[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 101 (Friday, May 23, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30054-30059]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-11620]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

(A-570-851)


Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 23, 2008.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the ``Department'') is currently 
conducting a new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on 
certain preserved mushrooms from the People's Republic of China 
(``PRC'') covering the period February 1, 2007, through July 31, 2007. 
We preliminarily determine that the sale made by Dujiangyan Xingda 
Foodstuff Co., Ltd. (``Xingda''), was not made below normal value 
(``NV''). If these preliminary results are adopted in our final results 
of this review, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(``CBP'') to assess antidumping duties on entries of subject 
merchandise during the period of review (``POR'') for any importer-
specific assessment rates that are above de minimis.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zev Primor at (202) 482-4114; AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 19, 1999, the Department 
published in the Federal Register an amended final determination and 
antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from the PRC. See 
Notice of Amendment of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the 
People's Republic of China, 64 FR 8308 (February 19, 1999) (``Order''). 
On August 30, 2007, we received a timely new shipper review request in 
accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``the Act''), and 19 CFR 351.214(c), from exporter and 
producer, Xingda. On September 27, 2007, the Department published a 
notice in the Federal Register initiating a new shipper review for 
Xingda. See Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of 
China: Initiation of New Shipper Antidumping Duty Review, 72 FR 54899 
(September 27, 2007).
    On March 19, 2008, the Department published a notice in the Federal 
Register of the extension of the preliminary results by 60 days to May 
19, 2008. See Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of 
China: Extension of Preliminary Results for Eleventh Antidumping Duty 
New Shipper Review, 73 FR 14771 (March 19, 2008).
    We issued the standard antidumping duty questionnaire, along with 
the standard importer questionnaire for new shipper reviews, on 
September 27, 2007, and received responses in October and November 
2007. We issued supplemental questionnaires covering sections A, C, and 
D of the original questionnaire on January 29, 2008, and received 
timely responses to those questionnaires. We also issued additional 
section D supplemental questionnaires on April 18, and April 21, 2008, 
respectively, and received timely responses from Xingda.

Period of Review

    The POR covers February 1, 2007, through July 31, 2007.

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are certain preserved mushrooms, 
whether imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. The 
certain preserved mushrooms covered under this order are the species 
Agaricus bisporus and Agaricus bitorquis. ``Certain Preserved 
Mushrooms'' refers to mushrooms that have been prepared or preserved by 
cleaning, blanching, and sometimes slicing or cutting. These mushrooms 
are then packed and heated in containers including, but not limited to, 
cans or glass jars in a suitable liquid medium, including, but not 
limited to, water, brine, butter or butter sauce. Certain preserved 
mushrooms may be imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. 
Included within the scope of this order are ``brined'' mushrooms, which 
are presalted and packed in a heavy salt solution to provisionally 
preserve them for further processing.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On June 19, 2000, the Department affirmed that 
``marinated,'' ``acidified,'' or ``pickled'' mushrooms containing 
less than 0.5 percent acetic acid are within the scope of the 
antidumping duty order. See Recommendation Memorandum-Final Ruling 
of Request by Tak Fat, et al. for Exclusion of Certain Marinated, 
Acidified Mushrooms from the Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order on 
Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China,'' 
dated June 19, 2000. On February 9, 2005, this decision was upheld 
by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. See 
Tak Fat v. United States, 396 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Excluded from the scope of this order are the following: (1) All 
other species of mushroom, including straw mushrooms; (2) all fresh and 
chilled mushrooms, including ``refrigerated'' or ``quick blanched 
mushrooms'' (3) dried mushrooms; (4) frozen mushrooms; and (5) 
``marinated,'' ``acidified,'' or ``pickled'' mushrooms, which are 
prepared or preserved by means of vinegar or acetic acid, but may 
contain oil or other additives.
    The merchandise subject to this order is classifiable under 
subheadings: 2003.10.0127, 2003.10.0131, 2003.10.0137, 2003.10.0143, 
2003.10.0147, 2003.10.0153 and 0711.51.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the 
written description of the scope of this order is dispositive.

