Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Orange Juice from Brazil
Federal Register: August 11, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 153)
Notices
Page 40167-40168
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
DOCID:fr11au09-49
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A-351-840
Certain Orange Juice from Brazil: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 6, 2009, the Department of Commerce published its preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain orange juice from Brazil. The period of review
(POR) is March 1, 2007, through February 29, 2008.
Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made certain changes in the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled ``Final Results of Review.''
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 11, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Eastwood or Miriam Eqab, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482- 3874 or (202) 482-3693, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On April 6, 2009, the Department published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain orange juice from Brazil. See Certain Orange
Juice from Brazil: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 74 FR 15438 (Apr. 6, 2009) (Preliminary
Results).
We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results of review.
In May 2009, we received case briefs from the petitioners (i.e.,
Florida Citrus Mutual, A. Duda & Sons, Citrus World Inc., and Southern
Gardens Citrus Processing Corporation) and the respondents (i.e.,
Fischer S.A. Comercio, Industria, and Agricultura (Fischer) and
Sucocitrico Cutrale, S.A. (Cutrale)). Also in May 2009, we received rebuttal briefs from the petitioners and the respondents.
The Department has conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act).
Scope of the Order
The scope of this order includes certain orange juice for transport and/or further manufacturing, produced in two different forms: (1) frozen orange juice in a highly concentrated form, sometimes referred to as frozen concentrated orange juice for manufacture (FCOJM); and (2) pasteurized single-strength orange juice which has not been concentrated, referred to as not-from-concentrate (NFC). At the time of the filing of the petition, there was an existing antidumping duty order on frozen concentrated orange juice (FCOJ) from Brazil. See
Antidumping Duty Order; Frozen Concentrated Orange Juice from Brazil, 52 FR 16426 (May 5, 1987). Therefore, the scope of this order with regard to FCOJM covers only FCOJM produced and/or exported by those companies which were excluded or revoked from the pre-existing antidumping order on FCOJ from Brazil as of December 27, 2004. Those companies are Cargill Citrus Limitada, Coinbra-Frutesp (SA), Cutrale,
Fischer, and Montecitrus Trading S.A.
Excluded from the scope of the order are reconstituted orange juice and frozen concentrated orange juice for retail (FCOJR). Reconstituted orange juice is produced through further manufacture of FCOJM, by adding water, oils and essences to the orange juice concentrate. FCOJR is concentrated orange juice, typically at 42 Brix, in a frozen state, packed in retail-sized containers ready for sale to consumers. FCOJR, a finished consumer product, is produced through further manufacture of
FCOJM, a bulk manufacturer's product.
The subject merchandise is currently classifiable under subheadings 2009.11.00, 2009.12.25, 2009.12.45, and 2009.19.00 of the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). These HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and for customs purposes only and are not dispositive. Rather, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.
Period of Review
The POR is March 1, 2007, through February 29, 2008.
Cost of Production
As discussed in the preliminary results, we conducted an investigation to determine whether Cutrale and Fischer made home market sales of the foreign like product during the POR at prices below their costs of production (COP) within the meaning of section 773(b) of the
Act. See Preliminary Results, 74 FR at 15442. For these final results, we performed the cost test following the same methodology as in the
Preliminary Results, except as discussed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum (the Decision Memo).
We found 20 percent or more of each respondent's sales of a given product during the reporting period were at prices less than the weighted-average COP for this period. Thus, we determined that these below-cost sales were made in ``substantial quantities'' within an extended period of time and at prices which did not permit the recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time in the normal course of trade. See sections 773(b)(1) and (2) of the Act.
Therefore, for purposes of these final results, we found that
Cutrale and Fischer made below-cost sales not in the ordinary course of trade. Consequently, we disregarded these sales for each respondent and used the remaining sales as the basis for determining normal value pursuant to section 773(b)(1) of the Act.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this administrative review, and to which we have responded, are listed in the Appendix to this notice and addressed in the Decision Memo, which is adopted by this notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the
Page 40168
Central Records Unit, room 1117, of the main Department Building.
In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made certain changes to the margin calculations. These changes are discussed in the relevant sections of the Decision Memo.
Final Results of Review
We determine that the following weighted-average margin percentages exist for the period March 1, 2007, through February 29, 2008:
Manufacturer/Exporter
Percent Margin
Fischer S.A. Comercio, Industria, and Agricultura...
0.00
Sucocitrico Cutrale, S.A............................
2.17
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.
We have calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the sales. We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review if any importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent). The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the
POR produced by companies included in these final results of review for which the reviewed companies did not know their merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate established in the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Further, the following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of certain orange juice from Brazil entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: 1) the cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates shown above, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), the cash deposit will be zero; 2) for previously investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; 3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, or the
LTFV investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and 4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 16.51 percent, the all- others rate established in the LTFV investigation. See Antidumping Duty
Order: Certain Orange Juice from Brazil, 72 FR 12183 (Mar. 9, 2006).
These deposit requirements 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 review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these results of review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and section 351.221(b)(5) of the Department's regulations.
Dated: August 4, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix - Issues in Decision Memorandum 1. Offsetting of Negative Margins 2. Constructed Export Price Offset for Cutrale 3. Capping of Certain Revenues Received by Cutrale by the Amount of
Reported Expenses 4. Calculation of the Indirect Selling Expense Ratios for Cutrale's
U.S. Affilates, Citrus Products Inc. and Cutrale Citrus Juices 5. Ministerial Errors for Cutrale 6. Calculation of the Denominator used in the General and
Administrative (G&A) and Financial Expense Ratios for Cutrale 7. Classification of Amortized Goodwill for Cutrale 8. Including Adiantamentos Sobre Contraltos de Cambio Financing Costs in Cutrale's Financial Expense Ratio 9. Conversion of U.S. Sales of NFC for Fischer from Gallons to Pounds
Solids 10. Calculation of International Freight Expenses for Fischer 11. Window Period Sales for Fischer 12. Calculation of Fischer's U.S. Dollar Borrowing Rate 13. Raw Material Cost-Allocation Methodology for Fischer 14. Capitalized Costs Related to the Videira Plant for Fischer 15. Omission of Certain Costs in Calculating Fischer's Cost of
Manufacture 16. Calculation of the G&A Expense Ratio for Fischer 17. Calculation of the Financial Expense Ratio for Fischer
FR Doc. E9-19223 Filed 8-10-09; 8:45 am
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
