United States International Trade Commission

Investigation No. 332-498 and Chile FTA-103-020

USITC Publication 4017

June 2008

Certain Vegetables 

and Grape Juice:

Probable Economic Effect 

of Accelerated Tariff 

Elimination for Certain 

Goods of Chile
U.S. International Trade Commission

COMMISSIONERS

Shara L. Aranoff, Chairman

Irving A. Willliamson

Address all communications to

Secretary to the Commission

United States International Trade Commission

Washington, DC 20436

Charlotte R. Lane

Deanna Tanner Okun

Robert A. Rogowsky

Director of Operations

Karen Laney-Cummings

Director, Office of Industries

Dean A. Pinkert

Daniel R. Pearson, Vice Chairman
U.S. International Trade Commission

Washington, DC 20436

Publication 4017 June 2008

www.usitc.gov

Certain Vegetables and Grape Juice:

Probable Economic Effect of Accelerated

Tariff Elimination for Certain Goods of Chile

Investigation Nos. 332-498 and Chile FTA-103-020
This report was principally prepared by the Office of Industries

Project Leader

Timothy McCarty

timothy.mccarty@usitc.gov

Joanna Bonarriva

Lead International Trade Analyst

joanna.bonarriva@usitc.gov

Economist

Kyle Johnson

kyle.johnson@usitc.gov

Staff Assistant

Phyllis Boone

Under the direction of

Jonathan R. Coleman, Chief

Agriculture and Fisheries Division
v

CONTENTS

Page

Chapter 1 Introduction ............................................... 1-1

Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1

Analytical approach and probable effect codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-2

Industry and market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-4

United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-4

Certain vegetables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-4

Grape juice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-5

Chile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6

Certain vegetables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6

Grape juice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-7

Chapter 2 Probable Effect Advice .................................. 2-1

* * * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1

* * * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-2

Bibliography ............................................................ Biblio-1

Appendixes..............................................................

A. Request letters from the USTR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1

B. Federal Register notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1

C. Summary of views of interested parties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-1

Tables ....................................................................

1.1. Staging of U.S. tariff reductions under the U.S.-Chile FTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-2

1.2. United States and Chile: Production, consumption, and trade, by product, 2007 . . . . . . . . 1-4

2.1. * * * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1

 1

 USTR, United States and Chile Sign Historic Free Trade Agreement, press release, June 6, 2003.

 2

 The grape juice to be included in these investigations is covered under HTS subheading 2009.69.00,

grape juice (including grape must), other, of a Brix value exceeding 30 degrees. The Brix value specified

signifies concentrate. It does not include grape juice of a Brix value not exceeding 30 degrees

(HTS 2009.61.00). 

 3

 Section 201(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).

 4

 For more information on Chilealimentos, see http://www.chilealimentos.com.

 5

 Chilealimentos requested accelerated tariff elimination for all products subject to this investigation; for

canned artichokes, the National Food Trading Corp., Atalanta Corp., and REMA Foods were also petitioners.

 6

 Section 103 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).

1-1

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Background

The United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement (U.S.-Chile FTA), signed June 6, 2003,1 was

implemented in both countries on January 1, 2004. Under the agreement, all U.S. duties on

fruit and vegetable imports from Chile were scheduled to be eliminated by the year 2015.

Most fruit and vegetable items were granted duty-free status immediately when the

agreement came into force. However, some products were subject to tariff elimination

phased over several years. U.S. imports of certain frozen vegetables and grape juice2

 from

Chile (subject products of these investigations) continue to be subject to duties in 2008, with

duties scheduled for elimination by 2011. In addition, the U.S.-Chile FTA established an

annual tariff-rate quota of 950 metric tons for U.S. imports of canned artichokes from Chile

(also covered in these investigations), continuing at the same volume through 2014, with inquota product entering duty free. Over-quota imports of canned artichokes faced a base tariff

of 14.9 percent ad valorem with phased elimination, varying with the value of the goods

entered, through 2014 (table 1.1).

The U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (Act)3

 allows the President to

proclaim modifications to the staging of any duty reductions upon mutual agreement by both

parties. Recently, the United States Trade Representative (USTR) was contacted by

Chilealimentos,4

 a Chilean trade association representing domestic fruit and vegetable

processors, requesting accelerated tariff elimination for certain vegetables and grape juice

from Chile.5

 Specifically, accelerated tariff elimination was requested for seven articles:

frozen beans, reduced in size (HTS 0710.22.40); frozen spinach, New Zealand spinach, and

orache spinach (HTS 0710.30.00); frozen sweet corn (HTS 0710.40.00); frozen vegetables,

nesi, reduced in size (HTS 0710.80.97); frozen mixtures of vegetables, nesi (HTS

0710.90.91); artichokes, prepared or preserved (2005.99.80); and grape juice (HTS

2009.69.00). Following this request, the United States and Chile agreed to enter into

consultations to consider acceleration of the elimination of U.S. tariffs for these products.