Bona Fide Analysis

    Consistent with the Department's practice, we investigated the bona 
fide nature of the sale made by Xingda for this new shipper review. In 
evaluating whether or not a single sale in a new shipper review is 
commercially reasonable, and therefore bona fide, the Department 
considers, inter alia, such factors as: (1) the timing of the sale; (2) 
the price and quantity; (3) the expenses arising from the transaction; 
(4) whether the goods were resold at a profit; and (5)

[[Page 30055]]

whether the transaction was made on an arm's-length basis. See Tianjin 
Tiancheng Pharm. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 366 F. Supp. 2d 1246, 1250 
(CIT 2005). Accordingly, the Department considers a number of factors 
in its bona fide analysis, ``all of which may speak to the commercial 
realities surrounding an alleged sale of subject merchandise.'' See 
Hebei New Donghua Amino Acid Co., Ltd. v. United States, 374 F. Supp. 
2d 1333, 1342 (CIT 2005) (citing Fresh Garlic From the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Administrative Review 
and Rescission of New Shipper Review, 67 FR 11283 (March 13, 2002) and 
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum).
    We preliminarily found that the U.S. sale made by Xingda during the 
POR was made on a bona fide basis. Specifically, we found that: (1) The 
timing of the sale does not indicate that the sale might not be bona 
fide; (2) the price and quantity of the sale were within the range of 
the prices and quantities of other entries of subject merchandise from 
the PRC into the United States during the POR, based upon the 
Department's review of data obtained from CBP; (3) Xingda and its 
customer did not incur any extraordinary expenses arising from the 
transaction; (4) the sale was resold at a profit; and (5) the sale was 
made between unaffiliated parties at arm's-length.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Calculation Memorandum from Zev Primor, Sr. 
International Trade Compliance Analyst, to The File via Mark 
Manning, Program Manager, Office 4, ``Bona Fide Sales Analysis for 
Dujiangyan Xingda Foodstuff Co., Ltd.,'' dated concurrently with 
this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on our review of the record evidence concerning the bona fide 
nature of this sale, as well as Xingda's eligibility for a separate 
rate (see ``Separate Rates Determination'' section, below) and the 
Department's determination that the seller was not affiliated with any 
exporter or producer that had previously shipped subject merchandise to 
the United States, we preliminarily determine that Xingda has met the 
requirements to qualify as a new shipper during the POR. Therefore, for 
purposes of these preliminary results, we are treating the sale of 
subject merchandise to the United States as an appropriate transaction 
for this new shipper review.

NME Country Status

    In every case conducted by the Department involving the PRC, the 
PRC has been treated as a non-market economy (``NME'') country. See 
Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final Results and 
Partial Rescission of the 2004/2005 Administrative Review and Notice of 
Rescission of 2004/2005 New Shipper Review, 71 FR 66304 (November 14, 
2006). In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any 
determination that a foreign country is an NME country shall remain in 
effect until revoked by the administering authority. None of the 
parties to this proceeding have contested such treatment. Accordingly, 
we calculated NV in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act, which 
applies to NME countries.

Separate Rates Determination

    A designation of a country as an NME remains in effect until it is 
revoked by the Department. See section 771(18)(C) of the Act. 
Accordingly, there is a rebuttable presumption that all companies 
within the PRC are subject to government control and, thus, should be 
assessed a single antidumping duty rate. It is the Department's 
standard policy to assign all exporters of the merchandise subject to 
review in NME countries a single rate unless an exporter can 
affirmatively demonstrate an absence of government control, both in law 
(de jure) and in fact (de facto), with respect to exports. To establish 
whether a company is sufficiently independent to be entitled to a 
separate, company-specific rate, the Department analyzes each exporting 
entity in an NME country under the test established in the Final 
Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value: Sparklers from the 
People's Republic of China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991), (``Sparklers'') 
as amplified by the Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the People's Republic of China, 59 FR 
22585 (May 2, 1994) (``Silicon Carbide'').

Absence of De Jure Control

    Evidence supporting, though not requiring, a finding of de jure 
absence of government control over export activities includes: (1) an 
absence of restrictive stipulations associated with the individual 
exporter's business and export licenses; (2) any legislative enactments 
decentralizing control of companies; and (3) any other formal measures 
by the government decentralizing control of companies. See Sparklers, 
56 FR at 20589.
    In the instant review, Xingda submitted a complete response to the 
separate rates section of the Department's questionnaire. The evidence 
submitted in the instant review by Xingda includes government laws and 
regulations on corporate ownership and control, business licenses, and 
narrative information regarding the company's operations and selection 
of management. The evidence provided by Xingda supports a preliminary 
finding of a de jure absence of government control over its export 
activities because: (1) there are no controls on exports of subject 
merchandise, such as quotas applied to, or licenses required for, 
exports of the subject merchandise to the United States; and (2) 
legislative enactments exist decentralizing control of companies. See 
Xingda's Section A Response at Exhibits 2-7 (October 26, 2007).

