Sugar from Mexico (Investigation Nos. 701–
TA–513 and 731–TA–1249 (Final)), 80 FR 70833
(November 16, 2015).
9 See Final CVD Determination, 80 FR at 57339.
Pursuant to section 704(f)(3)(B) of the Act, the CVD
Agreement remains in force and the Department
shall not issue an countervailing order so long as
(i) the CVD Suspension Agreement remains in force,
(ii) the CVD Suspension Agreement continues to
meet the requirements of subsections 704(c) and
704(d) of the Act, and (iii) the parties to the CVD
Merchandise covered by this CVD
Agreement 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, and
1702.90.4000. The tariff classification is
provided for convenience and customs
purposes; however, the written
description of the scope of this CVD
Agreement is dispositive.1
Methodology and Preliminary Results
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
On December 19, 2014, the
Department signed an agreement under
section 704(c) of the Act, with the GOM,
suspending the countervailing duty
1 For a complete description of the Scope of the
Order, see Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, from
Carole Showers, Director, Office of Policy,
‘‘Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Results of
Administrative Review of the Agreement
Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation on
Sugar from Mexico,’’ dated concurrently with and
adopted by this notice (‘‘Preliminary Decision
Memorandum’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:12 Dec 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
On December 30, 2015, Imperial and
AmCane submitted requests for an
administrative review of the CVD
Agreement.10 On December 31, 2015,
the American Sugar Coalition and its
Members 11 (Petitioners) filed a request
for an administrative review of the CVD
Agreement.12
The review of the CVD Agreement
was initiated on February 9, 2015,13 for
the December 19, 2014 through
December 31, 2014, period of review
(POR) but was extended on March 16,
2016, to include calendar year 2015.14
On June 2, 2016, the Department
selected mandatory respondents 15 and
issued its questionnaire to the GOM, the
signatory to the CVD Agreement, and
asked the GOM to send full
questionnaires (Attachment 2) to two
companies (and their respective
affiliates): Central Motzorongo S.A. de
C.V. (Motzorongo) and Fideicomiso
Ingenio San Cristobal (San Cristobal).
The Department also asked that the
GOM forward a more limited
questionnaire (Attachment 1) to all
Mexican producers and exporters of
sugar to whom the GOM issued an
export license in the POR.16
Suspension Agreement carry out their obligations
under the CVD Suspension Agreement in
accordance with its terms.
10 See Letter from Imperial, ‘‘Sugar from Mexico,
Inv. No. C–201–846—Request for Administrative
Review of the Agreement Suspending the
Countervailing Duty Investigation,’’ December 30,
2015; Letter from AmCane, ‘‘Sugar from Mexico:
Request for Administrative Reviews,’’ December 30,
2015.
11 The members of the American Sugar Coalition
are as follows: American Sugar Cane League,
American Sugarbeet Growers Association,
American Sugar Refining, Inc., Florida Sugar Cane
League, Hawaiian Commercial and Sugar Company,
Rio Grande Valley Sugar Growers, Inc., Sugar Cane
Growers Cooperative of Florida, and the United
States Beet Sugar Association.
12 See Letter from American Sugar Coalition and
its Members, ‘‘Sugar from Mexico: Request for
Administrative Review,’’ December 31, 2015.
13 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR
6832 (February 9, 2016).
14 On March 16, 2016, the Department expanded
the period of review for the CVD Agreement from
December 19, 2014, through December 31, 2014, to
include calendar year 2015. As such, the period of
review for the instant review is December 19, 2014,
through December 31, 2015. See Memorandum to
Lynn Fischer Fox entitled ‘‘First Administrative
Review of the Agreement Suspending the
Countervailing Duty Investigation on Sugar from
Mexico: Extending the Period of Review’’ (March
16, 2016).
15 See Department Memorandum, ‘‘First
Administrative Review of the Agreement
Suspending the Countervailing Duty Investigation
on Sugar from Mexico: Questionnaire Issuance,’’
June 2, 2016.
