Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 243 / Monday, December 20, 2010 / Notices 79337 

1We have selected India as the primary surrogate 

country in which to value all inputs with the 

exception of live crawfish, the primary input, and 

the by-product, crawfish scrap shell. See 

Preliminary Results, 75 FR at 34102, for a 

discussion regarding the valuation of live crawfish 

and the selection of Indonesia as the secondary 

surrogate country. 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–848] 

Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From 

the People’s Republic of China: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative and New-Shipper 

Reviews 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On June 16, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce published the 

preliminary results of the administrative 

and new-shipper reviews of the 

antidumping duty order on freshwater 

crawfish tail meat from the People’s 

Republic of China (PRC). The reviews 

cover five exporters. The period of 

review is September 1, 2008, through 

August 31, 2009. 

Based on our analysis of the 

comments received, we have made 

changes in the margin calculations for 

all companies. 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 the Reviews.’’ 

DATES: Effective Date: December 20, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dmitry Vladimirov or Minoo Hatten, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–0665 or (202) 482– 

1690, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 16, 2010, the Department of 

Commerce (the Department) published 

Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the 

People’s Republic of China: Preliminary 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative and New-Shipper 

Reviews, 75 FR 34100 (June 16, 2010) 

(Preliminary Results), in the Federal 

Register. The administrative review 

covers Xiping Opeck Food Co., Ltd. 

(Xiping Opeck), Shanghai Ocean Flavor 

International Trading Co., Ltd. 

(Shanghai Ocean Flavor), China 

Kingdom (Beijing) Import & Export Co., 

Ltd. (China Kingdom), and Xuzhou 

Jinjiang Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. (Jinjiang). 

The new-shipper review covers Nanjing 

Gemsen International Co., Ltd. (Nanjing 

Gemsen). We invited interested parties 

to comment on the Preliminary Results. 

On June 22, 2010, the Department 

placed export and wage-rate data on the 

record for comment following the recent 

decision in Dorbest Limited et. al. v. 

United States, 604 F.3d 1363 (CAFC 

2010) (Dorbest IV), issued by the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Federal 

Circuit (CAFC) on May 14, 2010, 

regarding the Department’s wage-rate 

methodology. On July 2, 2010, and July 

15, 2010, Jinjiang submitted certain 

factual information with respect to the 

valuation of surrogate values (SVs). On 

July 3, 2010, Xiping Opeck, Shanghai 

Ocean Flavor, China Kingdom, and 

Nanjing Gemsen submitted additional 

factual information. 

We received case briefs from Xiping 

Opeck, Shanghai Ocean Flavor, China 

Kingdom, Nanjing Gemsen, Jinjiang, and 

the petitioner, the Crawfish Processors 

Alliance. We received a rebuttal brief 

from the petitioner. Interested parties 

submitted comments regarding the June 

22, 2010, wage-rate data in their case 

and rebuttal briefs. No interested party 

requested a hearing. 

On July 16 and August 4, 2010, we 

placed additional information on the 

record concerning the valuation of wage 

rates and invited parties to comment. 

On August 11, 2010, the petitioner 

provided comments. On October 5, 

2010, we placed on the record industryspecific labor-wage data and the wagerate calculations and invited interested 

parties to comment. We did not receive 

any timely comments on the additional 

information. 

On October 13, 2010, we extended the 

time limit for completion of the final 

results of these reviews from October 

14, 2010, to December 13, 2010. See 

Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the 

People’s Republic of China: Extension of 

the Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative and New-Shipper 

Reviews, 75 FR 64249 (October 19, 

2010). 

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 product covered by the 

antidumping duty order is freshwater 

crawfish tail meat, in all its forms 

(whether washed or with fat on, 

whether purged or un-purged), 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 

(HTSUS) under item numbers 

1605.40.10.10 and 1605.40.10.90, which 

are the HTSUS numbers for prepared 

foodstuffs, indicating peeled crawfish 

tail meat and other, as introduced by 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP) in 2000, and HTSUS numbers 

0306.19.00.10 and 0306.29.00.00, which 

are reserved for fish and crustaceans in 

general. The HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes only. The written description 

of the scope of the order is dispositive. 