Before proclaiming tariff staging modifications, the Act requires the President to obtain

advice regarding the proposed action from the Commission.6

 This report contains this advice,

derived from the Commission’s assessment of the probable economic effect (PE) on 
 7

 The Commission instituted investigation Nos. 332-498 and Chile FTA-103-020, Certain Vegetables and

Grape Juice: Probable Economic Effect of Accelerated Tariff Elimination for Certain Goods of Chile,

effective March 7, 2008. See appendix B for the Federal Register notice of institution.

 8

 Partial equilibrium results were estimated based on shipments of domestic production, imports, and

calculated duties.

1-2

Table 1.1 Staging of U.S. tariff reductions under the U.S.-Chile FTA

Base

rate Duty

HTS item Product description 2003 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

0710.22.40 Beans, reduced in size, frozen 11.2% 5.6% 4.2% 2.8% 1.4% Free Free Free Free Free

0710.30.00 Spinach, New Zealand spinach, 

 and orache spinach, frozen

14.0% 7.0% 5.2% 3.5% 1.7% Free Free Free Free Free

0710.40.00 Sweet corn, frozen 14.0% 7.0% 5.2% 3.5% 1.7% Free Free Free Free Free

0710.80.97 Vegetables, nesi, reduced in size, 14.9% 7.4% 5.5% 3.7% 1.8% Free Free Free Free Free

 frozen

0710.90.91 Mixtures of vegetables, nesi, frozen 14.0% 7.0% 5.2% 3.5% 1.7% Free Free Free Free Free

2005.99.80 Artichokes, prepared or preserved, 

not frozen:

14.9%

9911.20.05 Within quota:

 Quota (metric tons) — 950 950 950 950 950 950 950 950 —

 Duty — Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free —

Over quota:

9911.20.11 Less than 32.25¢/kg 14.9% 14.9% 14.9% 14.9% 14.9% 14.9% 14.9% 14.9% 14.9% Free

9911.20.12 32.25¢/kg or more, < 51.6¢/kg 14.9% 13.4% 13.0% 12.6% 12.2% 11.9% 11.5% 11.1% 10.7% Free

9911.20.13 51.6¢/kg or more, < 77.4¢/kg 14.9% 12.4% 11.7% 11.1% 10.5% 9.9% 9.3% 8.6% 8.0% Free

9911.20.14 77.4¢/kg or more, < $1.161/kg 14.9% 11.4% 10.4% 9.6% 8.8% 7.9% 7.0% 6.1% 5.3% Free

9911.20 15 $1.161/kg or more 14.9% 9.9% 8.6% 7.4% 6.2% 4.9% 3.7% 2.4% 1.2% Free

2009.69.00 Grape juice 4.4¢/L 2.2¢/L 1.6¢/L 1.1¢/L 0.5¢/L Free Free Free Free Free

Source: Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (2008) and Modifications to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United

States to Implement the United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement, Annex I and II, USITC Pub. No. 3652, December 2003.

Note: The quota on originating goods from Chile under subheading 9911.20.05 became effective in calendar year 2004. Beginning

in calendar year 2015, quantitative limitations shall cease to apply on such originating goods of Chile.

domestic industries producing these products, on workers in these industries, and on

consumers, of accelerating the elimination of U.S. tariffs (effective on or about

January 1, 2009) applicable to imports of certain vegetables and grape juice from Chile.7

Appendix A of this report presents the request letters from the USTR. Appendix B contains

the Commission’s Federal Register notice announcing institution of these investigations and

a request for written submissions. Appendix C presents a summary of views of interested

parties.

Analytical Approach and Probable Effect Codes

The Commission used a partial equilibrium model and qualitative analysis to develop its PE

advice in this investigation.8

 The inputs for the model include product-specific data for

imports and production, as well as various estimates pertaining to the price sensitivity of

market participants. The PE advice is also based on information gathered from public and

private sources, including official U.S. Government statistics and views of interested parties.
1-3

* * * * * * *
 9

 Certain vegetables include frozen beans reduced in size; frozen spinach, New Zealand spinach, and

Orache spinach; frozen sweet corn; frozen miscellaneous vegetables reduced in size; mixtures of frozen

vegetables; and canned artichokes.

 10 California produces large amounts of artichokes, but nearly all of these artichokes are consumed fresh.

U.S. industry representative, telephone interview by Commission staff, February 25, 2008.

 11 Data are for 2002, the most recent year available. 2002 Census of Agriculture. State Data, Vegetables

and Melons Harvested for Sale, 2002, table 29, 454.

 12 Calculated by Commission staff from data of the American Frozen Food Institute, McLean, VA.

 13 2006 Membership Directory, American Frozen Food Institute, McLean, VA.

