67 FR 52442, August 12, 2002

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-848]
 
Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper 
Reviews: Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of 
China

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting new 
shipper reviews of the antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish 
tail meat from the People's Republic of China (PRC) in response to 
requests from North Supreme Seafood (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd. (North 
Supreme) and Shouzhou Huaxiang Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. (Shouzhou 
Huaxiang). Shouzhou Huaxiang's period of review (POR) is September 1, 
2000 through August 31, 2001. North Supreme's POR is September 1, 2000 
through October 15, 2001.
    We preliminarily determine that sales by Shouzhou Huaxiang have 
been made below normal value (NV). We also preliminarily determine that 
sales by North Supreme have not been made below NV. The preliminary 
results are listed below in the section titled ``Preliminary Results of 
Reviews.'' If these preliminary results are adopted in our final 
results, for entries made by Shouzhou Huaxiang, we will instruct the 
U.S. Customs Service to assess antidumping duties based on the 
difference between the export price (EP) and NV. Interested parties are 
invited to comment on these preliminary results. (See the ``Preliminary 
Results of Reviews'' section of this notice.)

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 12, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Gilgunn or Scott Lindsay, 
Office of AD/CVD Enforcement VII, Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4236 or (202) 482-0780, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Applicable Statute

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations are to the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (the Act). In addition, unless otherwise indicated, 
all citations to the Department's regulations are to 19 CFR part 351 
(2001).

[[Page 52443]]

Background

    The Department published in the Federal Register an antidumping 
duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the People's Republic 
of China on September 15, 1997 (62 FR 48218). On September 18, 2001 the 
Department received a properly filed request for a new shipper review, 
in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and section 
351.214(c) of the Department's regulations, from North Supreme under 
the antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the 
People's Republic of China. On September 26, 2001 the Department 
received a properly filed request for a new shipper review, in 
accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and section 351.214(c) 
of the Department's regulations, from Shouzhou Huaxiang under the 
antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the PRC.
    The new shipper requests were made pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) 
of the Act and section 351.214(b) of the Department's regulations, 
which state that, if the Department receives a request for review from 
an exporter or producer of the subject merchandise stating that it did 
not export the merchandise to the United States during the period of 
investigation (POI) and that such exporter or producer is not 
affiliated with any exporter or producer who exported the subject 
merchandise during that period, the Department shall conduct a new 
shipper review to establish an individual weighted-average dumping 
margin for such exporter or producer, if the Department has not 
previously established such a margin for the exporter or producer.
    The regulations require that the exporter or producer shall include 
in its request, with appropriate certifications: (i) the date on which 
the merchandise was first entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption, or, if it cannot certify as to the date of first entry, 
the date on which it first shipped the merchandise for export to the 
United States, or if the merchandise has not yet been shipped or 
entered, the date of sale; (ii) a list of the firms with which it is 
affiliated; (iii) a statement from such exporter or producer, and from 
each affiliated firm, that it did not, under its current or a former 
name, export the merchandise during the period of investigation (POI); 
and (iv) in an antidumping proceeding involving inputs from a non-
market-economy (NME) country, a certification that the export 
activities of such exporter or producer are not controlled by the 
central government. See 351.214(b)(2) of the Department's Regulations.
    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i) and 19 CFR 
351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A), in its September 18, 2001 request for review, 
North Supreme certified that it did not export the subject merchandise 
to the United States during the POI and that it is not affiliated with 
any company which exported subject merchandise to the United States 
during the POI. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B), North Supreme 
further certified that its export activities are not controlled by the 
central government of the PRC.
    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i) and 19 CFR 
351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A), in its September 26, 2001 request for review, 
Shouzhou Huaxiang certified that it did not export the subject 
merchandise to the United States during the POI and that it is not 
affiliated with any company which exported subject merchandise to the 
United States during the POI. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B), 
Shouzhou Huaxiang further certified that its export activities are not 
controlled by the central government of the PRC. These requests for new 
shipper reviews also included all documentation required under 19 CFR 
351.214(b)(2)(iv).
    The Department determined that each request met all of the 
requirements stipulated in section 351.214 of the regulations. On 
November 8, 2001, the Department published its initiation of these new 
shipper reviews for the period September 1, 2000 through August 31, 
2001. See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of 
China: Initiation of New Shipper Antidumping Administrative Reviews, 66 
FR 56536 (November 8, 2001).
    On April 25, 2002, the Department received a request from North 
Supreme to extend its POR to include the entry date for its sales of 
crawfish tail meat, The Department determined that such an extension 
would not prevent the completion of the review within the regulatory 
time limits in accordance with section 351.214(f)(2)(ii) of the 
regulations. The Department extended the POR for North Supreme in this 
new shipper review by forty-five days, until October 15, 2001. See 
Memorandum to Barbara E. Tillman through Dana S. Mermelstein, from 
Holly Hawkins: Extension of the Period of Review in the New Shipper 
Administrative Review of Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the 
People's Republic of China, dated April 29, 2002.
    On April 30, 2002 the Department published an extension of the 
deadline for completion of the preliminary results of these new shipper 
reviews until August 5, 2002. See Notice of Extension of Time Limit for 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews: Freshwater 
Crawfish Tail Meat from the People 's Republic of China, 67 FR 21219 
(April 30, 2002).

Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order

    The product covered by these reviews is freshwater crawfish tail 
meat, in all its forms (whether washed or with fat on, whether purged 
or unpurged), grades, and sizes; whether frozen, fresh, or chilled; and 
regardless of how it is packed, preserved, or prepared. Excluded from 
the scope of the order are live crawfish and other whole crawfish, 
whether boiled, frozen, fresh, or chilled. Also excluded are saltwater 
crawfish of any type, and parts thereof. Freshwater crawfish tail meat 
is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTS) under item numbers 1605.40.10.10 and 1605.40.10.90, 
which are the new HTS numbers for prepared foodstuffs, indicating 
peeled crawfish tail meat and other, as introduced by the U.S. Customs 
Service in 2000, and HTS items 0306.19.00.10 and 0306.29.00, which are 
reserved for fish and crustaceans in general. The HTS subheadings are 
provided for convenience and Customs purposes only. The written 
description of the scope of this order is dispositive.

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we conducted verification 
of the responses of North Supreme and Shouzhou Huaxiang. We used 
standard verification procedures, including on-site inspection of the 
manufacturers' facilities and the examination of relevant sales and 
financial records. Our verification results are outlined in the public 
versions of the verification reports, which are on file in the Central 
Records Unit (CRU) located in room B-099 of the Main Commerce Building. 
(See the public versions of New Shipper Review of Freshwater Crawfish 
Tail Meat (tail meat) from the People's Republic of China (PRC) (A-570-
848): Sales and Factors Verification Report for Shouzhou Huaxiang 
Foodstuffs Co., Ltd., and New Shipper Review of Freshwater Crawfish 
Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China (PRC) (A-570-848): Sales 
and Factors Verification Report for North Supreme Seafood Zhejiang Co., 
Ltd., dated July 17, 2002. (Shouzhou Huaxiang Verification Report and 
North Supreme Verification Report, respectively).)

[[Page 52444]]

New Shipper Status

    Based on the questionnaire responses received from North Supreme 
and Shouzhou Huaxiang, and our verification thereof, we preliminarily 
determine that these companies have met the requirements to qualify as 
new shippers during the POR. We have determined that both companies 
made their first sale or shipment of subject merchandise to the United 
States during the POR, that these sales were bona fide sales, and that 
these companies were not affiliated with any exporter or producer that 
previously shipped to the United States.

Separate Rates

    North Supreme and Shouzhou Huaxiang both requested a separate, 
company-specific rate. In their questionnaire responses, both companies 
stated that each is an independent legal entity.
    To establish whether a company operating in an NME country is 
sufficiently independent to be entitled to a separate rate, the 
Department analyzes each exporting entity under the test established in 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers from 
the People's Republic of China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991) , as 
amplified by Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Silicon Carbide from the People's Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 
2, 1994). Under this policy, exporters in NMEs are entitled to 
separate, company-specific margins when they can demonstrate an absence 
of government control, in law and in fact, with respect to export 
activities. Evidence supporting, though not requiring, a finding of de 
jure absence of government control over export activities includes: 1) 
an absence of restrictive stipulations associated with an individual 
exporter's business and export licenses; 2) any legislative enactments 
decentralizing control of companies; and 3) any other formal measures 
by the government decentralizing control of companies. De facto absence 
of government control over exports is based on four factors: 1) whether 
each exporter sets its own export prices independently of the 
government and without the approval of a government authority; 2) 
whether each exporter retains the proceeds from its sales and makes 
independent decisions regarding the disposition of profits or financing 
of losses; 3) whether each exporter has the authority to negotiate and 
sign contracts and other agreements; and 4) whether each exporter has 
autonomy from the government regarding the selection of management.

