Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 196 / Thursday, October 12, 2017 / Notices 47469 

13See Letter from Palmyra do Brasil, ‘‘Silicon 

Metal from Brazil/Exporter’s Request for 

Postponement of Final Antidumping 

Determination’’ dated September 6, 2017. 

1See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 

People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 

Rescission of Review in Part, and Preliminary Intent 

to Rescind New Shipper Review; 2015–2016, 82 FR 

26435 (June 7, 2017), and accompanying Decision 

Memorandum (Preliminary Decision Memorandum) 

(collectively, Preliminary Results). 

2The Crawfish Processors Alliance consists of the 

following firms: A&S Crawfish; Acadiana 

Fishermen’s Cooperative; Arnaudville Seafood 

Plant; Atchafalaya Crawfish Processors; Atchafalaya 

Crawfish Processing, L.L.C.; Bayou Land Seafood, 

LLC; Bieber Farms Crawfish, Inc.; Blanchard’s 

Seafood, Inc.; Bonanza Crawfish Farm, Inc.; CJL 

Enterprise, Inc. d/b/a C.J.’s; Cajun Central, Inc.; 

Cajun Seafood Distributor, Inc.; Catahoula Crawfish, 

Inc.; Choplin Seafood; Clearwater Crawfish; 

Crawfish Enterprises, Inc.; Dugas Seafood aka Carl’s 

Seafood; Toups Crawfish, L.L.C.; Harvestime 

Seafood; Harvey’s Seafood; Louisiana Seafood Co.; 

Louisiana Premium Seafood; L.T. West, Inc.; 

Continued 

location of the hearing two days before 

the scheduled date. 

Postponement of Final Determination 

and Extension of Provisional Measures 

Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides 

that a final determination may be 

postponed until not later than 135 days 

after the date of the publication of the 

preliminary determination if, in the 

event of an affirmative preliminary 

determination, a request for such 

postponement is made by exporters who 

account for a significant proportion of 

exports of the subject merchandise, or in 

the event of a negative preliminary 

determination, a request for such 

postponement is made by the petitioner. 

Section 351.210(e)(2) of the 

Department’s regulations requires that a 

request by exporters for postponement 

of the final determination be 

accompanied by a request for extension 

of provisional measures from a fourmonth period to a period not more than 

six months in duration. 

On September 6, 2017, pursuant to 19 

CFR 351.210(e), Palmyra do Brasil 

requested that the Department postpone 

the final determination and that 

provisional measures be extended to a 

period not to exceed six months.13 In 

accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of 

the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), 

because: (1) The preliminary 

determination is affirmative; (2) the 

requesting exporter accounts for a 

significant proportion of exports of the 

subject merchandise; and (3) no 

compelling reasons for denial exist, the 

Department is postponing the final 

determination and extending the 

provisional measures from a four-month 

period to a period not greater than six 

months. Accordingly, the Department 

will make its final determination no 

later than 135 days after the date of 

publication of this preliminary 

determination. 

International Trade Commission 

Notification 

In accordance with section 733(f) of 

the Act, the Department will notify the 

International Trade Commission (ITC) of 

its preliminary determination. If the 

final determination is affirmative, the 

ITC will determine before the later of 

120 days after the date of this 

preliminary determination or 45 days 

after the final determination whether 

these imports are materially injuring, or 

threaten material injury to, the U.S. 

industry. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This determination is issued and 

published in accordance with sections 

733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.205(c). 

Dated: October 4, 2017. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix I 

Scope of the Investigation 

The scope of this investigation covers all 

forms and sizes of silicon metal, including 

silicon metal powder. Silicon metal contains 

at least 85.00 percent but less than 99.99 

percent silicon, and less than 4.00 percent 

iron, by actual weight. Semiconductor grade 

silicon (merchandise containing at least 

99.99 percent silicon by actual weight and 

classifiable under Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 

subheading 2804.61.0000) is excluded from 

the scope of this investigation. 