1-4

Industry and Market

United States

Certain Vegetables9

The United States is a major producer of the vegetables examined in these investigations

(except canned artichokes)10 and also an important consumer of all of these vegetables. In

recent years, all vegetables principally for processing (including canning, freezing, and

drying) were grown by about 10,200 U.S. farms on an estimated 611,000 hectares

(1.5 million acres).11 Estimated U.S. production of these vegetables amounted to $3 billion

in 2007 (table 1.2),12 with most production concentrated in California, Michigan,

Washington, and New York. In most of these production areas, these vegetables are grown

specifically for processing rather than being diverted to processing use after fresh-market

demand has been satisfied. There were an estimated 40 firms processing frozen vegetables

in 2006, ten in California and many of the rest in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Michigan,

Ohio, New York, and New Jersey.13

Table 1.2 United States and Chile: Production, consumption, and trade, by product, 2007

HTS item Product description

U.S.

.production

Total

U.S.

exports

U.S.

imports

from

world

U.S.

imports

from

Chile

U.S.

consumption

Ratio of

imports from

Chile to

consumption

Thousands of U.S. dollars Percent

0710.22.40 Beans, reduced in size, frozen 342,750 5,600 14,627 0 351,777 0

0710.30.00 Spinach, New Zealand spinach, 

 and orache spinach, frozen

256,840 5,130 11,844 0 263,554 0

0710.40.00 Sweet corn, frozen 1,380,930 49,114 22,045 0 1,353,861 0

0710.80.97 Vegetables, nesi, reduced in size, 893,320 29,124 324,733 2,694 1,188,929 (a

)

 frozen

0710.90.91 Mixtures of vegetables, nesi, frozen 87,320 28,459 62,449 2,754 121,310 2

2005.99.80 Artichokes, prepared or preserved 0 0 82,755 14,431 82,755 17

Total certain vegetables 2,961,160 117,427 518,453 19,879 3,362,186 1

2009.69.00 Grape juice 103,932 48,565 82,263 2,972 137,630 2

Source: U.S. production estimated by Commission staff; exports and imports compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department

of Commerce.

Note: For beans, miscellaneous vegetables, mixtures of vegetables, artichokes, and grape juice, U.S. export data include additional

products not covered in the corresponding import subheading.

a

Less than 0.5 percent.
 14 USITC, Dataweb.

 15 Ibid.

 16 Ibid.

 17 USDA, NASS, Noncitrus Fruits and Nuts 2007 Preliminary Summary, January 2008. The value of juice

grapes was estimated by Commission staff.

 18 MKF Research LLC, “Economic Impact of New York Grapes, Grape Juice and Wine 2005,” 2005,

44–45.

 19 U.S. industry representative, telephone interview by Commission staff, March 31, 2008.

 20 Paggi, “Grape Juice Concentrate Trade Profile 2004,” April 2005, 2. In the U.S. market, grape juice

concentrate is sold mainly as a food ingredient, including as juice stock, as a natural sweetener, and, in the

case of red grapes, as a food coloring agent.

 21 MaGill, Greg, 2004 Grape Juice Concentrate Summary Report and Future Projections, Joseph W. Ciatti

Co., LLC, 4.

 22 U.S. industry representative, telephone interview by Commission staff, March 5, 2008.

 23 Juice Products Association, written submission to the USITC, April 4, 2008, 2.

 24 U.S. industry representative, email to Commission staff, April 9, 2008.

1-5

Trade between the United States and Chile for certain vegetables (except canned artichokes)

is a small part of total U.S. trade in vegetables. Total U.S. imports of certain vegetables from

all sources amounted to $518 million in 2007, with major suppliers including Mexico,

Canada, China, Peru, and Spain. Total imports have risen dramatically in recent years, with

most of the rise accounted for by these suppliers. In 2007, U.S. imports of certain vegetables

from Chile were valued at about $20 million, with canned artichokes accounting for nearly

three-fourths of the amount.14 Imports of canned artichokes from Chile have risen by nearly

300 percent since 2003 and accounted for 17 percent of total U.S. canned artichoke imports

in 2007.15 U.S. imports from Chile of frozen miscellaneous vegetables (HTS 0710.80.97) and

mixtures of frozen vegetables (HTS 0710.90.91) also rose through the 2003–07 period, but

accounted for less than 5 percent of total U.S. imports of these products. The United States,

with total exports of certain vegetables valued at an estimated $117 million in 2007, was a

leading global exporter of some of these vegetables, particularly frozen sweet corn and

frozen miscellaneous vegetables. U.S. exports of certain vegetables to all markets ranged

from $5.1 million (spinach) to $49.1 million (sweet corn) in 2007, and were shipped mainly

to Canada, Japan, and Mexico; there were no U.S. exports of certain vegetables to Chile in

2007.16

Grape Juice

About 524,000 metric tons (mt) of juice grapes grown in the United States, with an estimated

value of $87 million, were processed into grape juice (including concentrate) and grape juice

products in 2007.17 Most domestic grape juice is produced in the states of California,

Washington, New York, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. Grape juice processed mainly from

Concord and Niagara grapes is produced in New York, Washington, Michigan, and

Pennsylvania.18 In these states, grapes are grown principally for making grape juice and

grape juice concentrate.19 In California, while some grapes are grown for juice production,

the majority of the states’ grape juice concentrate derives from grapes grown for primary

uses as table grapes, wine, and especially raisins.20 There are three producers of grape juice

concentrate in California,21 two in New York (one company with processing plants in other

states), and one in Washington.22

The United States is a major producer of grape juice concentrate and also an important

consumer of this product. The production of grape juice concentrate is reported to be an

important alternative market for domestic growers of wine grapes.23 In recent years, imports

have accounted for a significant share of domestic consumption, especially during those

times when U.S.-produced grape juice is not available,24 as most U.S. retail sales of grape
 25 Juice Products Association, written submission to the USITC, April 4, 2008, 1.