Absence of De Facto Control

    The absence of de facto government control over exports generally 
is based on whether the respondent: (1) sets its own export prices 
independent of the government and other exporters; (2) retains the 
proceeds from its export sales and makes independent decisions 
regarding the disposition of profits or financing of losses; (3) has 
the authority to negotiate and sign contracts and other agreements; and 
(4) has autonomy from the government regarding the selection of 
management. See Silicon Carbide, 59 FR at 22586-87; Sparklers, 56 FR at 
20589; Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Furfuryl 
Alcohol From the People's Republic of China, 60 FR 22544, 22545 (May 8, 
1995).
    In its questionnaire responses, Xingda submitted evidence 
demonstrating an absence of de facto government control over its export 
activities. Specifically, this evidence indicates that: (1) the company 
sets its own export prices independent of the government and without 
the approval of a government authority; (2) the company retains the 
proceeds from its sales and makes independent decisions regarding the 
disposition of profits or financing of losses; (3) the company has a 
general manager with the authority to negotiate and bind the company in 
an agreement; (4) the general manager is selected by the shareholders' 
meeting, and the general manager appoints the manager of each 
department; and (5) there is no restriction on the company's use of 
export revenues. Therefore, we have preliminarily found that Xingda 
established prima facie that it qualifies for a separate rate under the 
criteria established by Silicon Carbide and Sparklers.

Surrogate Country

    When the Department investigates imports from an NME country, 
section 773(c)(1) of the Act directs it to base NV, in most 
circumstances, on the NME producer's factors of production

[[Page 30056]]

(``FOPs''), valued in a surrogate market-economy country or countries 
considered to be appropriate by the Department. In accordance with 
section 773(c)(4) of the Act, in valuing the FOPs, the Department shall 
utilize, to the extent possible, the prices or costs of FOPs in one or 
more market-economy countries that are at a level of economic 
development comparable to that of the NME country and are significant 
producers of comparable merchandise. The sources of the surrogate 
values we have used in this new shipper review are discussed under the 
``Normal Value'' section, below. On January 29, 2008, the Department 
determined that India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Colombia, and 
Thailand are countries comparable to the PRC in terms of economic 
development, and requested comments from interested parties on 
selecting the appropriate surrogate country for this review. See Letter 
to All Interested Parties, RE: New Shipper Review of Certain Preserved 
Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Dujiangyan Xingda 
Foodstuffs Co., Ltd., dated March 19, 2008. No party submitted 
surrogate country selection comments.
    On April 21, 2008, the Department examined the export levels \3\ of 
subject merchandise from the above-mentioned countries and found that 
India and Indonesia are significant producers of comparable 
merchandise. See Memorandum from Zev Primor, Sr. International Trade 
Compliance Analyst, to Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, ``Antidumping 
Duty New Shipper Review of Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the 
People's Republic of China: Selection of a Surrogate Country,'' dated 
April 21, 2008, (``Surrogate Country Memorandum'') at 4. However, since 
India has exports in both of the HTS subheadings identified for subject 
merchandise, while Indonesia has exports under only one of the HTS 
subheadings, we found that the Indian export data are more 
comprehensive and representative of subject merchandise than Indonesian 
export data. Id. at 5. In selecting the appropriate surrogate country, 
the Department examines the availability and reliability of data from 
the countries deemed to be economically comparable and significant 
producers of subject merchandise. For a description of our practice, 
see Department Policy Bulletin No. 04.1: Non-Market Economy Surrogate 
Country Selection Process (March 1, 2004). India has been the primary 
surrogate country in numerous past segments for this proceeding. In 
those past segments, the Department found India's import statistics to 
be an available and reliable source for surrogate values. Id. at 4. 
Therefore, since India: (1) is a significant producer of comparable 
merchandise, whose production of subject merchandise is more 
comprehensive than Indonesia's production; (2) is at a similar level of 
economic development as the PRC; and (3) has publicly available and 
reliable data, which the Department has relied upon for numerous 
segments of this proceeding, the Department selected India as the 
surrogate country, pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of the Act. See 
Surrogate Country Memorandum at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Department was unable to find world production data for 
subject merchandise and relied on export data as a substitute for 
overall production.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    To determine whether Xingda's sale of subject merchandise to the 
United States was made at a price below NV, we compared its U.S. price 
to NV, as described in the ``U.S. Price'' and ``Normal Value'' sections 
of this notice, below.