16 See Questionnaire Regarding the Agreement
Suspending the Countervailing Duty Investigation
on Sugar from Mexico for the December 19, 2014
through December 31, 2015 Period of Review, dated
June 2, 2016.
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 233 / Monday, December 5, 2016 / Notices
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
The Department has conducted this
review in accordance with section
751(a)(1)(C) of the Act, which specifies
that the Department shall ‘‘review the
current status of, and compliance with,
any agreement by reason of which an
investigation was suspended.’’ Pursuant
to the CVD Agreement, the GOM agreed
that the subject merchandise would be
subject to export limits as outlined in
the CVD Agreement.17 The Government
also agreed to other conditions
including limits on Refined Sugar 18 and
the issuance of shipment-specific export
licenses.19 In addition, in this review,
the Department is reassessing whether
suspension of the CVD Agreement is in
the ‘‘public interest,’’ including the
availability of supplies of sugar in the
U.S. market, and whether ‘‘effective
monitoring’’ is practicable.20
After reviewing the information
received to date from the respondent
companies in their questionnaire
responses, there is some indication that
certain individual transactions of
subject merchandise may not be in
compliance with the CVD Agreement
and that the CVD Agreement may no
longer be meeting all of the statutory
requirements, as set forth in sections
704(c) and (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930
(the Act). However, based on the
Department’s review to date of the
record information, we do not yet find
a sufficient basis to make a reliable
judgment as to whether the GOM and
the Mexican respondent mills have
adhered to the terms of the CVD
Agreement and whether the CVD
Agreement continues to meet the
relevant requirements of the Act for
such agreements. As detailed above, the
Department found it necessary, late in
the review, to seek additional
information, i.e., in supplemental
questionnaires issued to the GOM and
to its two selected mill respondents on
November 18, 2016, in order to reach a
determination as to whether the
Agreement is functioning as intended, is
in the public interest and whether it can
be effectively monitored. For a full
description of the methodology
underlying our conclusions, see
Preliminary Decision Memorandum,
dated concurrently with these results
and hereby adopted by this notice. The
17 See Agreement, 79 FR 78040, 78047 at Export
Limits.
18 See id., 79 FR 78046–78047 at Definitions and
Export Limits.
19 See id., 79 FR 78048 at Export Limits and
Implementation.
20 See Memorandum to Paul Piquado entitled
‘‘Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty
Investigation on Sugar from Mexico: Existence of
Extraordinary Circumstances, Public Interest, and
Effective Monitoring Assessments) (December 19,
2014) at pages 3–5.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:12 Dec 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a
public document and is made available
via Enforcement & Compliance’s
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System
(ACCESS). ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://
access.trade.gov and in the
Department’s Central Records Unit,
located in Room 18022 of the main
Department of Commerce building. In
addition, a complete version of the
Preliminary Decision Memorandum can
be found on the Internet at https://
www.trade.gov/enforcement. The signed
Preliminary Decision Memorandum and
the electronic version of the Preliminary
Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Public Comment
As discussed above, the Department
needs additional information before
making a definitive preliminary finding.
Therefore, absent the issuance of a
revised suspension agreement, we
intend to issue our post-preliminary
finding on these issues as soon as
practicable. The comment period on
these preliminary results as well as the
post-preliminary results will be stated
with the release of the post-preliminary
results. At that time interested parties
will have the opportunity to submit case
and rebuttal briefs.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c),
interested parties who wish to request a
hearing, or to participate if one is
requested, must submit a written
request to the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance, filed
electronically via ACCESS. An
electronically filed document must be
received successfully in its entirety by
the Department’s electronic records
system, ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern
Time within 30 days after the date of the
issuance of the post-preliminary results.
Requests should contain: (1) The party’s
name, address and telephone number;
(2) the number of participants; and (3)
a list of issues to be discussed. Issues
raised in the hearing will be limited to
those raised in the respective case
briefs. The Department intends to issue
the final results of this administrative
review, including the results of its
analysis of the issues raised in any
written briefs, not later than 120 days
after the date of publication of this
notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A)
of the Act.
We are issuing and publishing these
results in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
87541
Dated: November 29, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016–29075 Filed 12–2–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–201–845]
Antidumping Duty Suspension
Agreement on Sugar From Mexico;
Administrative Review
Enforcement & Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the Agreement
Suspending the Antidumping Duty
Investigation of Sugar from Mexico (the
AD Agreement) for the period December
19, 2014, through November 30, 2015
(AD review). Based upon the current
record of this review, there is some
indication that certain individual
transactions of subject merchandise may
not be in compliance with the terms of
the AD Agreement, and further, that the
AD Agreement may no longer be
meeting all of the statutory
requirements, as set forth in sections
734(c) and (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act). The Department,
therefore, needs to obtain additional
information in order to confirm whether
the Mexican signatories subject to
individual examination in this review
are in compliance with the terms of the
AD Agreement, and whether the current
AD Agreement continues to meet the
relevant statutory requirements
referenced above. The preliminary
results are set forth in the section titled
‘‘Methodology and Preliminary
Results,’’ infra. Absent the issuance of a
revised suspension agreement, we
intend to issue a post-preliminary
finding addressing these issues as soon
as practicable. In addition, we expect to
issue the final results of review within
120 days after publication of these
preliminary results in the Federal
Register.
DATES: Effective December 5, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sally C. Gannon or Julie H. Santoboni,
Enforcement & Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202)
482–0162 or (202) 482–3063.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 233 (Monday, December 5, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 87539-87541]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29075]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-201-846]
Suspension Agreement on Sugar From Mexico; Administrative Review
of the Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty Investigation on
Sugar From Mexico
AGENCY: Enforcement & Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective December 5, 2016.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the Agreement Suspending the Countervailing
Duty Investigation of Sugar from Mexico (the CVD Agreement) for the
period December 19, 2014, through December 31, 2015 (CVD review). Based
upon the current record of this review, there is some indication that
certain individual
[[Page 87540]]
transactions of subject merchandise may not be in compliance with the
CVD Agreement, and further, that the CVD Agreement may no longer be
meeting all of the statutory requirements, as set forth in sections
704(c) and (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The
Department, therefore, needs to obtain additional information in order
to confirm whether the Government of Mexico (GOM)--the signatory to the
CVD Agreement--is in compliance with the terms of the CVD Agreement,
and whether the current CVD Agreement continues to meet the relevant
statutory requirements referenced above. The preliminary results are
set forth in the section titled ``Methodology and Preliminary
Results,'' infra. Absent the issuance of a revised suspension
agreement, we intend to issue a post-preliminary finding on these
issues as soon as practicable. In addition, we expect to issue the
final results of review within 120 days after publication of these
preliminary results in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sally C. Gannon or David Cordell,
Enforcement & Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-0162 or (202) 482-0408.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
Scope of Review
Merchandise covered by this CVD Agreement 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, and 1702.90.4000. The tariff classification
is provided for convenience and customs purposes; however, the written
description of the scope of this CVD Agreement is dispositive.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For a complete description of the Scope of the Order, see
Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance, from Carole Showers, Director, Office of Policy,
``Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Results of Administrative
Review of the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty
Investigation on Sugar from Mexico,'' dated concurrently with and
adopted by this notice (``Preliminary Decision Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methodology and Preliminary Results
On December 19, 2014, the Department signed an agreement under
section 704(c) of the Act, with the GOM, suspending the countervailing
duty investigation on sugar from Mexico.\2\ On January 8, 2015,
Imperial Sugar Company (Imperial) and AmCane Sugar LLC (AmCane) each
notified the Department that they had petitioned the U.S. International
Trade Commission (the ITC) to conduct a review to determine whether the
injurious effects of imports of the subject merchandise are eliminated
completely by the CVD Agreement (a section 704(h) review).\3\ On
January 16, 2015, Imperial and AmCane also submitted timely requests
for continuation of the CVD investigation.\4\ On March 19, 2015, in a
unanimous vote, the ITC found that the CVD Agreement eliminates
completely the injurious effects of imports of sugar from Mexico.\5\
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.\6\ On
September 23, 2015, the Department issued a final affirmative
determination in the CVD investigation.\7\ On November 16, 2015, the
ITC published its final affirmative finding that an industry in the
United States is materially injured by reason of imports of sugar from
Mexico found to be subsidized by the GOM.\8\ Because the ITC determined
that such injury did exist, consistent with section 704(f)(3)(B) of the
Act, the CVD Agreement remained in force.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty
Investigation on Sugar from Mexico, 79 FR 78044 (December 29, 2014),
at Attachment, ``Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty
Investigation on Sugar from Mexico'' (the CVD Agreement).
\3\ See Letter from Imperial, ``Sugar from Mexico--Notice of
Filing of Petition for Review of Suspension Agreements to Eliminate
the Injurious Effect of Subject Imports,'' January 8, 2015; see also
Letter from AmCane, ``Sugar from Mexico: Notice of Petition for
Review of Suspension Agreements,'' January 8, 2015.
\4\ See Letter from Imperial, ``Sugar from Mexico, Inv. Nos. A-
201-845 and C-201-846--Request for Continuation of Investigations,''
January 16, 2015; see also Letter from AmCane, ``Sugar from Mexico:
Request for Continuation of Investigations,'' January 16, 2015.
\5\ See Department Memorandum, ``Requests to Continue the
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations on Sugar from
Mexico,'' March 19, 2015.
\6\ See id.
\7\ See Sugar from Mexico: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, 80 FR 57337 (September 23, 2015).
\8\ See Sugar from Mexico (Investigation Nos. 701-TA-513 and
731-TA-1249 (Final)), 80 FR 70833 (November 16, 2015).
\9\ See Final CVD Determination, 80 FR at 57339. Pursuant to
section 704(f)(3)(B) of the Act, the CVD Agreement remains in force
and the Department shall not issue an countervailing order so long
as (i) the CVD Suspension Agreement remains in force, (ii) the CVD
Suspension Agreement continues to meet the requirements of
subsections 704(c) and 704(d) of the Act, and (iii) the parties to
the CVD Suspension Agreement carry out their obligations under the
CVD Suspension Agreement in accordance with its terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 30, 2015, Imperial and AmCane submitted requests for an
administrative review of the CVD Agreement.\10\ On December 31, 2015,
the American Sugar Coalition and its Members \11\ (Petitioners) filed a
request for an administrative review of the CVD Agreement.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Letter from Imperial, ``Sugar from Mexico, Inv. No. C-
201-846--Request for Administrative Review of the Agreement
Suspending the Countervailing Duty Investigation,'' December 30,
2015; Letter from AmCane, ``Sugar from Mexico: Request for
Administrative Reviews,'' December 30, 2015.
\11\ The members of the American Sugar Coalition are as follows:
American Sugar Cane League, American Sugarbeet Growers Association,
American Sugar Refining, Inc., Florida Sugar Cane League, Hawaiian
Commercial and Sugar Company, Rio Grande Valley Sugar Growers, Inc.,
Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida, and the United States
Beet Sugar Association.
\12\ See Letter from American Sugar Coalition and its Members,
``Sugar from Mexico: Request for Administrative Review,'' December
31, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The review of the CVD Agreement was initiated on February 9,
2015,\13\ for the December 19, 2014 through December 31, 2014, period
of review (POR) but was extended on March 16, 2016, to include calendar
year 2015.\14\ On June 2, 2016, the Department selected mandatory
respondents \15\ and issued its questionnaire to the GOM, the signatory
to the CVD Agreement, and asked the GOM to send full questionnaires
(Attachment 2) to two companies (and their respective affiliates):
Central Motzorongo S.A. de C.V. (Motzorongo) and Fideicomiso Ingenio
San Cristobal (San Cristobal). The Department also asked that the GOM
forward a more limited questionnaire (Attachment 1) to all Mexican
producers and exporters of sugar to whom the GOM issued an export
license in the POR.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 6832 (February 9, 2016).
