[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22136-22139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08711]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-902]


Organic Soybean Meal From India: Initiation of Countervailing 
Duty Investigation

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

DATES: Applicable April 20, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren Caserta at (202) 482-4737, AD/
CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petition

    On March 31, 2021, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) 
received a countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of 
organic soybean meal from India, filed in proper form on behalf of the 
Organic Soybean Processors of America and eight domestic processors of 
organic soybean meal.\1\ On April 6, 2021, these companies filed an 
amendment to Volume I of the Petition and ``a change of petitioner'' 
status on behalf of the Organic Soybean Processors of America, stating 
that the petitioners now consisted of the Organic Soybean Processors of 
America and seven domestic processors (collectively, the 
petitioners).\2\ The Petition was accompanied by the antidumping duty 
(AD) petition concerning organic soybean meal from India.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Petitioners' Letter, ``Petition for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Organic Soybean Meal from 
India,'' dated March 31, 2021 (the Petition).
    \2\ See Petitioners' Letter, ``Organic Soybean Meal from India: 
The Petitioners' Amendment to Volume I Relating to General Issues 
and Change of Petitioner Status,'' dated April 6, 2021 (General 
Issues Amendment).
    \3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 5 and 15, 2021, Commerce requested supplemental 
information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petition.\4\ The 
petitioners filed responses to these requests on April 7, 9, and 16, 
2021.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Organic Soybean 
Meal from India: Supplemental Questions,'' (General Issues 
Supplemental) and ``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing 
Duties on Imports of Organic Soybean Meal from India: Supplemental 
Questions,'' both dated April 5, 2021; and Commerce's Letter, 
``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Organic Soybean Meal from India: Additional Supplemental 
Questions,'' dated April 15, 2021.
    \5\ See Petitioners' Letters, ``Organic Soybean Meal from India: 
Petitioners' Response to Supplemental General Questions,'' dated 
April 7, 2021 (General Issues Supplement), ``Organic Soybean Meal 
from India: Petitioners' Response to Supplemental CVD Questions,'' 
dated April 9, 2021; and ``Organic Soybean Meal from India: 
Petitioners' Response to Additional Supplemental CVD Questions,'' 
dated April 16, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that the Government of India 
(GOI) is providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of 
sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of organic soybean 
meal in India, and that imports of such products are materially 
injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic industry 
producing organic soybean meal in the United States. Consistent with 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged 
programs on which we are initiating a CVD investigation, the Petition 
was accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners 
supporting their allegations.
    Commerce finds that the petitioners filed the Petition on behalf of 
the domestic industry, because the petitioners are interested parties, 
as defined in sections 771(9)(C) and (E)-(G) of the Act.\6\ Commerce 
also finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry 
support for the initiation of the requested CVD investigation.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Petition at Volume I at 4.
    \7\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition'' 
section, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    Because the Petition was filed on March 31, 2021, the period of 
investigation (POI) for this CVD investigation is January 1, 2020, 
through December 31, 2020, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is organic soybean meal 
from India. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, 
see the appendix to this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigation

    On April 5 and 9, 2021, Commerce requested further information and 
clarification from the petitioners regarding the proposed scope to 
ensure that the scope language in the Petition is an accurate 
reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking 
relief.\8\ On April 7, 2021, the petitioners revised the scope.\9\ The 
description of merchandise covered by this investigation, as described 
in the appendix to this notice, reflects these clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See General Issues Supplemental at 1-2; see also Memorandum, 
``Phone Call with Petitioners Counsel,'' dated April 9, 2021.
    \9\ See General Issues Supplement at 2-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are 
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding 
product coverage (i.e., scope).\10\ Commerce will consider all comments 
received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with 
interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary 
determination. If scope comments include factual information,\11\ all 
such factual information should be limited to public information. To 
facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that 
all interested parties submit scope comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time 
(ET) on May 10, 2021, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date 
of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual 
information, must be filed by

[[Page 22137]]

5:00 p.m. ET on May 20, 2021, which is 10 calendar days from the 
initial comment deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \11\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information.'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce requests that any factual information the parties consider 
relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this 
time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional 
factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may 
be relevant, the party must contact Commerce and request permission to 
submit the additional information. All such comments must be filed on 
the records of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using 
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), unless an exception 
applies.\12\ An electronically filed document must be received 
successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due. Note that 
Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for 
serving documents containing business proprietary information until 
further notice.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order 
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and 
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046 
(November 20, 2014) for details of Commerce's electronic filing 
requirements, effective August 5, 2011. Information on using ACCESS 
can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook 
can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
    \13\ See Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD Service Requirements 
Due to COVID-19; Extension of Effective Period, 85 FR 41363 (July 
10, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce 
notified the GOI of the receipt of the Petition and provided an 
opportunity for consultations with respect to the Petition.\14\ 
Representatives from the GOI notified Commerce that they were unable to 
schedule consultations prior to the deadline for initiation. Commerce 
has offered the GOI the opportunity to meet after initiation.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Commerce's Letter, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on 
Organic Soybean Meal from India: Invitation for Consultations to 
Discuss the Countervailing Duty Petition,'' dated April 5, 2021.
    \15\ See GOI's Letter, ``Scheduling of Pre-Initiation 
Consultation for Countervailing Duty Petition on Organic Soybean 
Meal from India,'' dated April 15, 2021; see also, Memorandum, 
``Countervailing Duty Investigation of Organic Soybean Meal from 
India: Ex Parte Communication Regarding Petition Consultation 
Deadline,'' dated April 16, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) 
Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if 
there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or 
(ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling 
method to poll the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which 
is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has 
been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like 
product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the 
ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\16\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a 
separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce's determination 
is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may 
result in different definitions of the like product, such differences 
do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \17\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the investigation.\18\ Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that organic soybean meal, 
as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, 
and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like 
product.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Petition at Volume I at 21-27 and Exhibits I-3 through 
I-5, I-7, I-10, I-14 through I-20, I-25 through I-27 and I-29.
    \19\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as 
applied to this case and information regarding industry support, see 
Checklist, ``Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Organic Soybean Meal from India,'' dated concurrently with this 
notice and on file electronically via ACCESS (CVD Initiation 
Checklist) at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Organic 
Soybean Meal from India (Attachment II).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 
702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petition with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in the appendix to 
this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioners provided 
their own production of the domestic like product in 2020.\20\ To 
estimate total production of the domestic like product for the entire 
U.S. industry, the petitioners relied on production data from a report 
prepared by Agromeris, LLC (Agromeris), a consulting firm that focuses 
on the food and agricultural industry.\21\ We relied on data provided 
by the petitioners for purposes of measuring industry support.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Petition at Volume I at 7-8 and Exhibits I-4 through I-
6; see also ``Organic Soybean Meal from India: The Petitioners' 
Amendment to Volume I Relating to General Issues and Change of 
Petitioner Status,'' dated April 6, 2021 (General Issues Amendment) 
at 5 and Exhibit I-6-S.
    \21\ See Petition at Volume I at 7-8 and Exhibits I-3 through I-
5; see also General Issues Amendment at 5.
    \22\ See Petition at Volume I at 6-9 and Exhibits I-2 through I-
6; see also General Issues Amendment at 4-6 and Exhibit I-6-S. For 
further discussion, see Attachment II of the CVD Initiation 
Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the General Issues 
Amendment, and other information readily available to Commerce 
indicates that the petitioners have established industry support for 
the Petition. First, the Petition established support from domestic 
producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product and, as such, Commerce is not

[[Page 22138]]

required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support 
(e.g., polling).\23\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have 
met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 
702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) 
who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product.\24\ Finally, the domestic 
producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry 
support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic 
producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for more than 
50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by 
that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, 
the Petition.\25\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petition 
was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II; see also 
section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
    \24\ See CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
    \25\ Id.
    \26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because India is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the 
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act 
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine 
whether imports of the subject merchandise from India materially 
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioners allege that imports of the subject merchandise are 
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are 
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry 
producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioners 
allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided 
for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Petition at Volume I at 30 and Exhibit I-30; see also 
General Issues Supplement at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports; 
reduced market share; underselling and price depression and 
suppression; lost sales and revenues; reduced levels of capacity 
utilization; declining sales and profitability; and mill curtailments 
and closures.\28\ We assessed the allegations and supporting evidence 
regarding material injury, threat of material injury, causation, as 
well as negligibility, and we have determined that these allegations 
are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory 
requirements for initiation.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Petition at Volume I at 2-3, 21, 27-42 and Exhibits I-3 
through I-5, I-22, and I-28 through I-33; see also General Issues 
Amendment at 6; and General Issues Supplement at 6 and Exhibit I-22-
S.
    \29\ See CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, Analysis of 
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Organic 
Soybean Meal from India (Attachment III).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of CVD Investigation

    Based upon the examination of the Petition and supplemental 
responses, we find that it meets the requirements of section 702 of the 
Act. Therefore, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine 
whether imports of Organic soybean meal from India benefit from 
countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOI. Based on our review of 
the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate 
a CVD investigation on all 50 alleged programs. For a full discussion 
of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see the 
Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for 
this investigation is available on ACCESS. In accordance with section 
703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we 
will make our preliminary determination no later than 65 days after the 
date of this initiation.

Respondent Selection

    In the Petition, the petitioners named 19 companies in India as 
producers/exporters of organic soymeal.\30\ In the event Commerce 
determines that the number of exporters or producers in any individual 
case is large such that Commerce cannot individually examine each 
company based upon its resources, where appropriate, Commerce typically 
selects mandatory respondents in that case based on U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports under the appropriate 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) numbers listed 
in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the appendix. There are two 
HTSUS subheadings in the scope of this investigation, 1208.10.0010 and 
2304.00.0000; subheading 2304.00.0000 covers imports of both organic 
and non-organic soybean meal.\31\ Therefore, we cannot rely on CBP 
entry data in selecting respondents. We intend to issue quantity and 
value (Q&V) questionnaires to each potential respondent for which the 
petitioners have provided a complete address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Petition at Volume I at I-24.
    \31\ While HTSUS subheading 1208.10.0010 is specific to organic 
soybean meal, HTSUS subheading 2304.00.0000 (which includes soybean 
meal in the form of cake, chips, or flakes) is not. The Petition 
alleges significant quantities of organic soybean meal enter under 
both subheadings: ``The petitioners recognize that the HTSUS 
provides for the organic-certified product in HTSUS subheading 
1208.10.0010. However, a review of the relevant USDA FAF's Global 
Cultural Trade System (GATS) data demonstrates that imports of OSBM 
enter U.S. ports of entry utilizing HTSUS heading 2304, which is 
typically used for conventional soybean meal.'' See Petition at 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Producers/exporters of organic soybean meal from India that do not 
receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the 
Q&V questionnaire and can obtain the Q&V questionnaire from E&C's 
website at https://www.trade.gov/ec-adcvd-case-announcements. Responses 
to the Q&V questionnaire must be submitted by the relevant Indian 
producers/exporters no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on May 5, 2021. All Q&V 
responses must be filed electronically via ACCESS. An electronically 
filed document must be received successfully, in its entirety, by 
ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the deadline noted above. Commerce 
intends to finalize its decisions regarding respondent selection within 
20 days of publication of this notice.

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been 
provided to the GOI via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will 
attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petition to each 
exporter named in the Petition, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    Commerce will notify the ITC of its initiation, as required by 
section 702(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that subject imports are materially injuring or threatening 
material injury to a U.S. industry.\32\ A negative ITC determination 
will result in the investigation being terminated.\33\ Otherwise, this 
CVD investigation will proceed according to the statutory and 
regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See section 703(a) of the Act.
    \33\ Id.

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

[[Page 22139]]

Submission of Factual Information

    Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) 
Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence 
submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available 
information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the 
adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence 
placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual 
information described in (i)-(iv). Section 351.301(b) of Commerce's 
regulations requires any party, when submitting factual information, to 
specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information 
is being submitted \34\ and, if the information is submitted to rebut, 
clarify, or correct factual information already on the record, to 
provide an explanation identifying the information already on the 
record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or 
correct.\35\ Time limits for the submission of factual information are 
addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based 
on the type of factual information being submitted. Interested parties 
should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information 
in this investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \35\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as 
otherwise specified by Commerce. In general, an extension request will 
be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time 
limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are due 
from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be 
considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. 
Under certain circumstances, Commerce may elect to specify a different 
time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for 
submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such 
a case, Commerce will inform parties in a letter or memorandum of the 
deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must 
be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in 
a separate, stand-alone submission; Commerce will grant untimely filed 
requests for the extension of time limits only in limited cases where 
we determine, based on 19 CFR 351.302, that extraordinary circumstances 
exist. Parties should review Commerce's regulation concerning extension 
of time limits prior to submitting extension requests or factual 
information in this investigation.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See 19 CFR 351.302; see also, e.g., Extension of Time 
Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at 
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\37\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\38\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \38\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also 
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Parties wishing to participate 
in this investigation should ensure that they meet the requirements of 
19 CFR 351.103(d) (e.g., by filing the required letters of appearance).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and 
777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).

    Dated: April 20, 2021.
Christian Marsh,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise subject to the investigation is certified 
organic soybean meal. Certified organic soybean meal results from 
the mechanical pressing of certified organic soybeans into ground 
products known as soybean cake, soybean chips, or soybean flakes, 
with or without oil residues. Soybean cake is the product after the 
extraction of part of the oil from soybeans. Soybean chips and 
soybean flakes are produced by cracking, heating, and flaking 
soybeans and reducing the oil content of the conditioned product. 
``Certified organic soybean meal'' is certified by the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Organic Program (NOP) or 
equivalently certified to NOP standards or NOP-equivalent standards 
under an existing organic equivalency or recognition agreement.
    Certified organic soybean meal subject to this investigation has 
a protein content of 34 percent or higher.
    Organic soybean meal that is otherwise subject to this 
investigation is included when incorporated in admixtures, including 
but not limited to prepared animal feeds. Only the organic soybean 
meal component of such admixture is covered by the scope of this 
investigation.
    The products covered by this investigation are currently 
classified under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 1208.10.0010 and 2304.00.0000. 
Certified organic soybean meal may also enter under HTSUS 
2309.90.1005, 2309.90.1015, 2309.90.1010, 2309.90.1030, 
2309.90.1032, 2309.90.1035, 2309.90.1045, 2309.90.1050, and 
2308.00.9890.
    The HTSUS subheadings and specifications are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the 
scope is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2021-08711 Filed 4-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P