U.S. Price

    In accordance with section 772(a) of the Act, we based U.S. price 
on the export price (``EP'') of the sale to the United States by Xingda 
because the first sale to an unaffiliated party was made before the 
date of importation and the use of constructed export price was not 
otherwise warranted. We calculated EP based on the free-on-board price 
to the first unaffiliated purchaser in the United States. For this EP 
sale, we deducted foreign inland freight and foreign brokerage and 
handling from the starting price (or gross unit price), in accordance 
with section 772(c) of the Act. For Xingda's U.S. sale, each of these 
services was either provided by an NME vendor or paid for using an NME 
currency. Thus, we based the deduction of these movement charges on 
surrogate values. We valued foreign inland freight with the surrogate 
value for truck freight, which we obtained from www.infreight.com. This 
source provides daily rates per truck load from six major points of 
origin to five different destinations in India. See Memorandum from Zev 
Primor, Sr. International Trade Compliance Analyst, through Mark 
Manning, Program Manager, to the File, ``12th New Shipper Review of 
Certain Preserved Mushroom from the People's Republic of China: 
Surrogate Values for the Preliminary Results'' (``Surrogate Values 
Memorandum'') at Exhibit 6. We valued foreign brokerage and handling 
with the publicly summarized brokerage and handling expense reported in 
the U.S. sales listing of Indian mushroom producer, Agro Dutch 
Industries, Ltd. (``Agro Dutch''), in the 2004-2005 administrative 
review of Certain Preserved Mushrooms from India. Id. at Exhibit 7.

Normal Value

1. Methodology

    Section 773(c)(1)(B) of the Act provides that the Department shall 
determine the NV using an FOP methodology if the merchandise is 
exported from an NME and the information does not permit the 
calculation of NV using home-market prices, third-country prices, or 
constructed value under section 773(a) of the Act. The Department bases 
NV on FOPs because the presence of government controls on various 
aspects of NMEs renders price comparisons and the calculation of 
production costs invalid under the Department's normal methodologies. 
See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished or Unfinished, 
From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Intent to Rescind in Part, 70 
FR 39744 (July 11, 2005), unchanged in Tapered Roller Bearings and 
Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, from the People's Republic of 
China: Final Results of 2003-2004 Administrative Review and Partial 
Rescission of Review, 71 FR 2517 (January 17, 2006).
    We calculated NV by adding together the value of the FOPs, general 
expenses, profit, and packing costs. The FOPs for subject merchandise 
include: (1) quantities of raw materials employed; (2) hours of labor 
required; (3) amounts of energy and other utilities consumed; (4) 
representative capital and selling costs; and (5) packing materials. We 
used the FOPs reported by Xingda for materials, energy, labor, and 
packing, and valued those FOPs by multiplying the amount of the factor 
consumed in producing subject merchandise by the average unit surrogate 
value of the factor.
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1), when a producer sources an 
input from a market-economy country and pays for it in a market-economy 
currency, the Department will normally value the FOP using the actual 
price paid for the input. See 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1); see also Lasko 
Metal Products v. United States, 43 F.3d 1442, 1445-1446 (Fed. Cir. 
1994) (affirming the Department's use of market-based prices to value 
certain FOPs). The Department has instituted a rebuttable