Surrogate Country 

In the Preliminary Results, we treated 

the PRC as a non-market-economy 

(NME) country and, therefore, we 

calculated normal value in accordance 

with section 773(c) of the Act. Also, we 

stated that we selected India 1 as the 

appropriate surrogate country to use in 

these reviews because it is a significant 

producer of merchandise comparable to 

subject merchandise and it is at a level 

of economic development comparable to 

the PRC, pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of 

the Act. See Preliminary Results, 75 FR 

at 34102. No interested party 

commented on our designation of the 

PRC as an NME country or the selection 

of India as the primary surrogate 

country. Therefore, for the final results 

of reviews, we have continued to treat 

the PRC as an NME country and have 

used the same primary surrogate 

country, India. 

Separate Rates 

In proceedings involving NME 

countries, the Department begins with a 

rebuttable presumption that all 

companies within the country are 

subject to government control and, thus, 

should be assigned a single 

antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the 

Department’s policy to assign all 

exporters of merchandise subject to 

review in an NME country this single 

rate unless an exporter can demonstrate 

that it is sufficiently independent so as 

to be entitled to a separate rate. 

In the Preliminary Results, we found 

that Xiping Opeck, Shanghai Ocean 

Flavor, China Kingdom, Jinjiang, and 

Nanjing Gemsen demonstrated their 

eligibility for separate-rate status. See 

Preliminary Results, 75 FR at 34102– 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
79338 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 243 / Monday, December 20, 2010 / Notices 

2As we stated in the Preliminary Results, 75 FR 

at 34101, we determined that the sales of subject 

merchandise produced by Henan Baoshu and 

exported to the United States by Nanjing Gemsen 

during the period of review constitute bona-fide 

transactions subject to the new-shipper review. 

34103. We received no comments from 

interested parties regarding the separaterate status of these companies. 

Therefore, in these final results of 

reviews, we continue to find that the 

evidence placed on the record of these 

reviews by Xiping Opeck, Shanghai 

Ocean Flavor, China Kingdom, Jinjiang, 

and Nanjing Gemsen demonstrates an 

absence of government control, both in 

law and in fact, with respect to these 

companies’ exports of the subject 

merchandise. Thus, we have determined 

that Xiping Opeck, Shanghai Ocean 

Flavor, China Kingdom, Jinjiang, and 

Nanjing Gemsen are eligible to receive 

a separate rate. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

The issues raised in the case briefs in 

these reviews are addressed in the 

‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’ 

(Decision Memo) from Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, dated concurrently 

with and hereby adopted by this notice. 

A list of the issues which the parties 

have raised and to which we have 

responded is in the Decision Memo and 

attached to this notice as an Appendix. 

The Decision Memo, which is a public 

document, is on file in the CRU of the 

main Department of Commerce 

building, Room 7046, and is accessible 

on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/ 

index.html. The paper copy and 

electronic version of the Decision Memo 

are identical in content. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

We have revised the wage-rate 

methodology and the surrogate value for 

cold storage applicable to finished 

merchandise. For further details see the 

Decision Memo at Comments 1 and 2, 

respectively; see also Memorandum to 

the File entitled ‘‘Fresh Crawfish Tail 

Meat from the People’s Republic of 

China: Surrogate-Factor Valuations for 

the Final Results,’’ dated concurrently 

with this notice (Final SV Memo). 

Because of the changes identified above, 

the antidumping duty margin 

calculations for all reviewed companies 

have changed since publication of the 

Preliminary Results. 

Wage-Rate Methodology 

On May 14, 2010, the CAFC found in 

Dorbest IV, 604 F.3d at 1366, that the 

‘‘{regression-based} method for 

calculating wage rates {as stipulated by 

19 CFR 351.408(c)(3)} uses data not 

permitted by {the statutory 

requirements laid out in section 773 of 

the Act (i.e., 19 U.S.C. 1677b(c))}* * *.’’ 

The Department is continuing to 

evaluate options for determining labor 

values in light of the recent CAFC 

decision. For these final results, 

however, we have calculated an hourly 

wage rate to use in valuing the 

respondents’ reported labor input by 

averaging industry-specific earnings 

and/or wages in countries that are 

economically comparable to the PRC 

and that are significant producers of 

comparable merchandise. 