\14\ On March 16, 2016, the Department expanded the period of
review for the CVD Agreement from December 19, 2014, through
December 31, 2014, to include calendar year 2015. As such, the
period of review for the instant review is December 19, 2014,
through December 31, 2015. See Memorandum to Lynn Fischer Fox
entitled ``First Administrative Review of the Agreement Suspending
the Countervailing Duty Investigation on Sugar from Mexico:
Extending the Period of Review'' (March 16, 2016).
\15\ See Department Memorandum, ``First Administrative Review of
the Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty Investigation on
Sugar from Mexico: Questionnaire Issuance,'' June 2, 2016.
\16\ See Questionnaire Regarding the Agreement Suspending the
Countervailing Duty Investigation on Sugar from Mexico for the
December 19, 2014 through December 31, 2015 Period of Review, dated
June 2, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 87541]]
The Department has conducted this review in accordance with section
751(a)(1)(C) of the Act, which specifies that the Department shall
``review the current status of, and compliance with, any agreement by
reason of which an investigation was suspended.'' Pursuant to the CVD
Agreement, the GOM agreed that the subject merchandise would be subject
to export limits as outlined in the CVD Agreement.\17\ The Government
also agreed to other conditions including limits on Refined Sugar \18\
and the issuance of shipment-specific export licenses.\19\ In addition,
in this review, the Department is reassessing whether suspension of the
CVD Agreement is in the ``public interest,'' including the availability
of supplies of sugar in the U.S. market, and whether ``effective
monitoring'' is practicable.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Agreement, 79 FR 78040, 78047 at Export Limits.
\18\ See id., 79 FR 78046-78047 at Definitions and Export
Limits.
\19\ See id., 79 FR 78048 at Export Limits and Implementation.
\20\ See Memorandum to Paul Piquado entitled ``Agreement
Suspending the Countervailing Duty Investigation on Sugar from
Mexico: Existence of Extraordinary Circumstances, Public Interest,
and Effective Monitoring Assessments) (December 19, 2014) at pages
3-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After reviewing the information received to date from the
respondent companies in their questionnaire responses, there is some
indication that certain individual transactions of subject merchandise
may not be in compliance with the CVD Agreement and that the CVD
Agreement may no longer be meeting all of the statutory requirements,
as set forth in sections 704(c) and (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the
Act). However, based on the Department's review to date of the record
information, we do not yet find a sufficient basis to make a reliable
judgment as to whether the GOM and the Mexican respondent mills have
adhered to the terms of the CVD Agreement and whether the CVD Agreement
continues to meet the relevant requirements of the Act for such
agreements. As detailed above, the Department found it necessary, late
in the review, to seek additional information, i.e., in supplemental
questionnaires issued to the GOM and to its two selected mill
respondents on November 18, 2016, in order to reach a determination as
to whether the Agreement is functioning as intended, is in the public
interest and whether it can be effectively monitored. For a full
description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see
Preliminary Decision Memorandum, dated concurrently with these results
and hereby adopted by this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum
is a public document and is made available via Enforcement &
Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic
Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at
https://access.trade.gov and in the Department's Central Records Unit,
located in Room 18022 of the main Department of Commerce building. In
addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can
be found on the Internet at https://www.trade.gov/enforcement. The
signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of
the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Public Comment
As discussed above, the Department needs additional information
before making a definitive preliminary finding. Therefore, absent the
issuance of a revised suspension agreement, we intend to issue our
post-preliminary finding on these issues as soon as practicable. The
comment period on these preliminary results as well as the post-
preliminary results will be stated with the release of the post-
preliminary results. At that time interested parties will have the
opportunity to submit case and rebuttal briefs.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to
request a hearing, or to participate if one is requested, must submit a
written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance, filed electronically via ACCESS. An electronically filed
document must be received successfully in its entirety by the
Department's electronic records system, ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern Time
within 30 days after the date of the issuance of the post-preliminary
results. Requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address and
telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of
issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to
those raised in the respective case briefs. The Department intends to
issue the final results of this administrative review, including the
results of its analysis of the issues raised in any written briefs, not
later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice,
pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.
We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: November 29, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-29075 Filed 12-2-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