[[Page 30057]]

presumption that market economy input prices are the best available 
information for valuing an input when the total volume of the input 
purchased from all market economy sources during the period of 
investigation or review is 33 percent or greater of the total volume of 
the input purchased from all sources during the period. In these cases, 
unless case-specific facts provide adequate grounds to rebut the 
Department's presumption, the Department will use the weighted-average 
market economy purchase price to value the input. Alternatively, when 
the volume of an NME firm's purchases of an input from market economy 
suppliers during the period is below 33 percent of its total volume of 
purchases of the input during the period, but where these purchases are 
otherwise valid and there is no reason to disregard the prices, the 
Department will weight-average the weighted-average market economy 
purchase price with an appropriate surrogate value according to their 
respective shares of the total volume of purchases, unless case-
specific facts provide adequate grounds to rebut the presumption. When 
an NME firm has made market economy input purchases that may have been 
dumped or subsidized, are not bona fide, or are otherwise not 
acceptable for use in a dumping calculation, the Department will 
exclude them from the total quantity of all market economy purchases to 
ensure a fair determination of whether valid market economy purchases 
meet the 33 percent threshold. See Antidumping Methodologies: Market 
Economy Inputs, Expected Non-Market Economy Wages, Duty Drawback; and 
Request for Comments, 71 FR 61716 (October 19, 2006). In this case, 
Xingda reported that it did not purchase any inputs from market economy 
sources.
    In addition, we added freight costs to the surrogate costs that we 
calculated for material inputs. We calculated freight costs by 
multiplying surrogate freight rates by the shorter of the reported 
distance from the domestic supplier to the factory that produced the 
subject merchandise or the distance from the nearest seaport to the 
factory that produced the subject merchandise, as appropriate. Where 
there were multiple domestic suppliers of a material input, we 
calculated a weighted-average distance after limiting each supplier's 
distance to no more than the distance from the nearest seaport to 
Xingda. This adjustment is in accordance with the decision by the Court 
of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Sigma Corp. v. United States, 117 
F.3d 1401, 1407-1408 (Fed. Cir. 1997). We increased the calculated 
costs of the FOPs for surrogate general expenses and profit. See 
Surrogate Values Memorandum.

2. Selection of Surrogate Values

    In selecting surrogate values, we followed, to the extent 
practicable, the Department's practice of choosing public values which 
are non-export averages, representative of a range of prices in effect 
during the POR, or over a period as close as possible in time to the 
POR, product-specific, and tax-exclusive. See, e.g., Notice of 
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Negative 
Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances and Postponement of 
Final Determination: Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp From 
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 69 FR 42672, 42682 (July 16, 2004), 
unchanged in Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp From the Socialist Republic 
of Vietnam, 69 FR 71005 (December 8, 2004). We also considered the 
quality of the source of surrogate information in selecting surrogate 
values. See Manganese Metal From the People's Republic of China; Final 
Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 63 FR 12440 (March 13, 1998). Where we could only obtain 
surrogate values that were not contemporaneous with the POR, we 
inflated (or deflated) the surrogate values using, where appropriate, 
the Indian Wholesale Price Index as published in International 
Financial Statistics by the International Monetary Fund. See Surrogate 
Values Memorandum at Exhibit 1.
    In calculating surrogate values from import statistics, in 
accordance with the Department's practice, we disregarded statistics 
for imports from NME countries and countries deemed to maintain broadly 
available, non-industry-specific subsidies which may benefit all 
exporters to all export markets (e.g., Indonesia, South Korea, and 
Thailand). See, e.g., Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Certain Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields From The 
People's Republic of China, 67 FR 6482 (February 12, 2002) and 
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1. See also 
Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 
Postponement of Final Determination, and Affirmative Preliminary 
Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Color Television 
Receivers From the People's Republic of China, 68 FR 66800, 66808 
(November 28, 2003), unchanged in Notice of Final Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Negative Final Determination of 
Critical Circumstances: Certain Color Television Receivers From the 
People's Republic of China, 69 FR 20594 (April 16, 2004). Additionally, 
we excluded from our calculations imports that were labeled as 
originating from an unspecified country because we could not determine 
whether they were from an NME country.
    We valued production material inputs (mushroom spawn, rice straw, 
and manure) using the fiscal year (``FY'') 2006-2007 (April 2006 
through March 2007) financial statements of Agro Dutch or Flex Foods 
Ltd. (``Flex Foods''), Indian producers of mushrooms and vegetables, as 
follows. To value the input of mushroom spawn, we used data from the FY 
2006-2007 financial statement of Agro Dutch because Agro Dutch's 
mushroom spawn value is specific to the species Agaricus bisporous, 
which is the species used to produce subject merchandise. To value the 
input of rice straw, we used the rice straw value from the FY 2006-2007 
financial statement of Flex Foods because this value is specific to the 
input. Similarly, to value the input of manure, we used the manure 
value from the FY 2006-2007 financial statement of Flex Foods because 
this value is specific to the input. See Surrogate Values Memorandum at 
Exhibit 2.
    We valued processing and canning material inputs (phosphate, 
calcium carbonate, rapeseed, mill cake, urea, gypsum powder, salt, 
citric acid, tin plate, copper wire, and sealing glue) using weighted-
average Indian import values derived from the World Trade Atlas online 
(``WTA''), for the period February 2007 through July 2007. See 
Surrogate Values Memorandum at Exhibits 2 and 3. In addition, we valued 
packing material inputs (cartons, labels, tape, kraft paper and glue) 
with weighted-average Indian import values derived from the WTA for the 
period February 2007 through July 2007. Id. at Exhibit 5. The Indian 
import statistics obtained from the WTA were published by the Indian 
Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics, Ministry 
of Commerce of India and are contemporaneous with the POR. As the 
Indian surrogate values were denominated in rupees, in accordance with 
section 773A(a) of the Act, they were converted to U.S. dollars using 
the official exchange rate for India recorded on the date of sale of 
subject merchandise in this case. See http://

[[Page 30058]]

www.ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/index.html.
    To value land rent, the Department used data from the 2001 Punjab 
State Development Report, administered by the Planning Commission of 
the Government of India. Since the value of land rent was not 
contemporaneous with the POR, the Department adjusted the value for 
inflation. See Surrogate Values Memorandum at Exhibit 2.
    To value electricity, the Department used the 2000 electricity 
price in India reported in Energy Prices & Taxes, Second Quarter 2003, 
published by the International Energy Agency. See Surrogate Values 
Memorandum at Exhibit 4, containing information obtained from 
data.iea.org. Since the electricity rates were not contemporaneous with 
the POR, the Department adjusted the value for inflation. See Surrogate 
Values Memorandum at Exhibit 4.
    To value natural gas, the Department used information from the 
Natural Gas Authority of India, from February 2005. Because the 
information was not contemporaneous with the POR, we adjusted the 
average cost of natural gas for inflation. See Surrogate Values 
Memorandum at Exhibit 4.
    To value water, the Department used data from the Maharastra 
Industrial Development Corporation (www.midcindia.org) for June 2003, 
which we found to be the best available information since it includes a 
wide range of industrial water rates. Since the water rates were not 
contemporaneous with the POR, the Department adjusted the value for 
inflation. See Surrogate Values Memorandum at Exhibit 4.
    To value inland freight expenses incurred for transporting raw 
materials and finished subject merchandise, we used data from 
www.infreight.com. This source provides daily rates per truck load from 
six major points of origin to five different destinations in India, for 
the period February through July 2005. Since these freight rates are 
not contemporaneous with the POR, the Department adjusted the value for 
inflation. See Surrogate Values Memorandum at Exhibit 6. 19 CFR 
351.408(c)(3) requires the use of a regression-based wage rate. 
Therefore, to value labor, the Department used the regression-based 
wage rate for the PRC published on the Import Administration website. 
See the IA website:
    http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/05wages/05wages-041608.html, and see 
Corrected 2007 Calculation of Expected Non-Market Economy Wages, 73 FR 
27795 (May 14, 2008).
    To value brokerage and handling, the Department used the publicly 
summarized average brokerage and handling expenses reported in the U.S. 
sales listings of Agro Dutch's May 24, 2005, submission in the sixth 
antidumping duty review of certain preserved mushrooms from India. See 
Surrogate Values Memorandum at Exhibit 7.
    To value the surrogate financial ratios for factory overhead 
(``OH''), selling, general & administrative (``SG&A'') expenses, and 
profit, the Department used the 2006-2007 financial statements of Agro 
Dutch and Flex Foods.\4\ The Department notes that Agro Dutch is a 
producer of mushrooms, and Flex Foods is a producer of mushrooms and 
vegetable products. Therefore, Agro Dutch's and Flex Foods' financial 
ratios for OH and SG&A are comparable to Xingda's financial ratios 
because Agro Dutch's and Flex Foods' production experience is 
comparable to Xingda's production experience by virtue of each 
company's production of subject merchandise. Additionally, the 
financial statements of these two companies are contemporaneous for two 
months of the POR. Moreover, an average of the financial statements of 
Agro Dutch and Flex Foods represents a broader spectrum of the Indian 
mushroom industry, than the financial statement of a single mushroom 
producer. See Surrogate Values Memorandum at Exhibit 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Both Agro Dutch and Flex Foods have a fiscal year of April 
to March.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Currency Conversion