 26 USITC, Dataweb.

 27 Ibid.

 28 GTIS, Global Trade Atlas.

 29 Ibid. 

 30 “Chilean Agriculture Overview,” Agrarian Policies and Studies Bureau, December 2005, 42.

 31 Ibid., 43.

 32 Chilealimentos, email communication with Commission staff, April 2, 2008.

 33 “Gold in Frozen Fruits,” FOODNEWS, September 2006, 12.

 34 “Processed Food,” Ag-Network-Chile, Embassy of Chile, Washington, DC, 3.

 35 “Gold in Frozen Fruits,” FOODNEWS, September 2006, 12.

 36 “New Horizons,” FOODNEWS, September 2006, 8.

 37 Ibid., 16.

1-6

juice are products blended from U.S. and imported juice.25 Total U.S. imports of grape juice

concentrate were valued at $82 million in 2007, up by about 240 percent from $24 million

in 2003, with nearly all of the increase accounted for by rising shipments from Argentina.

Argentina accounted for 81 percent of all U.S. imports of grape juice concentrate in 2007,

and Canada, Mexico, and Chile accounted for most of the remainder.26 Imports from Chile

were valued at $3 million, or about 4 percent of total U.S. imports in 2007, and have trended

downward irregularly since 2003.27 The United States, with total exports of grape juice

concentrate valued at nearly $50 million in 2007, was the fourth leading global exporter

behind Argentina, Italy, and Spain, and accounted for about 9.5 percent of global trade.28

U.S. exports rose by nearly 12 percent between 2003 and 2007, with Canada accounting for

about 62 percent of U.S. grape juice concentrate exports in 2007. In 2007, there were no U.S.

exports of grape juice concentrate to Chile.29

Chile

Certain Vegetables

A wide variety of vegetables is grown throughout Chile, with production intended for sales

in both domestic and export markets.30 The topography of Chile allows for the production

of certain vegetables in multiple climatic regions within Chile, which results in product

availability throughout much of the year.31 In addition, Chile benefits from its

counterseasonality to major consuming markets in the Northern Hemisphere, although this

may be less important with frozen products.

Chilean production of certain vegetables was 53,208 mt grown on 8,636 hectares

(21,374 acres) in 2007.32 Frozen sweet corn and canned artichokes accounted for almost

65 percent of the total production volume for the category. Data on the Chilean value of

production and production trends of these vegetables are not available; however, it is known

that Chile’s processed vegetable industry is significant and growing.33 Frozen fruit and

vegetable production exceeded $101 million in 2003 (the latest year for which data are

available),34 while food processing, in particular frozen food production, reportedly grew by

10 percent annually in recent years.35 Additionally, Chilean investment in its canned food

industry has risen, resulting in an increase in capacity of up to 20 percent for some sectors

in 2005 over the previous year.36 According to Chilean sources, one of the most promising

new products for the Chilean canned food industry is canned artichokes.37
 38 “Fresh Fruits and Vegetables,” Ag-Network-Chile, Embassy of Chile, Washington, DC, 4.

 39 “Gold in Frozen Fruits,” FOODNEWS, September 2006, 12.

 40 “Becoming a World Leader,” FOODNEWS, September 2006, 18.

 41 “New Horizons,” FOODNEWS, September 2006, 16.

 42 “A National Priority,” FOODNEWS, September 2006, 6.

 43 Ibid., 3–6.

 44 Because trade data are available only at the aggregated 6-digit HTS level, the data presented here for

certain frozen vegetables include certain beans, other vegetables, and vegetable mixtures that are not

included in the category of certain vegetables subject to this report.

 45 GTIS, Global Trade Atlas.

 46 Ibid.

 47 USDA, FAS, Chile Fresh Deciduous Fruit Annual 2007, November 20, 2007, 7.

 48 USDA, FAS, Chile Wine Annual 2007, June 13, 2007, 4.

 49 Ibid., 3.

 50 Chilealimentos, email communication with Commission staff, April 2, 2008.

1-7

Chile is also a global exporter of fresh and frozen vegetables, exporting over 75 different

fruits and vegetables to 70 countries in recent years.38 In 2005, the frozen food industry

exported products valued at $146 million, with frozen vegetables accounting for 21 percent

of this value.39 Frozen food products exported in greatest values in recent years included

artichokes, asparagus, mushrooms, and peppers.40 As U.S. tariffs are phased out,41 Chilean

producers are expecting to increase exports of vegetables, including canned artichokes.