De Jure Control

    With respect to the absence of de jure government control over the 
export activities of all the companies reviewed, evidence on the record 
supports the claims by both North Supreme and Shouzhou Huaxiang that 
their export activities are not controlled by the government. Both 
North Supreme and Shouzhou Huaxiang submitted evidence of their legal 
rights to set prices independently of all government oversight. The 
business licenses of both companies indicate that they are permitted to 
engage in the exportation of crawfish. We find no evidence of de jure 
government control restricting these companies' exportation of 
crawfish.
    In general, no export quotas apply to crawfish. Prior verifications 
have confirmed that there are no commodity-specific export licenses 
required and no quotas for the seafood category ``Other,'' which 
includes crawfish, in China's Tariff and Non-Tariff Handbook for 1996. 
In addition, we have previously confirmed that crawfish is not on the 
list of commodities with planned quotas in the 1992 PRC Ministry of 
Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation document entitled Temporary 
Provisions for Administration of Export Commodities. (See Freshwater 
Crawfish Tail Meat From The People's Republic of China; Preliminary 
Results of New Shipper Review, 64 FR 8543 (February 22, 1999) and 
Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of China; 
Final Results of New Shipper Review, 64 FR 27961 (May 24, 1999) (Ningbo 
New Shipper Review).)
    The Administrative Regulations of the People's Republic of China 
for Controlling the Registration of Enterprises as Legal Persons (Legal 
Persons Law), issued on June 13, 1988 by the State Administration for 
Industry and Commerce of the PRC and provided for the record of this 
review, indicates a lack of de jure government control over privately-
owned companies, such as North Supreme and Shouzhou Huaxiang, and that 
control over these enterprises rests with the enterprises themselves. 
The Legal Persons Law provides that, to qualify as legal persons, 
companies must have the ``ability to bear civil liability 
independently'' and the right to control and manage their businesses. 
These regulations also state that, as an independent legal entity, a 
company is responsible for its own profits and losses. See Notice of 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Manganese Metal 
from the People's Republic of China, 60 FR 56045 (November 6, 1995) 
(Manganese Metal). At verification, we saw that the business licenses 
for North Supreme and Shouzhou Huaxiang were granted in accordance with 
this law. The results of verification support the information provided 
regarding the Legal Persons Law. (See Shouzhou Huaxiang Verification 
Report and North Supreme Verification Report.) Therefore, we 
preliminarily determine that there is an absence of de jure control 
over export activity with respect to these firms.

De Facto Control

    With respect to the absence of de facto control over export 
activities, the information submitted on the record and reviewed at 
verification, indicates that the management of North Supreme and 
Shouzhou Huaxiang are responsible for the determination of export 
prices, profit distribution, marketing strategy, and contract 
negotiations. Our analysis indicates that there is no government 
involvement in the daily operations or the selection of management for 
these companies. In addition, we have found that the respondents' 
pricing and export strategy decisions are not subject to the review or 
approval of any outside entity, and that there are no governmental 
policy directives that affect these decisions.
    There are no restrictions on the use of export earnings. The 
company general managers of both North Supreme and Shouzhou Huaxiang 
have the right to negotiate and enter into contracts, and may delegate 
this authority to employees within their respective companies. There is 
no evidence that this authority is subject to any level of governmental 
approval. North Supreme and Shouzhou Huaxiang both stated that their 
management is selected by a board of directors and/or their employees, 
and that there is no government involvement in the selection process. 
Finally, decisions made by each respondent concerning purchases of 
subject merchandise from other suppliers are not subject to government 
approval. Consequently, because evidence on the record indicates an 
absence of government control, both in law and in fact, over the 
companies' export activities, we preliminarily determine that separate 
rates should be applied to both North Supreme and Shouzhou Huaxiang.

Application of Partial Adverse Facts Available

    During the course of this new shipper review, the Department issued 
questionnaires to Shouzhou Huaxiang requesting that they provide factor 
of

[[Page 52445]]

production information for our preliminary results. At verification, we 
found that Shouzhou Huaxiang's reported crawfish scrap and water 
factors were unverifiable. As a result, the Department has determined 
that it is appropriate to use facts otherwise available for the 
crawfish scrap and water factors of production in the calculation of 
normal value for Shouzhou Huaxiang's sales of crawfish tail meat.
    Furthermore, section 776(b) of the Act provides that the Department 
may use an inference that is adverse to the interests of a party in 
selecting among the facts otherwise available if the Department finds 
that the party had failed to cooperate to the best of its ability. In 
this case, the Department has found that Shouzhou Huaxiang has failed 
to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability by reporting 
unverifiable crawfish scrap and water factors of production. Shouzhou 
Huaxiang neither provided an explanation or notified the Department of 
any discrepancies or problems regarding its crawfish scrap and water 
factors. This information is within the sole possession of Shouzhou 
Huaxiang and cannot be obtained by the Department unless it is reported 
by Shouzhou Huaxiang. Moreover, this information is integral to our 
margin calculation for Shouzhou Huaxiang. We therefore determine that 
Shouzhou Huaxiang has failed to cooperate to the best of its ability in 
this new shipper review. Therefore, for the preliminary results of this 
review, we have made an inference that is adverse to Shouzhou Huaxiang 
in selecting from facts otherwise available for Shouzhou Huaxiang's 
crawfish scrap and water factors of production.
    In addition, section 776(b) of the Act states that adverse facts 
available may include information derived from the petition, the final 
determination, a previous administrative review, or other information 
placed on the record. Section 776(c) of the Act provides that when the 
Department relies on secondary information, the Department shall, to 
the extent practicable, corroborate that information with independent 
sources reasonably at the Department's disposal. The Statement of 
Administrative Action (SAA) accompanying the URAA clarifies that the 
petition is secondary information. See SAA, H.R. Doc. 103-316 at 870 
(1994). The SAA also clarifies that ``corroborate'' means to determine 
whether the information used has probative value. Id.
    In this review, we are using, as adverse facts available, the 
lowest reported crawfish scrap to whole crawfish ratio and the highest 
reported water factor from the Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 
People's Republic of China; Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, and Final Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 67 FR 19546, (April 22, 2002) (Crawfish Final 
1999/2000). See memorandum to file dated August 5, 2002, which places 
on the record of these reviews the ``Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from 
The People's Republic of China Placement of Yancheng Haiteng's and 
Huaiyin30's factors of production from the 1999-2000 Administrative 
Review on to the Record of the Current Review'' on the record of these 
new shipper reviews. These factors are corroborated, in accordance with 
section 776(c) of the Act, because each factor is based on actual 
information from a previous review. See the proprietary memorandum, 
``Determination of Partial Adverse Facts Available for Shouzhou 
Huaxiang Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. in the New Shipper Review of Freshwater 
Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China,'' dated August 
5, 2002 which is in the CRU.

Normal Value Comparisons

    To determine whether respondents' sales of the subject merchandise 
to the United States were made at prices below NV, we compared their 
United States prices to NV, as described in the ``United States Price'' 
and ``Normal Value'' sections of this notice.

United States Price

    For North Supreme and Shouzhou Huaxiang, we based United States 
price on export price (EP) in accordance with section 772(a) of the 
Act, because the first sale to an unaffiliated purchaser was made prior 
to importation, and constructed export price (CEP) was not otherwise 
warranted by the facts on the record. We calculated EP based on the 
packed price from the exporter to the first unaffiliated purchaser in 
the United States. We deducted foreign inland freight from the starting 
price (gross unit price) in accordance with section 772(c) of the Act. 
Since the terms of sale for both Shouzhou Huaxiang's and North 
Supreme's sales were FOB China port, no other deductions for movement 
expenses were necessary.