Silicon metal is currently classifiable 

under subheadings 2804.69.1000 and 

2804.69.5000 of the HTSUS. While HTSUS 

numbers are provided for convenience and 

customs purposes, the written description of 

the scope remains dispositive. 

Appendix II 

List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Name Change for Dow Corning Silicio do 

Brasil Indu ́ stria e Come ́rcio Ltda. 

IV. Period of Investigation 

V. Scope Comments 

VI. Application of Facts Available and Use of 

Adverse Facts Available 

A. Application of Facts Available 

B. Use of Adverse Inference for LIASA 

C. Preliminary Estimated WeightedAverage Dumping Margin Based on AFA 

D. Corroboration of Secondary Information 

VII. Conclusion 

[FR Doc. 2017–22066 Filed 10–11–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

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 Review and Rescission 

of New Shipper Review; 2015–2016 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On June 7, 2017, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published the preliminary 

results of the administrative review and 

intent to rescind the new shipper review 

of the antidumping duty order on 

freshwater crawfish tail meat from the 

People’s Republic of China (PRC). The 

period of review (POR) for the 

administrative review and aligned new 

shipper review is September 1, 2015, 

through August 31, 2016. Based on our 

analysis of the comments received, the 

Department has made changes to the 

margin calculations for the final results 

of the administrative review. The 

Department continues to find that 

Jingzhou Tianhe Aquatic Products, 

Ltd.’s (Jingzhou Tianhe) single sale 

made to the United States during the 

POR was not bona fide and, therefore, 

is rescinding the new shipper review 

with respect to Jingzhou Tianhe. 

DATES: Applicable October 12, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Bryan Hansen or Minoo Hatten, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement 

and Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–3683 or (202) 482–1690, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 7, 2017, the Department 

published the preliminary results of the 

administrative review and intent to 

rescind the new shipper review of the 

antidumping duty order on freshwater 

crawfish tail meat from the People’s 

Republic of China (the PRC) 1 and 

invited interested parties to comment. 

On July 14, 2017, Hubei Nature 

Agriculture Industry Co., Ltd. (Hubei 

Nature) timely submitted its case brief 

in the administrative review and, on 

July 19, 2017, the Crawfish Processors 

Alliance 2 (the petitioners) timely 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
47470 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 196 / Thursday, October 12, 2017 / Notices 

Phillips Seafood, L.L.C.; Prairie Cajun Wholesale 

Distributors; Randol, Inc. aka Randol’s Seafood and 

Restaurant; Riceland Crawfish, Inc. aka Beaucoup 

Crawfish; Seafood International, Inc.; Sylvester’s 

Crawfish; and Teche Valley Seafood. 

3See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper 

Review of Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 

People’s Republic of China; 2015–2016,’’ dated 

concurrently with, and hereby adopted by this 

notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 

4See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 4 and 

5; see also Memorandum, ‘‘New Shipper Review of 

Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People’s 

Republic of China—Bona Fides Analysis of 

Jingzhou Tianhe Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.’s Sale,’’ 

dated June 1, 2017. 

5See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

Comment 1. 

6For more details on our methodology in 

selecting a rate for a non-examined separate rate 

exporter, see the ‘‘Separate Rates’’ section of the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum. 

7See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 

People’s Republic of China; Notice of Final Results 

of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 68 FR 

19504 (April 21, 2003). 

submitted its rebuttal brief. No party 

submitted comments concerning the 

Department’s preliminary intent to 

rescind the new shipper review of 

Jingzhou Tianhe. 

We conducted these reviews in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(1)(B) 

and 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (the Act). 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to the 

antidumping duty order is freshwater 

crawfish tail meat, which is currently 

classified in the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 

under subheadings 1605.40.10.10, 

1605.40.10.90, 0306.19.00.10, and 

0306.29.00.00. On February 10, 2012, 

the Department added HTSUS 

classification number 0306.29.01.00 to 

the scope description pursuant to a 

request by U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP). While the HTSUS 

numbers are provided for convenience 

and customs purposes, the written 

description is dispositive. A full 

description of the scope of the order is 

contained in the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum.3

Rescission of New Shipper Review 

As discussed in the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum, we 

preliminarily found that the sale made 

by Jingzhou Tianhe was not bona fide.4

We received no comments concerning 

this finding. Because the non-bona fide 

sale at issue was the only sale of subject 

merchandise that Jingzhou Tianhe made 

to the United States during the POR, we 

are rescinding the new shipper review 

of this company. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties in these 

reviews are addressed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum. A list of the 

issues raised is attached as an Appendix 

to this notice. The Issues and Decision 

Memorandum is a public document and 

is made available to the public via 

Enforcement and Compliance’s 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Centralized Electronic Service System 

(ACCESS). ACCESS is available to 

registered users at http://

access.trade.gov and is available to all 

parties in the Central Records Unit, 

Room B8024 of the main Department of 

Commerce building. In addition, a 

complete version of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum can be accessed 

directly on the Enforcement and 

Compliance Web site at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. A list of the 

topics discussed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum is attached as an 

Appendix to this notice. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on comments received from 

interested parties and further review of 

the record, the Department revised its 

calculation of the surrogate value for 

non-refrigerated inland freight 

expenses.5 This revision changed the 

weighted-average dumping margin 

results for Hubei Nature and, therefore, 

the rate applied to the non-selected, 

separate rate company, Xiping Opeck 

Food Co., Ltd. (Xiping Opeck). 

Separate Rate for a Non-Selected 

Company 

Xiping Opeck is the only exporter of 

crawfish tail meat from the PRC that 

demonstrated its eligibility for a 

separate rate which was not selected for 

individual examination in this review. 

As in the Preliminary Results, the 

Department has calculated a rate for the 

mandatory respondent Yancheng HiKing Agriculture Developing Co., Ltd. 

(Yancheng Hi-King) that is zero and a 

rate for the mandatory respondent 

Hubei Nature that is not zero, de 

minimis, or based entirely on facts 

available. Therefore, in accordance with 

section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act and its 

prior practice, the Department has 

assigned Hubei Nature’s calculated rate 

(i.e., 3.81 percent) as the separate rate 

for the non-examined separate rate 

exporter, Xiping Opeck, for these final 

results.6

PRC-Wide Entity 

As stated in the Preliminary Results, 

because no party requested a review of 

the PRC-wide entity in this review, the 

entity is not under review and the 

entity’s rate is not subject to change (i.e., 

223.01 percent).7

Final Results of the Administrative 

Review 

For the final results of the 

administrative review, we determine 

that the following percentage weightedaverage dumping margins exist for the 

period September 1, 2015, through 

August 31, 2016: 

Producer/exporter 

Weightedaverage 

margin 

(percent) 

Hubei Nature Agriculture Industry Co., Ltd .................. 3.81 

Xiping Opeck Food Co., Ltd 3.81 

Yancheng Hi-King Agriculture Developing Co., 

Ltd ..................................... 0.00 

Assessment Rates 

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the 

Act, and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the 

Department will determine, and U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries covered by these 

reviews. 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. 

For entries that were not reported in 

the U.S. sales databases submitted by 

companies individually examined 

during the administrative review, the 

Department will instruct CBP to 

liquidate such entries at the PRC-wide 

rate. We intend to issue assessment 

instructions to CBP 15 days after the 

date of publication of these final results 

of review. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of the final results of the 

administrative review for all shipments 

of the subject merchandise entered, or 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 196 / Thursday, October 12, 2017 / Notices 47471 

1See Silicon Metal from Australia, Brazil, and 

Norway: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value 

Investigations, 82 FR 16352 (April 4, 2017) 

(Initiation Notice). 

2See Silicon Metal from Australia, Brazil, and 

Norway: Postponement of Preliminary 

Determinations in the Less-Than-Fair-Value 

Investigations, 82 FR 35753 (August 1, 2017). 