Further, several companies are reportedly increasing investments in packaging design as a

larger share of their products is exported in retail-size containers.42 Finally, in an effort to

remain a major foreign supplier of processed foods, Chilean food companies are

concentrating on such current global trade issues as food safety and product traceability,

satisfying changing consumer demands through innovative product design and packaging,

and expanding efforts to improve overall domestic farming practices.43

Chilean exports of certain frozen vegetables44 rose by approximately 60 percent during 2003-

07 reaching an estimated value of $36 million.45 Exports were mainly to the EU, the United

States, Venezuela, and Colombia. Exports to the United States increased more rapidly than

overall exports. Exports to the United States increased by more than 90 percent from 2003

to 2007, and, with a value of $9 million in 2007, were about 25 percent of total exports.

Chilean imports of those vegetables covered here were valued at approximately $3 million

in 2007; imports, about three-fifths of which were miscellaneous frozen vegetables and

canned artichokes, were imported from a number of countries including Argentina, Peru, and

the EU.

Chilean exports of certain canned vegetables including canned artichokes grew by

140 percent in value between 2003 and 2007 to about $15 million.46 The vast majority of

exports were to the United States, with a small amount to Russia and Canada during the

period. Chilean imports of certain canned vegetables (including canned artichokes) were

valued at less than $1 million in 2007 and were received mainly from Spain, Thailand, and

Morocco.

Grape Juice

Chile is a leading global producer and exporter of both wine and table grapes. During 2007,

Chile produced 1.3 million mt of table grapes of which it exported 69 percent47 and produced

770 million liters of wine of which it exported 78 percent.48 Chile has an estimated 8,000

producers of wine grapes and an estimated wine-grape planted area of about

117,000 hectares (290,000 acres).49 In contrast, only 7,833 ha (19,340 acres) were devoted

to grapes for juice concentrate in 2007.50 In 2006, processing (for grape juice and wine)
 51 USDA, FAS, Chile Fresh Deciduous Fruit Annual 2007, November 20, 2007, 7.

 52 GTIS, Global Trade Atlas.

 53 Ibid.

 54 USITC, Dataweb.

 55 U.S. industry representative, telephone interview by Commission staff, February 27, 2008.

1-8

accounted for 21 percent of total Chilean grape production, domestic table grape

consumption accounted for about 9 percent, and most of the remainder was exported as table

grapes.51

Total Chilean exports of grape juice concentrate grew by nearly 300 percent from 2003 to

2007 reaching an estimated value of $46 million. Nearly all of the export increase was to

Chile’s top four markets: Japan, Mexico, Canada, and Venezuela. Exports to the United

States fluctuated downward during 2003–07 and, with a value of $3.2 million in 2007, were

about 7 percent of total Chilean grape juice concentrate exports.52 Chile’s imports of grape

juice concentrate, virtually all from Argentina53 and none from the United States in 2007,54

were valued at $5 million and were used mostly in Chile’s wine industry.55
2-1

CHAPTER 2

Probable Effect Advice

* * * * * * *
2-2

* * * * * * *
Biblio-1

Bibliography

“Chile Produce, Chile Adds Value” ProChile. Chile Magazine, Santiago, Issue 3, 2008. 

Embassy of Chile, Fresh Fruits and Vegetables. Washington, DC: Chile Agricultural Office, 2008.

http://www.ag-network-chile.net (accessed March 21, 2008).

Embassy of Chile, Processed Food. Washington, DC: Chile Agricultural Office, 2008. http://www.agnetwork-chile.net (accessed March 21, 2008).

Global Trade Information Service, Inc. (GTIS). Global Trade Atlas.

Goldberg, Mike and Eric Palladini. “Chile: A Strategy to Promote Innovative Small and Medium 

Enterprises,” Policy Research Working Paper WPS4518, Latin America Finance and Private Sector Unit,

The World Bank, February 1, 2008.

MaGill, Greg. “2004 Grape Juice Concentrate Summary Report and Future Projections: A Paradigm Shift

in Business philosophy is Upon Us.” Joseph W. Ciatti Co., LLC. Central California Winegrowers,

Marketing and Policy-Marketing Issues. http://ccwinegrowers.org/symposium (accessed

March 14, 2008).

McLean, VA: American Frozen Food Institute, 2005. “2004 Frozen Food Pack Statistics Book.” 

MKF Research LLC. “Economic Impact of New York Grapes, Grape Juice and Wine 2005.” Economic

impact report commissioned by the New York Wine and Grape Foundation. The Wine Business Center,

2005.

MKF Research LLC. “The Impact of Wine, Grapes and Grape Products on the American Economy 2007:

Family Businesses Building Value.” Economic impact report prepared for Wine America, the Wine

Institute, Wine Grape Growers of America, and the National Grape and Wine Initiative. The Wine

Business Center, 2007.

Paggi, Mechel and Fumiko Yamazaki. “Grape Juice Concentrate Trade Profile.” Prepared for the

California Association of Winegrape Growers, April 2005.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Foreign Agriculture Service (FAS). (Author: Luis Hennicke).

Chile Fresh Deciduous Fruit Annual 2007. GAIN Report No. CI7030, November 20, 2007. 

——. Chile Wine Annual 2007. GAIN Report No. CI7015, June 13, 2007.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). Noncitrus

Fruits and Nuts 2007 Preliminary Summary. Washington, DC: USDA, January 2008.

U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC). Interactive Tariff and Trade Dataweb (Dataweb).

http://dataweb.usitc.gov (accessed various dates).

U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC). Tariff Information Center.

http://www.usitc.gov/tata/hts/bychapter/index (accessed April 1, 2008).

United States Trade Representative (USTR). “United States and Chile Sign Historic Free Trade

Agreement.” Press release, June 6, 2003.

APPENDIX A

REQUEST LETTERS FROM THE USTR

A-3
A-4
A-5

APPENDIX B

FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE

13250 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 12, 2008 / Notices 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation Nos. 332–498 and Chile FTA–

103–020] 

Certain Vegetables and Grape Juice: 

Probable Economic Effect of 

Accelerated Tariff Elimination for 

Certain Goods of Chile 

AGENCY: United States International 

Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Institution of investigation and 

request for written submissions. 

SUMMARY: Following receipt of a request 

on February 11, 2008, from the United 

States Trade Representative (USTR), as 

amended by a letter received on 

February 22, 2008, for an investigation 

and advice pursuant to section 332(g) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. (332(g)) 

and in accordance with section 103 of 

the U.S.–Chile Free Trade Agreement 

Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 

note), the Commission instituted 

Investigation No. 332–498 and Chile 

FTA–103–020, Certain Vegetables and 

Grape Juice: Probable Economic Effect 

of Accelerated Tariff Elimination for 

Certain Goods of Chile. 

DATES: February 11, 2008: Date of 

receipt of request, amended by letter 

received February 22, 2008. 

March 7, 2008: Date of institution of 

investigation. 

April 4, 2008: Deadline for written 

statements. 

May 22, 2008: Transmittal of report to 

the USTR. 

ADDRESSES: All Commission offices, 

including the Commission’s hearing 

rooms, are located in the United States 

International Trade Commission 

Building, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC. All written 

submissions and statements should be 

addressed to the Secretary, United 

States International Trade Commission, 

500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20436. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Information may be obtained from 

Timothy McCarty, (202–205–3324 or 

timothy.mccarty@usitc.gov); for 

information on the legal aspects, contact 

William Gearhart of the Commission’s 

Office of the General Counsel (202–205–

3091 or william.gearhart@usitc.gov). 

The media should contact Margaret 

O’Laughlin, Office of External Relations 

(202–205–1819 or 

margaret.olaughlin@usitc.gov). Hearing 

impaired individuals are advised that 

information on this matter can be 

obtained by contacting the TDD 

terminal on (202–205–1810). General 

information concerning the Commission 

may also be obtained by accessing its 

internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). 

The public record for this investigation 

may be viewed on the Commission’s 

electronic docket (EDIS–ONLINE) at 

http://www.usitc.gov/secretary/ 

edis.htm. Persons with mobility 

impairments who will need special 

assistance in gaining access to the 

Commission should contact the Office 

of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: According 

to the USTR’s letter and annex thereto, 

the President may accelerate the 

elimination of duties under the United 

States–Chile Free Trade Agreement 

(U.S.–Chile FTA) on certain vegetables 

and grape juice that are qualifying goods 

of Chile and classified in the tariff items 

listed below. Duties on these goods 

would be eliminated on or about 

January 1, 2009. Section 201(b) of the 

U.S.–Chile Free Trade Agreement 

Implementation Act (Act) authorizes the 

President, subject to the consultation 

and layover requirements in section 103 

of the Act, to proclaim such 

modifications as the United States may 

agree to with Chile regarding the staging 

of any duty treatment set forth in Annex 

3.3 of the U.S.–Chile FTA. Section 103 

of the Act requires the President to 

obtain advice regarding the proposed 

action from the Commission. 

The USTR requested that the 

Commission provide advice as to the 

probable economic effect of eliminating 

the U.S. tariff under the U.S.–Chile FTA 

on domestic industries producing like 

or directly competitive articles, workers 

in these industries, and on consumers of 

the affected goods, on the articles 

provided for in the following 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

subheadings: (1) 0710.22.40 (beans, 

reduced in size); (2) 0710.30.00 

(spinach, New Zealand spinach, and 

orache spinach); (3) 0710.40.00 (sweet 

corn); (4) 0710.80.97 (vegetables, nesi, 

uncooked or cooked by steaming or 

boiling in water, frozen, reduced in 

size); (5) 0710.90.91 (mixtures of 

vegetables, nesi, uncooked or cooked by 

steaming or boiling in water, frozen); (6) 

2005.99.80 (artichokes); and (7) 

2009.69.00 (grape juice including grape 

must, other). 

As requested, the Commission will 

provide its advice to the USTR by May 

22, 2008. USTR requested that the 

Commission mark as ‘‘confidential’’

those portions of its report and working 

papers that contain the Commission’s 

probable economic effect advice. The 

USTR requested that the Commission, 

as soon as possible after May 22, issue 

a public version of its report with 

portions classified as ‘‘confidential’’ and 

any confidential business information 

deleted. 

Written Submissions: In lieu of a 

public hearing, interested parties are 

invited to submit written statements 

concerning the matters to be addressed 

by the Commission in this investigation. 

Submissions should be addressed to the 

Secretary, United States International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436. To be assured of 

consideration by the Commission, 

written statements should be submitted 

to the Commission at the earliest 

practical date and should be received no 

later than the close of business on April 

4, 2008. All written submissions must 

conform with the provisions of section 

201.8 of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.8). 

Section 201.8 of the rules requires that 

a signed original (or copy designated as 

an original) and fourteen (14) copies of 

each document be filed. In the event 

that confidential treatment of the 

document is requested, at least four (4) 

additional copies must be filed, from 

which the confidential business 

information must be deleted (see the 

following paragraph for further 

information regarding confidential 

business information). The 

Commission’s rules authorize filing 

submissions with the Secretary by 

facsimile or electronic means only to the 

extent permitted by section 201.8 of the 

rules (see Handbook for Electronic 

Filing Procedures, http://www.usitc.gov/ 

secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/ 

documents/ 

handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf). 

Persons with questions regarding 

electronic filing should contact the 

Secretary (202–205–2000 or 

edis@usitc.gov). 

Any submissions that contain 

confidential business information must 

also conform with the requirements of 

section 201.6 of the Commission’s Rules 

of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

201.6). Section 201.6 of the rules 

requires that the cover of the document 

and the individual pages be clearly 

marked as to whether they are the 

‘‘confidential’’ or ‘‘nonconfidential’’

version, and that the confidential 

business information be clearly 

identified by means of brackets. All 

written submissions, except for 

confidential business information, will 

be made available in the Office of the 

Secretary to the Commission for 

inspection by interested parties. 

The Commission may include some or 

all of the confidential business 

information submitted in the course of 

this investigation in the report it sends 

to the USTR and the President. 

However, the Commission will not 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

B-3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 12, 2008 / Notices 13251 

publish such confidential business 

information in the public version of its 

report in a manner that would reveal the 

operations of the firm supplying the 

information. 

Issued: March 7, 2008. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E8–4877 Filed 3–11–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 731–TA–1145 

(Preliminary)] 

Certain Steel Threaded Rod From 

China 

AGENCY: United States International 

Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Institution of antidumping duty 

investigation and scheduling of a 

preliminary phase investigation. 

SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives 

notice of the institution of an 

investigation and commencement of 

preliminary phase antidumping duty 

investigation No. 731–TA–1145 

(Preliminary) under section 733(a) (19 

U.S.C. 1673b(a)) to determine whether 

there is a reasonable indication that an 

industry in the United States is 

materially injured or threatened with 

material injury, or the establishment of 

an industry in the United States is 

materially retarded, by reason of 

imports from China of certain steel 

threaded rod provided for in statistical 

reporting number 7318.15.5060 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States, that are alleged to be sold 

in the United States at less than fair 

value. Unless the Department of 

Commerce extends the time for 

initiation pursuant to section 

732(c)(1)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 

1673a(c)(1)(B)), the Commission must 

reach a preliminary determination in 

antidumping duty investigations in 45 

days, or in this case by April 21, 2008. 

The Commission’s views are due at 

Commerce within five business days 

thereafter, or by April 28, 2008. 

For further information concerning 

the conduct of this investigation and 

rules of general application, consult the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, part 201, subparts A through 

E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, 

subparts A and B (19 CFR part 207). 

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 5, 2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim 

McClure (202–205–3191), Office of 

Investigations, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired persons can obtain 

information on this matter by contacting 

the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202–

205–1810. Persons with mobility 

impairments who will need special 

assistance in gaining access to the 

Commission should contact the Office 

of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. 

General information concerning the 

Commission may also be obtained by 

accessing its Internet server (http:// 

www.usitc.gov). The public record for 

this investigation may be viewed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

at http://edis.usitc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background.—This investigation is 

being instituted in response to a petition 

filed on March 5, 2008, by Vulcan 

Threaded Products, Inc., Pelham, AL. 

Participation in the investigation and 

public service list.—Persons (other than 

petitioners) wishing to participate in the 

investigation as parties must file an 

entry of appearance with the Secretary 

to the Commission, as provided in 

sections 201.11 and 207.10 of the 

Commission’s rules, not later than seven 

days after publication of this notice in 

the Federal Register . Industrial users 

and (if the merchandise under 

investigation is sold at the retail level) 

representative consumer organizations 

have the right to appear as parties in 

Commission antidumping duty 

investigations. The Secretary will 

prepare a public service list containing 

the names and addresses of all persons, 

or their representatives, who are parties 

to this investigation upon the expiration 

of the period for filing entries of 

appearance. 

Limited disclosure of business 

proprietary information (BPI) under an 

administrative protective order (APO) 

and BPI service list.—Pursuant to 

section 207.7(a) of the Commission’s 

rules, the Secretary will make BPI 

gathered in this investigation available 

to authorized applicants representing 

interested parties (as defined in 19 

U.S.C. 1677(9)) who are parties to the 

investigation under the APO issued in 

the investigation, provided that the 

application is made not later than seven 

days after the publication of this notice 

in the Federal Register. A separate 

service list will be maintained by the 

Secretary for those parties authorized to 

receive BPI under the APO. 

Conference.—The Commission’s 

Director of Operations has scheduled a 

conference in connection with this 

investigation for 9:30 a.m. on March 26, 

2008, at the U.S. International Trade 

Commission Building, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC. Parties wishing to 

participate in the conference should 

contact Jim McClure (202–205–3191) 

not later than March 21, 2008, to arrange 

for their appearance. Parties in support 

of the imposition of antidumping duties 

in this investigation and parties in 

opposition to the imposition of such 

duties will each be collectively 

allocated one hour within which to 

make an oral presentation at the 

conference. A nonparty who has 

testimony that may aid the 

Commission’s deliberations may request 

permission to present a short statement 

at the conference. 

Written submissions.—As provided in 

sections 201.8 and 207.15 of the 

Commission’s rules, any person may 

submit to the Commission on or before 

March 31, 2008, a written brief 

containing information and arguments 

pertinent to the subject matter of the 

investigation. Parties may file written 

testimony in connection with their 

presentation at the conference no later 

than three days before the conference. If 

briefs or written testimony contain BPI, 

they must conform with the 

requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, 

and 207.7 of the Commission’s rules. 

The Commission’s rules do not 

authorize filing of submissions with the 

Secretary by facsimile or electronic 

means, except to the extent permitted by 

section 201.8 of the Commission’s rules, 

as amended, 67 FR 68036 (November 8, 

2002). Even where electronic filing of a 

document is permitted, certain 

documents must also be filed in paper 

form, as specified in II (C) of the 

Commission’s Handbook on Electronic 

Filing Procedures, 67 FR 68168, 68173 

(November 8, 2002). 

In accordance with sections 201.16(c) 

and 207.3 of the rules, each document 

filed by a party to the investigation must 

be served on all other parties to the 

investigation (as identified by either the 

public or BPI service list), and a 

certificate of service must be timely 

filed. The Secretary will not accept a 

document for filing without a certificate 

of service. 

Authority: This investigation is being 

conducted under authority of title VII of the 

Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published 

pursuant to section 207.12 of the 

Commission’s rules. 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: March 6, 2008. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E8–4832 Filed 3–11–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

B-4
APPENDIX C

SUMMARY OF VIEWS OF INTERESTED

PARTIES

 1

 Paul Rosenthal, Kelley Drye & Warren, counsel for the Juice Products Association, written submission,

April 4, 2008.

 2

 Jim Gore and Jim Clawson, JBC International, on behalf of the Wine Institute and California

Association of Wine Grape Growers, written submission, April 4, 2008.

C-3

The Juice Products Association1

In its submission, the Juice Products Association (Association), whose membership consists

of major packers and distributors of fruit and vegetable juices which account for a significant

majority of juice processors in the United States, opposes any reduction of the duty on U.S.

imports of grape juice from Chile. Although many of its processor members also import

grape juice concentrate, the Association maintains that the current duty structure supports

a competitive balance between domestically-produced juice and imported juice. The

Association states that, faced with lagging domestic wine sales as a result of intensifying

competition from wine imports, U.S. growers and processors have been able to divert their

excess grape production into grape juice and concentrate, but that the ability of U.S.

producers to raise prices is constrained by the low prices of grape juice concentrate imports.

The Association states that a tariff reduction for Chile and the resulting low prices would

harm the U.S. juice industry, reduce grower revenue, and may cause some U.S. juice

extractors to go out of business. 

The Wine Institute and the California Association of Wine

Grape Growers2

The California Association of Wine Grape Growers (CAWG) is a farmer advocacy group

providing leadership on public policy, research and education programs, sustainable farming

practices, and trade policy to the California wine-grape industry; the Wine Institute is the

public policy advocacy organization for California wineries and affiliated businesses

supporting legislative and regulatory advocacy, international market development, media

relations, scientific research, and education programs. In their joint submission, the Wine

Institute and CAWG support the continuation of the original phase-out schedule for duties

on grape juice concentrate (HTS 2009.69.00) established under the U.S.-Chile FTA. They

maintain that the current schedule allows U.S. producers of grape juice concentrate the

opportunity to adjust to, and plan for, increased competition from Chile, while accelerating

tariff elimination would create a competitive disadvantage for the U.S. industry.