Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon From Norway; Final Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

The Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (``the Act'') by the Uruguay Round Agreement Act. In addition, unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are to the regulations codified at 19 CFR part 351 (1998).

Background

In a letter dated March 2, 1998, Kinn advised the Department that on July 1, 1997, the former Skaarfish reorganized to form two firms, Skaarfish Pelagisk AS and Kinn Salmon. Kinn requested that the Department conduct a changed circumstances administrative review pursuant to section 751(b) of the Act to determine whether Kinn should properly be considered the successor firm to Skaarfish. Kinn stated that the salmon activities of Skaarfish including processing, marketing and exporting were transferred to Kinn Salmon AS. Skaarfish Pelagisk AS oversees the processing, marketing and exporting activities of all other types of fish. Kinn stated that its operations are a direct continuation of the salmon related activities performed by Skaarfish. While the board of directors has changed, the officers and management of Kinn are virtually identical to the officers and management of Skaarfish. Kinn stated that the address, telephone numbers and telefax numbers are the same as those of Skaarfish. Furthermore, it operates the same facilities in Floro, Norway that were operated by Skaarfish for the processing of salmon and conducts business operations at the same executive offices used by Skaarfish. It provided documentation showing that the customer list for Kinn and the supplier list to Kinn is the same as the customer and supplier lists for Skaarfish. Kinn submitted a copy of The Certificates of Registration of Skaarfish, Skaarfish Pelagisk AS, and Kinn Salmon AS that it filed with the Register of Business Enterprises in Norway. On September 23, 1998, the Department published in the Federal Register (63 FR 50880) the notice of initiation and preliminary results of its changed circumstances antidumping duty administrative review of fresh and chilled Atlantic salmon from Norway. We have now completed this changed circumstances review in accordance with section 751(b) of the Act.

Scope of the Review

The merchandise covered by this review is fresh and chilled Atlantic salmon (``salmon''). It encompasses the species of Atlantic salmon (``Salmo salar'') marketed as specified herein; the subject merchandise excludes all other species of salmon: Danube salmon; Chinook (also called ``king'' or ``quinnat''); Coho (``silver''); Sockeye (``redfish'' or ``blueback''); Humpback (``pink''); and Chum (``dog''). Atlantic salmon is whole or nearly whole fish, typically (but not necessarily) marketed gutted, bled, and cleaned, with the head on. The subject merchandise is typically packed in fresh water ice (``chilled''). Excluded from the subject merchandise are fillets, steaks, and other cuts of Atlantic salmon. Also excluded are frozen, canned, smoked or otherwise processed Atlantic salmon. Fresh and chilled Atlantic salmon is currently provided for under Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) subheading 0302.12.00.02.09. The HTS item number is provided for convenience and Customs purposes. The written description remains dispositive.

Successorship

In considering questions involving successorship, the Department examines several factors including, but not

limited to, changes in (1) management, (2) production facilities, (3) supplier relationships, and (4) customer base. See, e.g., Brass Sheet and Strip from Canada; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460 (1992). While no one or several of these factors will necessarily provide a dispositive indication, the Department will generally consider the new company to be the successor to the previous company if its resulting operation is essentially the same as its predecessor. See, e.g., Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Israel; Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR 6944 (February 14, 1994). Thus, if evidence demonstrates that, with respect to the production and sale of the subject merchandise, the new company operates as the same entity as the former company, the Department will treat the successor company the same as the predecessor for antidumping purposes, e.g., assign the same cash deposit rate, apply any relevant revocation. We have examined the information provided by Kinn in its March 2, 1998, letter and determined that Kinn is the successor-in-interest to Skaarfish. The management and organizational structure of the former Skaarfish have remained intact under Kinn, and there have been no changes in the production facilities, supplier relationships, or customer base. Therefore, we determine that Kinn has maintained the same management, production facilities, supplier relationships, and customer bases as did Skaarfish.

Comments

Although we gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the preliminary results, none were submitted.

Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review

We determine that Kinn is the successor-in-interest to Skaarfish for antidumping duty cash deposit purposes. Kinn, therefore, will be assigned the Skaarfish antidumping cash deposit rate of 2.30 percent. This deposit requirement will apply to all unliquidated entries of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after July 1, 1997, the date on which the corporate name change legally took effect. This deposit rate shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. This changed circumstances review and notice are in accordance with section 751(b) of the Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1675(b)), and 19 CFR 351.216.

Dated: February 23, 1999. Holly A. Kuga, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 99-5015 Filed 2-26-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P