3See Memorandum, ‘‘Decision Memorandum for 

the Preliminary Determination in the Less-ThanFair-Value Investigation of Silicon Metal from 

Australia’’ dated concurrently with, and hereby 

adopted by, this notice (Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum). 

4See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 

Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). 

5See Initiation Notice. 

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 the companies listed above, 

the cash deposit rate will be the rate 

established in the final results of the 

administrative review for each exporter 

as listed above, except if the rate is zero 

or de minimis, then no cash deposit will 

be required for that exporter; (2) for 

previously investigated companies not 

listed above that have separate rates, the 

cash deposit rate will continue to be the 

company-specific rate published for the 

investigation; (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 the PRC-wide rate of 223.01 percent; 

and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of 

subject merchandise which have not 

received their own rate, the cash deposit 

rate will be the rate applicable to the 

PRC entity that supplied that non-PRC 

exporter. 

These deposit requirements, when 

imposed, shall remain in effect until 

further notice. 

Disclosure 

We intend to disclose the calculations 

performed to parties in this proceeding 

within five days after public 

announcement of the final results in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). 

Notification to Importers 

This notice serves as a final reminder 

to importers of their responsibility 

under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a 

certificate regarding the reimbursement 

of antidumping duties prior to 

liquidation of the relevant entries 

during this review period. Failure to 

comply with this requirement could 

result in the Secretary’s presumption 

that reimbursement of antidumping 

duties occurred and the subsequent 

assessment of double antidumping 

duties. 

Notification Regarding Administrative 

Protective Orders 

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 

written notification of the return or 

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 violation subject to sanction. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

final results of administrative and new 

shipper reviews in accordance with 

sections 751(a)(1), 751(a)(2)(B)(iii), 

751(a)(3), 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.213(h) and 351.214. 

Dated: October 5, 2017. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix 

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum: 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Scope of the Order 

IV. Surrogate Country 

V. Separate Rates 

VI. Discussion of the Issues 

Comment 1: Calculation of Surrogate Value 

for Non-Refrigerated Inland Freight 

Expenses 

Comment 2: Selection of Financial 

Information to Value Factory Overhead, 

Selling, General & Administrative 

Expenses, and Profit 

VII. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2017–22071 Filed 10–11–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–602–810] 

Silicon Metal From Australia: 

Preliminary Affirmative Determination 

of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 

Preliminary Affirmative Determination 

of Critical Circumstances, 

Postponement of Final Determination, 

and Extension of Provisional Measures 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) preliminarily 

determines that silicon metal from 

Australia is being, or is likely to be, sold 

in the United States at less than fair 

value (LTFV). The period of 

investigation (POI) is January 1, 2016, 

through December 31, 2016. 

DATES: Applicable October 12, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Smith or Denisa Ursu, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement 

and Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–1766 or (202) 482–2285, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

This preliminary determination is 

made in accordance with section 733(b) 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(the Act). The Department published the 

notice of initiation of this investigation 

on April 4, 2017.1 On August 1, 2017, 

the Department postponed the 

preliminary determination of this 

investigation and the revised deadline is 

now October 4, 2017.2 For a complete 

description of the events that followed 

the initiation of this investigation, see 

the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum.3 A list of topics included 

in the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum is included as Appendix 

II to this notice. The Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum is a public 

document and is on file electronically 

via Enforcement and Compliance’s 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Centralized Electronic Service System 

(ACCESS). ACCESS is available to 

registered users at https://

access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the 

Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of 

the main Department of Commerce 

building. In addition, a complete 

version of the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum can be accessed directly 

at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. 

The signed and the electronic versions 

of the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum are identical in content. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The product covered by this 

investigation is silicon metal from 

Australia. For a complete description of 

the scope of this investigation, see 

Appendix I. 

Scope Comments 

In accordance with the preamble to 

the Department’s regulations,4 the 

Initiation Notice set aside a period of 

time for parties to raise issues regarding 

product coverage (i.e., scope).5 Certain 

interested parties commented on the 

scope of the investigation as it appeared 

in the Initiation Notice. After evaluating 

these comments, the Department 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES