5792 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No.
21 / Thursday, January 31, 2008 / Notices
a regulatory flexibility analysis has not
been prepared.
Dated: January 25, 2008.
Deborah A. Jefferson,
Director for Human Resources Management,
Department of Commerce.
[FR Doc. E8–1659 Filed 1–30–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–BS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A–570–888
Floor–standing, Metal–top Ironing
Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from
the People’s Republic of China: Notice
of Extension of Time Limit for Final
Results of Second Antidumping
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 31, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bobby Wong, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 9, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–0409.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On September 11, 2007, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published in the Federal
Register the preliminary results of this
antidumping administrative review.
Floor–Standing, Metal–Top Ironing
Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from
the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR
51781 (September 11, 2007). On
December 28, 2007, the Department
extended the deadline for these results
by 23 days. Floor–standing, Metal–top
Ironing Tables and Certain Parts
Thereof from the People’s Republic of
China: Notice of Extension of Time
Limit for Final Results of Second
Antidumping Administrative Review, 72
FR 73758 (December 28, 2007). The
period of review for this administrative
review is August 1, 2005, to July 31,
2006.
Extension of Time Limits for Final
Results
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
and section 351.213(h)(1) of the
Department’s regulations, the
Department shall issue the preliminary
VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:05 Jan 30, 2008 Jkt 214001
results of an administrative review
within 245 days after the last day of the
Error! Main Document Only.anniversary
month of the date of publication of the
order. The Act further provides that the
Department shall issue the final results
of review within 120 days after the date
on which the notice of the preliminary
results was published in the Federal
Register. However, if the Department
determines that it is not practicable to
complete the review within this time
period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act
and section 351.213(h)(2) of the
Department’s regulations allow the
Department to extend the 245–day
period to 365 days and the 120–day
period to 180 days.
In the instant review, the Department
finds that the current deadline for the
final results of February 1, 2008, is not
practicable. The Department requires
additional time to conduct surrogate
value research and review and analyze
interested party comments. As a result,
the Department has determined to
extend the current time limits of this
administrative review by an additional
37 days. Since a 37–day extension
would result in the deadline for the
final results falling on March 9, 2008,
which is a Sunday, the new deadline for
the final results will be the next
business day, March 10, 2008. Notice of
Clarification: Application of ‘‘Next
Business Day’’ Rule for Administrative
Determination Deadlines Pursuant to
the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70
FR 24533 (May 10, 2005).
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A)
and 777(I) of the Act.
Dated: January 24, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–1800 Filed 1–30–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
A–549–813
Canned Pineapple Fruit from Thailand:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 8, 2007, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of its administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on canned
pineapple fruit (CPF) from Thailand.
PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JAN1.SGM
See Canned Pineapple Fruit from
Thailand: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 72 FR 44490 (August 8, 2007)
(Preliminary Results). This review
covers shipments of subject
merchandise to the United States for the
period July 1, 2005 through June 30,
2006, made by Vita Food Factory (1989)
Ltd. (Vita) and Tropical Food Industries
Co. Ltd. (Trofco).
The Department determines that Vita
and Trofco made sales to the U.S. at less
than normal value. The final results are
listed below in the section titled ‘‘Final
Results of Review’’.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 31, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Douglas Kirby or Myrna Lobo, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 6, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3782 or (202) 482–
2371, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 8, 2007, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) published
the preliminary results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on CPF from
Thailand. See Preliminary Results. We
conducted a sales and cost verification
of Vita from September 17 through
September 25, 2007. See Verification of
the U.S. and Comparison Market Sales
Information and the Cost Information in
the Response of Vita Food Factory
(1989) Co., Ltd. for the 2005–06
Administrative Review of Canned
Pineapple Fruit (CPF) from Thailand,
issued on November 30, 2007 (Vita
Verification Report). Furthermore, we
conducted a sales verification of Trofco
on September 26 through September 28,
2007. See Verification of the U.S. and
Comparison Market Sales Information
of Tropical Food Industries Co., Ltd. for
the 2005–06 Administrative Review of
Canned Pineapple Fruit (CPF) from
Thailand, issued on November 30, 2007
(Trofco Verification Report). We invited
interested parties to comment on the
preliminary results and the verification
reports. We received no comments.
Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order
The product covered by this order is
CPF, defined as pineapple processed
and/or prepared into various product
forms, including rings, pieces, chunks,
tidbits, and crushed pineapple, that is
packed and cooked in metal cans with
either pineapple juice or sugar syrup
added. CPF is currently classifiable
31JAN1
 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 21 / Thursday, January 31, 2008 / Notices
under subheadings 2008.20.0010 and
2008.20.0090 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’). HTSUS 2008.20.0010
covers CPF packed in a sugar–based
syrup; HTSUS 2008.20.0090 covers CPF
packed without added sugar (i.e., juice–
packed). Although these HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and for customs purposes,
the written description of the scope is
dispositive. There have been no scope
rulings for the subject order.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our findings at verification,
we have made minor adjustments in the
methodology that was used in the
Preliminary Results for Trofco and Vita
and accounted for corrections to their
reported data.
At verification, Vita provided minor
corrections relating to its reported
commissions in the comparison market.
Moreover, the Department identified
additional minor corrections to Vita’s
reported commissions data. As a result,
we have made adjustments to certain
comparison market commissions made
by Vita. Vita also provided minor
corrections to its packing expenses and
its direct selling expenses. As a result,
we have made adjustments to Vita’s
packing expenses and direct selling
expenses. For a further explanation of
these changes, see Vita Verification
Report at pages 3–4. Furthermore, based
on information obtained since the
preliminary results of this review, we
have determined that Vita’s reported
commissions are more appropriately
treated as discounts for the majority of
sales by Vita to the United States. See
Vita Verification Report at page 7; see
also the Memorandum to the File, from
Douglas Kirby through Dana
Mermelstein (Program Manager) re:
Analysis of Vita for the Final Results,
dated January 24, 2008, on file in the
Central Record Unit, room B–099 of the
main Department of Commerce building
(CRU).
Trofco also provided minor
corrections at verification to its reported
packing expenses. As a result, we have
revised Trofco’s packing expenses.
Furthermore, Trofco provided minor
corrections to its direct selling expenses
for U.S. sales. As a result, we have
revised Trofco’s direct selling expenses
for U.S. sales. See Trofco Verification
Report at page 2; see also the
Memorandum to the File, from Myrna
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Lobo through Dana Mermelstein
(Program Manager) re: Analysis of
Trofco for the Final Results, dated
January 24, 2008, on file in the Central
Record Unit, room B–099 of the main
VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:05 Jan 30, 2008 Jkt 214001
5793
Department of Commerce building rate listed above; (2) for previously
(CRU). reviewed or investigated companies not
listed above, the cash deposit rate will
Final Results of Review
continue to be the company–specific
As a result of this review, we rate published for the most recent
determine that the following weighted– period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm
average dumping margins exist for the covered in this review, a prior review,
period July 1, 2005 through June 30, or the investigation, but the producer is,
2006: the cash deposit rate will be that
established for the producer of the
Weighted Average
Manufacturer/Exporter merchandise in these final results of
Margin
review, a prior review, or in the final
Vita Food Factory determination; and (4) if neither the
(1989) Ltd. ................. 7.13 percent exporter nor the producer is a firm
Tropical Food Industries covered in this review, a prior review,
Co., Ltd. .................... 10.40 percent
or the investigation, the cash deposit
rate will be 24.64 percent, the ‘‘all–
Assessment
others’’ rate established in the less–
The Department will determine, and than-fair–value investigation. These
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
deposit requirements shall remain in
(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties effect until publication of the final
on all appropriate entries, pursuant to results of the next administrative
section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of
review.
1930 (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.212(b).
The Department calculated importer- Certificate on Reimbursement
specific duty assessment rates (or, when
the importer was unknown by the This notice also serves as a final
respondent, customer–specific duty reminder to importers of their
assessment rates) on the basis of the responsibility under 19 CFR
ratio of the total amount of antidumping 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
duties calculated for the examined sales regarding the reimbursement of
observations involving each importer to antidumping duties prior to liquidation
the total entered value of the examined of the relevant entries during this
sales observations for that importer. The review period. Failure to comply with
Department intends to issue assessment this requirement could result in the
instructions to CBP 15 days after the Secretary’s presumption that
date of publication of these final results reimbursement of antidumping duties
of review. occurred, and in the subsequent
The Department clarified its assessment of double antidumping
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on duties.
May 6, 2003. This clarification will
apply to entries of subject merchandise Notification Regarding Administrative
during the POR produced by companies Protective Orders
included in these final results of review This notice is the only reminder to
for which the reviewed companies did
parties subject to the administrative
not know their merchandise was protective order (APO) of their
destined for the United States. In such
responsibility concerning the return or
instances, we will instruct CBP to destruction of proprietary information
liquidate unreviewed entries at the ‘‘All disclosed under the APO in accordance
Others’’ rate if there is no rate for the
with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written
intermediate company(ies) involved in
notification of the return or destruction
the transaction. For a discussion of this
of APO materials or conversion to
clarification, see Notice of Policy
judicial protective order is hereby
Concerning Assessment of Antidumping
requested. Failure to comply with the
Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
regulations and the terms of an APO is
Cash Deposits a sanctionable violation.
Furthermore, the following deposit We are issuing and publishing these
requirements will be effective upon results and this notice in accordance
publication of these final results of this with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of
administrative review for all shipments the Act.
of canned pineapple fruit from Thailand
Dated: January 24, 2008.
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the David M. Spooner,
publication date of these final results, as Assistant Secretary for Import
provided by section 751(a) of the Act: Administration.
(1) for companies covered by this [FR Doc. E8–1794 Filed 1–30–08; 8:45 am]
review, the cash deposit rate will be the BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JAN1.SGM 31JAN1