Normal Value

    Section 773(c)(1) of the Act provides that the Department shall 
determine NV using a factors-of-production methodology if (1) the 
merchandise is exported from an NME country, and (2) available 
information does not permit the calculation of NV using home-market 
prices, third-country prices, or constructed value under section 773(a) 
of the Act.
    In every case conducted by the Department involving the PRC, the 
PRC has been treated as an NME country. Pursuant to section 
771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any determination that a foreign country is 
an NME country shall remain in effect until revoked by the 
administering authority. None of the companies contested such treatment 
in these reviews. Accordingly, we have applied surrogate values to the 
factors of production to determine NV. See Factor Values Memo for the 
Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews of 
Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China, 
August 5, 2002 (Factor Values Memo).
    We calculated NV based on factors of production in accordance with 
section 773(c)(4) of the Act and section 351.408(c) of our regulations. 
Consistent with the original investigation and the subsequent 
administrative reviews of this order, we determined that India (1) is 
comparable to the PRC in level of economic development, and (2) is a 
significant producer of comparable merchandise. With the exceptions of 
the whole live crawfish input and the crawfish scrap by-product, we 
valued the factors of production using publicly available information 
from India. We adjusted the Indian import prices by adding freight 
expenses to make them delivered prices.
    We valued the factors of production as follows:
    To value the input of whole crawfish we used publicly available 
Spanish import data of whole live crawfish from Portugal for September 
2000 through August 2001. See Selection of Surrogate for the Valuation 
of Whole, Live Freshwater Crawfish in the 2000 - 2001 Administrative 
and New Shipper Reviews for Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 
People's Republic of China, dated August 5, 2002. We adjusted the 
values of whole live crawfish to include freight costs incurred between 
the supplier and the factory. For transportation distances used in the 
calculation of freight expenses on whole live crawfish, we added, to 
surrogate values from India, a surrogate freight cost using the shorter 
of (a) the distances between the closest PRC port and the factory, or 
(b) the distance between the domestic supplier and the factory. See 
Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Collated Roofing Nails From

[[Page 52446]]

the People's Republic of China, 62 FR 51410 (October 1, 1997) (Roofing 
Nails).
    To value the by-product of wet crawfish scrap, we used a price 
quote from Indonesia for wet crab and shrimp shells. See Surrogate 
Valuation of Shell Scrap: Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 
People's Republic of China (PRC), Administrative Review 9/1/00-8/31/01 
and New Shipper Reviews 9/1/00-8/31/01 and 9/1/00-10/15/01, dated 
August 5, 2002.
    To calculate a value for steam, we derived the values by: 1) noting 
the BTU equivalent of the steam, then 2) obtaining a ratio of steam to 
the BTU equivalent of natural gas, and 3) multiplying this ratio by the 
surrogate value of natural gas.
    To value coal, we used the average 1996 total price of ``steam coal 
for industry'' as published in the International Energy Agency's 
publication, Energy Prices and Taxes, First Quarter, 2000. We adjusted 
the cost of coal to include an amount for transportation. To value 
electricity, we used the average of the 1997 total cost per kilowatt 
hour (KWH) for ``Electricity for Industry'' as reported in the 
International Energy Agency's publication, Energy Prices and Taxes, 
First Quarter, 2000. For water, we relied upon public information from 
the October 1997 Second Water Utilities Data Book: Asian and Pacific 
Region, published by the Asian Development Bank.
    To achieve comparability of energy and water prices to the factors 
reported for the crawfish tail meat processing periods applicable to 
the companies under review, we adjusted these factor values to reflect 
inflation to the applicable crawfish processing season during the POR 
using the Wholesale Price Index (WPI) for India, as published in the 
2001 International Financial Statistics (IFS) by the International 
Monetary Fund (IMF).
    To value packing materials (plastic bags, cardboard boxes and 
adhesive tape), we relied upon Indian import data for the period August 
2000 through January 2001 as reported in the Monthly Statistics of the 
Foreign Trade of India (Monthly Statistics). We adjusted these prices 
to reflect inflation to the crawfish processing season during the POR. 
We adjusted the values of packing materials to include freight costs 
incurred between the supplier and the factory. For transportation 
distances used in the calculation of freight expenses on packing 
materials, we added, to surrogate values from India, a surrogate 
freight cost using the shorter of (a) the distances between the closest 
PRC port and the factory, or (b) the distance between the domestic 
supplier and the factory. See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Collated Roofing Nails From the People's Republic 
of China, 62 FR 51410 (October 1, 1997) (Roofing Nails).
    To value factory overhead, selling, general, and administrative 
expenses (SG&A), and profit, we continued to use simple average derived 
from the publicly available 1996-97 financial statements of four Indian 
seafood processing companies. We applied these rates to the calculated 
cost of manufacture. See Factor Values Memorandum.
    For labor, we used the PRC regression-based wage rate at Import 
Administration's home page, Import Library, Expected Wages of Selected 
NME Countries, revised in September 2001. Because of the variability of 
wage rates in countries with similar per capita gross domestic 
products, section 351.408(c)(3) of the Department's regulations 
requires the use of a regression-based wage rate. The source of these 
wage rate data on the Import Administration's web site is the Year Book 
of Labour Statistics 2000, International Labour Office (Geneva: 1998), 
Chapter 5: Wages in Manufacturing.
    We valued movement expenses as follows: To value truck freight 
expenses we used seventeen price quotes from six different Indian 
trucking companies which were used in the antidumping investigation of 
Bulk Aspirin from the People's Republic of China, 65 FR 33805 (May 25, 
2000). We adjusted the rates to reflect inflation to the month of sale 
of the finished product using the WPI for India from the IFS.

Currency Conversion

    We made currency conversions pursuant to section 351.415 of the 
Department's regulations at the rates certified by the Federal Reserve 
Bank.

Preliminary Results of Reviews

    We preliminarily determine that the following dumping margins 
exist:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Manufacturer and Exporter         Time Period      Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Supreme Seafood (Zhejiang)      9/1/00-10/15/01               0.00
 Co., Ltd.........................
Shouzhou Huaxiang Foodstuffs Co.,      9/1/00-8/31/01              14.18
 Ltd..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash-Deposit Requirements

    If these preliminary results are not modified in the final results 
of these reviews, the following deposit rates will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of these new shipper reviews for all 
shipments of freshwater crawfish tail meat from the PRC entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after publication date, 
as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act. The cash deposit 
rate for shipments produced and exported by Shouzhou Huaxiang will be 
the total amount of dumping duties divided by the total quantity 
exported during the POR. Since the margin for North Supreme is zero, no 
cash deposits would be required for shipments produced and exported by 
North Supreme. If these preliminary results are not changed in the 
final results, no other cash deposits under this order would be 
changed.
    The Department will disclose calculations performed in connection 
with these preliminary results of reviews within five days of the date 
of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Any 
interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of 
this notice in accordance with section 351.310(c) of the Department's 
regulations. Any hearing would normally be held 37 days after the 
publication of this notice, or the first workday thereafter, at the 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue N.W., 
Washington, DC 20230. Individuals who wish to request a hearing must 
submit a written request within 30 days of the publication of this 
notice in the Federal Register to the Assistant Secretary for Import 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 1870, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. Requests for a public 
hearing should contain: (1) the party's name, address, and telephone 
number; (2) the number of participants; and, (3) to the extent 
practicable, an identification of the arguments to be raised at the 
hearing.
    Unless otherwise notified by the Department, interested parties may 
submit case briefs within 30 days of the date of publication of this 
notice in accordance with 351.309(c)(ii) of the Department's 
regulations. As part of the

[[Page 52447]]

case brief, parties are encouraged to provide a summary of the 
arguments not to exceed five pages and a table of statutes, 
regulations, and cases cited. Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to 
issues raised in the case briefs, must be filed within five days after 
the case brief is filed. If a hearing is held, an interested party may 
make an affirmative presentation only on arguments included in that 
party's case brief and may make a rebuttal presentation only on 
arguments included in that party's rebuttal brief. Parties should 
confirm by telephone the time, date, and place of the hearing 48 hours 
before the scheduled time.
    The Department will issue the final results of these new shipper 
reviews, which will include the results of its analysis of issues 
raised in the briefs, within 90 days from the date of these preliminary 
results, unless the time limit is extended.

Assessment Rates

    Upon completion of these new shipper reviews, the Department shall 
determine, and the U.S. Customs Service shall assess, antidumping 
duties on all appropriate entries. The Department will issue 
appraisement instructions directly to the U.S. Customs Service upon 
completion of these reviews. For assessment purposes, we calculated 
importer-specific assessment rates for freshwater crawfish tail meat 
from the PRC. We divided the total dumping margins (calculated as the 
difference between NV and EP) for each importer by the total quantity 
of subject merchandise sold to that importer during the POR. Upon the 
completion of these reviews, we will direct Customs to assess the 
resulting quantity-based rates against the weight in kilograms of each 
entry of the subject merchandise by the importer during the POR. See 
memorandum to file dated August 5, 2002, which places on the record of 
these reviews the ``Memorandum to Barbara E. Tillman through Maureen 
Flannery, from Mark Hoadley: Collection of Cash Deposits and Assessment 
of Duties on Freshwater Crawfish from the PRC, dated August 27, 2001'' 
on the record of these new shipper reviews.

Notification to Importers

    This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of 
their responsibility under 351.402(f) of the Department's regulations 
to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties 
prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during these review 
periods. 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.
    These new shipper reviews and this notice are published in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777 (i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: August 5, 2002.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 02-20388 Filed 8-9-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S