    We made currency conversions into U.S. dollars, in accordance with 
section 773A(a) of the Act, based on the exchange rates in effect on 
the dates of the U.S. sales as certified by the Federal Reserve Bank. 
These exchange rates can be accessed at the website of Import 
Administration at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/index.html.

Combination Rate

    In new shipper reviews, the Department may, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.107(b), establish a combination cash deposit rate for each 
combination of the exporter and its supplying producer(s). See Fresh 
Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review, 67 FR 72139 at 72140 (December 4, 
2002), Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review: 
Certain In-Shell Raw Pistachios from Iran, 68 FR 353 at 354 (January 3, 
2003), and Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges from India: Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review, 68 FR 351 (January 3, 
2002). The Department has preliminarily determined that a combination 
rate is appropriate in this case, as Xingda is both the producer and 
exporter of the subject merchandise. Therefore, the Department will 
include in its cash deposit instructions to CBP appropriate language to 
enforce the final results of this review on the basis of a combination 
rate involving Xingda as both the producer and exporter of the subject 
merchandise.

Preliminary Results of Review

    We preliminarily determine that the following margin exists during 
the period February 1, 2007, through July 31, 2007:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-Average
                Exporter/Manufacturer                       Margin
                                                         (Percentage)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dujiangyan Xingda Foodstuff Co., Ltd................                0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Comment

    The Department will disclose to parties to this proceeding the 
calculations performed in reaching the preliminary results within five 
days of publication of these preliminary results. Interested parties 
may submit written comments (case briefs) within 30 days of publication 
of the preliminary results and rebuttal comments (rebuttal briefs) 
within five days after the time limit for filing case briefs. Rebuttal 
briefs must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs. See 19 CFR 
351.309(c)(1)(ii) and 19 CFR 351.309(d). Parties who submit arguments 
are requested to submit with the argument: (1) a statement of the 
issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of 
authorities. Further, the Department requests that parties submitting 
written comments provide the Department with a diskette containing the 
public version of those comments.
    Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of 
publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Interested parties 
who wish to request a hearing or to participate if one is requested, 
must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Import 
Administration within 30 days of publication of this notice. Requests 
should contain: (1) the party's name, address, and telephone number; 
(2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues to be 
discussed. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Issues raised in the hearing will be 
limited to those raised in the briefs.
    Unless the deadline is extended pursuant to section 
751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act, the Department will issue the

[[Page 30059]]

final results of this new shipper review, including the results of our 
analysis of the issues raised by the parties in their comments, within 
90 days of publication of these preliminary results.

Assessment Rates

    Upon issuing the final results of the review, the Department shall 
determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 
15 days after the date of publication of the final results of review. 
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate importer-specific 
ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount 
of the dumping margins calculated for the examined sales to the total 
entered value of those same sales. We will instruct CBP to assess 
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review if 
any importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results 
of this review is above de minimis. However, the final results of this 
review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on 
entries of merchandise covered by the final results of these reviews 
and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements, when imposed, will be 
effective upon publication of the final results of this new shipper 
review for all shipments of subject merchandise exported by Xingda 
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 manufactured and exported by Xingda, the cash-
deposit rate will be that established in the final results of this 
review; (2) for subject merchandise exported by Xingda but not 
manufactured by Xingda, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the 
PRC-wide rate (i.e., 198.63 percent); and (3) for subject merchandise 
manufactured by Xingda but exported by any party, the cash deposit rate 
will be the rate applicable to the exporter. If the cash deposit rate 
calculated for Xingda in the final results is zero or de minimis, a 
zero cash deposit will be required for entries of subject merchandise 
both produced and exported by Xingda. These cash deposit requirements, 
when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a preliminary 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 new shipper review and notice are in accordance with sections 
751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(h)(i).

    Dated: May 19, 2008.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-11620 Filed 5-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S