For the final results of these reviews, 

we are valuing labor using a simpleaverage industry-specific wage rate 

using earnings or wage data reported 

under Chapter 5B by the International 

Labor Organization (ILO). To achieve an 

industry-specific labor value, we relied 

on industry-specific labor data from the 

countries we determined to be both 

economically comparable to the PRC 

and significant producers of comparable 

merchandise. A full description of the 

industry-specific wage-rate calculation 

methodology is provided in the 

memorandum to the file entitled 

‘‘Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from 

the People’s Republic of China: 

Industry-Specific Wage-Rate Selection,’’ 

dated October 5, 2010 (WageCalculation Memo). See Final SV Memo 

as well. The Department calculated a 

simple-average industry-specific wage 

rate of $1.38 for these final results. 

Specifically, for these reviews, the 

Department has calculated the wage rate 

using a simple average of the data 

provided to the ILO under SubClassification 15 of the ISIC–Revision 3 

standard by countries determined to be 

both economically comparable to the 

PRC and significant producers of 

comparable merchandise. We find the 

two-digit description under ISIC– 

Revision 3 (‘‘Manufacture of food 

products and beverages’’) to be the best 

available wage-rate SV on the record 

because it is specific and derived from 

industries that produce merchandise 

comparable to the subject merchandise. 

Consequently, we averaged the ILO 

industry-specific wage-rate data or 

earnings data available from the 

following countries found to be 

economically comparable to the PRC 

and which are significant producers of 

comparable merchandise: Ecuador, 

Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Peru, 

Philippines, Thailand, and Ukraine. For 

further information on the calculation of 

the wage rate, see Wage-Calculation 

Memo. For the full discussion 

pertaining to this issue, see the Decision 

Memo at Comment 1. 

Final Results of the Reviews 

As a result of the administrative 

review, we determine that the following 

percentage weighted-average dumping 

margins exist for the period September 

1, 2008, through August 31, 2009: 

Company Margin 

(percent) 

Xiping Opeck Food Co., Ltd. ...... 9.39 

Shanghai Ocean Flavor International Trading Co., Ltd. ....... 41.92 

China Kingdom (Beijing) Import 

& Export Co., Ltd. ................... 18.87 

Xuzhou Jinjiang Foodstuffs Co., 

Ltd. .......................................... 5.39 

As a result of the new-shipper review, 

we determine that a weighted-average 

dumping margin of 12.37 percent exists 

for merchandise produced by Henan 

Baoshu Aquatic Products Co., Ltd. 

(Henan Baoshu), and exported by 

Nanjing Gemsen International Co., Ltd., 

for the period September 1, 2008, 

through August 31, 2009.2

Assessment 

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.212(b)(1), we have calculated 

importer-specific (or customer-specific) 

assessment rates for merchandise 

subject to these reviews. 

For these final results, we divided the 

total dumping margins (calculated as 

the difference between normal value 

and export price) for each of the 

respondents’ importers or customers by 

the total number of kilograms the 

exporter sold to that importer or 

customer. We will direct CBP to assess 

the resulting per-kilogram dollar 

amount against each kilogram of 

merchandise in each of that importer’s/ 

customer’s entries during the review 

period. 

We intend to issue assessment 

instructions to CBP 15 days after the 

date of publication of these final results 

of reviews. 

Cash-Deposit Requirements 

The following cash-deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of these final results of these 

reviews for all shipments of the subject 

merchandise entered, or withdrawn 

from warehouse, for consumption on or 

after the publication date as provided by 

section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For 

subject merchandise exported by Xiping 

Opeck, Shanghai Ocean Flavor, China 

Kingdom, and Jinjiang and for subject 

merchandise produced by Henan 

Baoshu and exported by Nanjing 

Gemsen, the cash-deposit rate will be 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 243 / Monday, December 20, 2010 / Notices 79339 

3For subject merchandise exported by Nanjing 

Gemsen but not produced by Henan Baoshu, the 

cash-deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate. 

the rate established in these final results 

of reviews, as listed above; 3 (2) for 

previously reviewed or investigated 

companies not listed above that have 

separate rates, the cash-deposit rate will 

continue to be the company-specific rate 

published for the most recent period; 

(3) for all other PRC exporters of subject 

merchandise which have not been 

found to be entitled to a separate rate, 

the cash-deposit rate will be PRC-wide 

rate of 223.01 percent; (4) for all nonPRC exporters of subject merchandise 

the cash-deposit rate will be the rate 

applicable to the PRC entity that 

supplied that exporter. These deposit 

requirements shall remain in effect until 

further notice. 

Notifications 

This notice also 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. 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

notification of the destruction of APO 

materials or conversion to judicial 

protective order is hereby requested. 

Failure to comply with the regulations 

and terms of an APO is a sanctionable 

violation. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. 

Dated: December 13, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix 

1. Valuation of Labor. 

2. Valuation of Cold Storage. 

3. Valuation of Live Crawfish. 

4. Filing of New Factual Information. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31882 Filed 12–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

Notice of Scope Rulings 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 20, 

2010. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Department’’) hereby publishes a list of 

scope rulings completed between April 

1, 2010, and June 30, 2010. In 

conjunction with this list, the 

Department is also publishing a list of 

requests for scope rulings and 

anticircumvention determinations 

pending as of June 30, 2010. We intend 

to publish future lists after the close of 

the next calendar quarter. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia 

Hancock, AD/CVD Operations, China/ 

NME Group, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202– 

482–1394. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Department’s regulations provide 

that the Secretary will publish in the 

Federal Register a list of scope rulings 

on a quarterly basis. See 19 CFR 

351.225(o). Our most recent notification 

of scope rulings was published on 

August 25, 2010. See Notice of Scope 

Rulings, 75 FR 52311 (August 25, 2010). 

This current notice covers all scope 

rulings and anticircumvention 

determinations completed by Import 

Administration between April 1, 2010, 

and June 30, 2010, inclusive, and it also 

lists any scope or anticircumvention 

inquiries pending as of June 30, 2010. 

As described below, subsequent lists 

will follow after the close of each 

calendar quarter. 

Scope Rulings Completed Between 

April 1, 2010, and June 30, 2010: 

People’s Republic of China 

A–570–502: Iron Construction Castings 

From the People’s Republic of China 

Requestor: National Diversified Sales; 

its grates and frames are outside the 

scope of the antidumping duty order; 

April 16, 2010. 

A–570–891: Hand Trucks From the 

People’s Republic of China 

Requestor: PelRay International LLC; 

its Janitor Cart, Large Dinner Trolleys 

(model nos. D–012 and D–012A) and 

Small Dinner Trolleys (model nos. D– 

013 and D–013A) are outside the scope 

of the antidumping duty order; April 12, 

2010. 

A–570–891: Hand Trucks From the 

People’s Republic of China 

Requestor: Northern Tool & 

Equipment Co.; its high-axle torch cart 

(item #164771) is outside the scope of 

the antidumping duty order; June 1, 

2010. 

A–570–899: Artist Canvas From the 

People’s Republic of China 

Requestor: Wuxi Phoenix Artist 

Materials Co., Ltd.; its framed artist 

canvas is not within the scope of the 

antidumping duty order; May 13, 2010. 

A–570–909: Steel Nails From the 

People’s Republic of China 

Requestor: Itochu Building Products; 

its plastic cap steel nails are within the 

scope of the antidumping duty order; 

May 12, 2010. 

A–570–941/C–570–942: Kitchen 

Appliance Shelving and Racks From the 

People’s Republic of China 

Requestor: Custom BioGenic Systems, 

Inc.; its inventory control racks are 

outside the scope of the antidumping 

duty and countervailing orders; April 1, 

2010. 

A–570–918: Steel Wire Garment Hangers 

From the People’s Republic of China 

Requestor: Target Corporation; its 

chrome-plated accessory hangers are 

outside the scope of the antidumping 

duty order; May 12, 2010. 

Germany 

A–428–801: Ball Bearings and Parts 

Thereof From Germany 

Requestor: Schaeffler Group; its ball 

roller bearings are within the scope of 

the antidumping duty order; May 11, 

2010. 

Anticircumvention Determinations 

Completed Between April 1, 2010, and 

June 30, 2010: None. 

Scope Inquiries Terminated Between 

April 1, 2010, and June 30, 2010: None. 

Anticircumvention Inquiries 

Terminated Between April 1, 2010, and 

June 30, 2010: None. 

Scope Inquiries Pending as of June 30, 

2010: 

Germany 

A–428–801: Ball Bearings and Parts 

From Germany 

Requestor: Myonic GmbH; whether its 

turbocharger spindle units are within 

the scope of the antidumping duty 

order; requested January 11, 2010; 

initiated April 16, 2010. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES