Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Results of New Shipper Reviews, 26329-26333 [E6-6759]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Notices
351.402(f) 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.
These new shipper reviews and this
notice are published in accordance with
sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.214(h).
Dated: April 26, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–6757 Filed 5–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–831]
Fresh Garlic from the People’s
Republic of China: Final Results and
Partial Rescission of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review and Final
Results of New Shipper Reviews
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 18, 2005, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) published the preliminary
results of the administrative review and
the preliminary results of the new
shipper reviews of the antidumping
duty order on fresh garlic from the
People’s Republic of China. The period
of review is November 1, 2003, through
October 31, 2004. The administrative
review covers twenty–one exporters,
and the new shipper reviews cover two
exporters.
We invited interested parties to
comment on our preliminary results. We
specifically invited comments on
surrogate country selection for water
valuation; however, no parties
submitted comments on this issue.1
Based on our analysis of the comments
received, we have made certain changes
to our calculations. The final dumping
margins for these reviews are listed in
the ‘‘Final Results of the Reviews’’
section below.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 4, 2006.
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
1 The Department determined in the 2002-2003
administrative review that agrarian water rates for
irrigation are highly subsidized by the Indian
government and, therefore, it is appropriate to use
an Indian industrial rate as a surrogate value for
water in the PRC.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:45 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Katharine Huang or Blanche Ziv, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 8, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–5047 and (202)
482–4207, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 18, 2005, the
Department published the preliminary
results of the administrative review and
new shipper reviews of the antidumping
duty order on fresh garlic from the
People’s Republic of China. See Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Preliminary Results and Partial
Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Preliminary
Results of New Shipper Reviews, 70 FR
69942 (November 18, 2005)
(‘‘Preliminary Results’’). On December
19, 2005, Taian Fook Huat Tong Kee
Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. (‘‘FHTK’’)
submitted comments on minor errors
contained in the Department’s
preliminary margin calculation for
FHTK. In December 2005, we extended
the deadline by which interested parties
may submit publicly available
information to value factors of
production to January 5, 2006. Also in
December 2005, we postponed the
briefing schedule until January 2006
and notified interested parties.
On January 5, 2006, we received
surrogate value submissions from the
petitioners2 and five respondents.3 On
January 17, 2006, we received
additional surrogate value information
from the petitioners in rebuttal to the
January 5, 2006, submissions from
respondents. We also received
submissions from seven respondents4 in
rebuttal to the January 5, 2006,
submission from the petitioners. On
January 23, 2006, we received a case
brief from the petitioners and their
request for a public hearing. We also
received case briefs from Linshu
Dading, Sunny, Harmoni, Shanyang,
Jinan Yipin, FHTK, Weifang Shennong
2 The Fresh Garlic Producers Association
(‘‘FGPA’’) and its individual members. The
individual members are Christopher Ranch L.L.C.,
The Garlic Company, Valley Garlic, and Vessey and
Company, Inc.
3 The five respondents are Linshu Dading Private
Agricultural Products Co., Ltd. (‘‘Linshu Dading’’),
Sunny Import and Export Ltd. (‘‘Sunny’’),
Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd. (‘‘Harmoni’’),
Jinxiang Shanyang Freezing Storage Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Shanyang’’), and Jinan Yipin Co., Ltd. (‘‘Jinan
Yipin‘‘).
4 The seven respondents are Linshu Dading,
Sunny, Harmoni, Shanyang, Jinan Yipin, FHTK,
and Taian Ziyang Food Co., Ltd. (‘‘Ziyang’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26329
Foodstuff Co., Ltd. (‘‘WSFC’’), Jining
Trans–High Trading Co., Ltd. (‘‘Trans–
High’’), Shanghai LJ International
Trading Company (‘‘Shanghai LJ’’), and
Jinxiang Dong Yun Freezing Storage Co.,
Ltd. (‘‘Dong Yun’’). On January 30, 2006,
we received rebuttal submissions from
the petitioners, Linshu Dading, Sunny,
Harmoni, Shanyang, Jinan Yipin, FHTK,
Trans–High, Shanghai LJ, Dong Yun,
and Taian Ziyang Food Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Ziyang’’). No comments were
submitted by Huaiyang Hongda
Dehydrated Vegetable Company
(‘‘Hongda’’) or Zhangqiu Qingyuan
Vegetable Co., Ltd. (‘‘Qingyuan’’).
On February 14, 2006, the petitioners
submitted a letter withdrawing their
request for a hearing. As there were no
other requests for a hearing, the
Department did not conduct a hearing
in these reviews.
On February 14, 2006, we evaluated
Trans–High’s comments in its case
briefs with regard to the copying error
in the verification report and identified
that Trans–High had based its
comments on a draft of the report
released for bracketing of business
proprietary information, rather than on
the official version of the verification
report released to the parties. Pursuant
to its relevant comments in its case
brief, the Department discovered that
Trans–High had not picked up the
official version of the report from the
Department’s Central Records Unit
(‘‘CRU’’). In response to Trans–High’s
omission, we re–released the official
version of the verification report to
Trans–High and allowed it one week to
submit any comments relevant to the
official version. See Letter from Blanche
Ziv to Francis Sailer, dated February 14,
2006. Trans–High did not submit any
comments in response to this
opportunity. See Memorandum from
Jennifer Moats to the File entitled, ‘‘No
Comments on Official Version of Trans–
High Verification Report,’’ dated March
9, 2006.
On March 1, 2006, we issued a letter
to all interested parties requesting
comments on a change in our allocation
of certain labor items from direct labor
to manufacturing overhead in the
calculation of the surrogate financial
ratios. We received comments on our
allocation methodology from Linshu
Dading, Sunny, Harmoni, Shanyang,
and Jinan Yipin on March 10, 2006.
On March 16, 2006, we extended the
time limit for the completion of the final
results of these reviews, including our
analysis of issues raised in case or
rebuttal briefs until April 17, 2006. See
Notice of Extension of Time Limit for
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and New
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
26330
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
Shipper Reviews: Fresh Garlic from the
People’s Republic of China, 71 FR 14681
(March 23, 2006).
On March 22, 2006, we issued a letter
to all interested parties requesting
comments on publicly available
information to value garlic bulbs for the
final results of review. We received
comments from the petitioners, Linshu
Dading, Sunny, Harmoni, Shanyang,
Jinan Yipin, Ziyang, and FHTK on
March 28, 2006.
On April 14, 2006, we extended the
time limit for the completion of the final
results of these reviews, including our
analysis of issues raised in case or
rebuttal briefs, until April 26, 2006. See
Notice of Extension of Time Limit for
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and New
Shipper Reviews: Fresh Garlic from the
People’s Republic of China, 71 FR 20645
(April 21, 2006).
We have conducted these reviews in
accordance with sections 751 and 777 of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), and 19 CFR 351.213, 351.214 and
352.221 (2005).
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this
antidumping duty order are all grades of
garlic, whole or separated into
constituent cloves, whether or not
peeled, fresh, chilled, frozen,
provisionally preserved, or packed in
water or other neutral substance, but not
prepared or preserved by the addition of
other ingredients or heat processing.
The differences between grades are
based on color, size, sheathing, and
level of decay.
The scope of this order does not
include the following: (a) Garlic that has
been mechanically harvested and that is
primarily, but not exclusively, destined
for non–fresh use; or (b) garlic that has
been specially prepared and cultivated
prior to planting and then harvested and
otherwise prepared for use as seed.
The subject merchandise is used
principally as a food product and for
seasoning. The subject garlic is
currently classifiable under subheadings
0703.20.0010, 0703.20.0020,
0703.20.0090, 0710.80.7060,
0710.80.9750, 0711.90.6000, and
2005.90.9700 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, our
written description of the scope of this
order is dispositive. In order to be
excluded from the antidumping duty
order, garlic entered under the HTSUS
subheadings listed above that is (1)
mechanically harvested and primarily,
but not exclusively, destined for non–
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:45 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
fresh use or (2) specially prepared and
cultivated prior to planting and then
harvested and otherwise prepared for
use as seed must be accompanied by
declarations to U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to that effect.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the post–
preliminary comments by parties in this
review are addressed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum, dated April 26,
2006 (‘‘Decision Memorandum’’), which
is hereby adopted by this notice. A list
of the issues which parties raised and to
which we respond in the Decision
Memorandum is attached to this notice
as an Appendix. The Decision
Memorandum is a public document
which is on file in CRU in room B–099
in the main Department building, and is
accessible on the Web at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper copy and
electronic version of the memorandum
are identical in content.
Partial Recession of Administrative
Reviews
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department issued a notice of intent to
rescind the administrative review with
respect to Shanghai Ever Rich Trade
Company (‘‘Ever Rich’’) because we
found no evidence that Ever Rich made
shipments of subject merchandise
during the POR. The Department also
issued a notice of intent to rescind the
administrative review with respect to
Linyi Sanshan Import & Export Trading
Co., Ltd. (‘‘Linyi’’), Shandong Jining
Jishan Textile Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shandong
Jining’’), Tacheng County Dexing Foods
Co., Ltd. (‘‘Tancheng’’), and Xiangcheng
Yisheng Foodstuff Co., Ltd. (‘‘Yisheng’’)
because no other parties requested a
review of these companies and the
petitioners have withdrawn their
request. See Preliminary Results, 70 FR
at 69944. The Department received no
comments on this issue, and we did not
receive any further information since
the issuance of the Preliminary Results
that provides a basis for reconsideration
of this determination. Therefore, the
Department is rescinding this
administrative review with respect to
Ever Rich, Linyi, Shandong Jining,
Tancheng, and Yisheng.
Separate Rates
In our Preliminary Results, we
determined that Dong Yun, FHTK,
Hongda, Harmoni, Linshu Dading,
Sunny, Ziyang, Jinan Yipin, Trans–
High, WSFC, Shanyang, Shanghai LJ,
and Qingyuan met the criteria for the
application of a separate rate. We
determined that Pizhou Guangda Import
and Export Co., Ltd. (‘‘Guangda’’), H&T
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Trading Company (‘‘H&T’’), Jinxiang
Hongyu Freezing and Storing Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Hongyu’’), Jining Yun Feng
Agriculture Products Co., Ltd. (‘‘Yun
Feng’’), Clipper Manufacturing Ltd.
(‘‘Clipper’’), and Heze Ever–Best
International Trade Co., Ltd. (‘‘Ever
Best’’) did not qualify for separate rate
status and, therefore, are deemed to be
included in the PRC entity. See
Preliminary Results, 70 FR at 69943. We
have not received any information since
the issuance of the Preliminary Results
that provides a basis for reconsideration
of these determinations.
The PRC–Wide Rate and Use of
Adverse Facts Available
Guangda, H&T, Hongyu, Yun Feng,
Clipper, and Ever–Best
In the Preliminary Results, we
determined that the PRC entity
(including Guangda, H&T, Hongyu, Yun
Feng, Clipper, and Ever–Best) received
copies of the questionnaire but did not
respond and, therefore, failed to
cooperate to the best of its ability in the
administrative review. Accordingly, we
determined that the use of facts
otherwise available in reaching our
determination is appropriate pursuant
to sections 776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the
Act and that the use of an adverse
inference in selecting from the facts
available is appropriate pursuant to
section 776(b) of the Act. In accordance
with the Department’s practice, as
adverse facts available, we assigned to
the PRC entity (including Guangda,
H&T, Hongyu, Yun Feng, Clipper, and
Ever–Best) the PRC–wide rate of 376.67
percent. For detailed information on the
Department’s corroboration of this rate,
see Preliminary Results, 70 FR at 69942,
and Memorandum to the File, entitled
‘‘2003–2004 Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review of Fresh Garlic
from the People’s Republic of China:
Corroboration of the PRC–Wide Adverse
Facts–Available Rate,’’ dated November
10, 2005.
Normal Value Methodology
The Department’s general policy,
consistent with section 773(c)(1)(B) of
the Act, is to calculate normal value
(‘‘NV’’) using the factors of production
(‘‘FOPs’’) that a respondent consumes in
order to produce a unit of the subject
merchandise. There are circumstances,
however, in which the Department will
modify its standard FOP methodology,
choosing to apply a surrogate value to
an intermediate input instead of the
individual FOPs used to produce that
intermediate input. First, in some cases,
a respondent may report factors used to
produce an intermediate input that
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Notices
accounts for an insignificant share of
total output. When the potential
increase in accuracy to the overall
calculation that results from valuing
each of the FOPs is outweighed by the
resources, time, and burden such an
analysis would place on all parties to
the proceeding, the Department has
valued the intermediate input directly
using a surrogate value. See, e.g., Notice
of Final Antidumping Duty
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Affirmative Critical
Circumstances: Certain Frozen Fish
Fillets from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam, 68 FR 37116 (June 23, 2003),
and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 3 (‘‘Fish
Fillets Final’’).
Also, there are circumstances in
which valuing the FOPs used to yield an
intermediate product would lead to an
inaccurate result because the
Department would not be able to
account for a significant element of cost
adequately in the overall factors
buildup. In this situation, the
Department would also value the
intermediate input directly. See, e.g.,
Notice of Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Carbon and
Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from
Ukraine, 67 FR 55785 (August 30, 2002),
and Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Certain Hot–Rolled
Carbon Steel Flat Products from the
People’s Republic of China, 66 FR 49632
(September 28, 2001). See also Certain
Preserved Mushrooms from the People’s
Republic of China: Final Results of First
New Shipper Review and First
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 66 FR 31204 (June 11, 2001),
and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 2; Notice of
Preliminary Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value, Affirmative
Preliminary Determination of Critical
Circumstances and Postponement of
Final Determination: Certain Frozen
Fish Fillets From the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam, 68 FR 498, 449 (January 31,
2003); and Fish Fillets Final.
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department found that the respondents
in these proceedings are unable to
accurately record and substantiate the
complete costs of growing garlic based
on our analysis of the information on
the record and for the reasons outlined
in the Memorandum to the File entitled,
‘‘2003–2004 Administrative and New
Shipper Reviews of the Antidumping
Duty Order on Fresh Garlic From the
People’s Republic of China:
Intermediate Input Methodology,’’ dated
November 10, 2005 (‘‘Intermediate
Product Memorandum’’). See
Preliminary Results, at 69948. In order
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:45 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
to eliminate the distortions in our
calculation of NV for all of the reasons
identified in the Intermediate Product
Memorandum, we have applied an
intermediate–product valuation
methodology to all companies for these
final results of review. Using this
methodology, we calculated NV by
starting with a surrogate value for the
garlic bulb (i.e., the ‘‘intermediate
product’’), adjusted for yield losses
during the processing stages, and adding
the respondents’ processing costs,
which were calculated using their
reported usage rates for processing fresh
garlic. For a complete explanation of the
Department’s analysis, and for a more
detailed analysis of these issues with
respect to each respondent, see
Intermediate Product Memorandum and
the Decision Memorandum at Comment
1.
In future reviews, should a
respondent be able provide sufficient
factual evidence that it maintains the
necessary information in its internal
books and records that would allow us
to establish the completeness and
accuracy of the reported FOPs, we will
revisit this issue and consider whether
to use its reported FOPs in the
calculation of NV. For further details,
see Intermediate Product Memorandum.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of information
on the record of these reviews, and
comments received from the interested
parties, we have made changes to the
margin calculations for certain
respondents.
We have revalued several of the
surrogate values used in the Preliminary
Results. The values that were modified
for these final results are those for garlic
bulbs, foreign brokerage and handling,
ocean freight, and the surrogate
financial ratio for overhead, selling,
general and administrative expenses,
and profit. For further details see
‘‘Factors Valuations for the Final Results
of the Administrative Review,’’ dated
April 26, 2006.
In addition, we have made some
company–specific changes since the
Preliminary Results. Specifically, we
have incorporated, where applicable,
post–preliminary clarifications, and
performed clerical error corrections for
Shanyang, FHTK, Qingyuan, Sunny and
Linshu Dading. For further details on
these company–specific changes, see
Decision Memorandum at Comments 14
through 22. For further information
detailing all of these changes, see
Memorandum to the File, entitled
‘‘Analysis for the Final Results of the
Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26331
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Jinan Yipin Corporation, Ltd.,’’
dated April 26, 2006; Memorandum to
the File, entitled ‘‘Analysis for the Final
Results of the Administrative Review of
the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Linshu Dading Private
Agricultural Products Co., Ltd.,’’ dated
April 26, 2006; Memorandum to the
File, entitled ‘‘Analysis for the Final
Results of the Administrative Review of
the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Sunny Import and Export Ltd.,’’
dated April 26, 2006; Memorandum to
the File, entitled ‘‘Analysis for the Final
Results of the Administrative Review of
the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co.,
Ltd.,’’ dated April 26, 2006;
Memorandum to the File, entitled
‘‘Analysis for the Final Results of the
Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Jinxiang Shanyang Freezing
Storage Co.,’’ dated April 26, 2006;
Memorandum to the File, entitled
‘‘Analysis for the Final Results of the
Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Weifang Shennong Foodstuff Co.,
Ltd.,’’ dated April 26, 2006;
Memorandum to the File, entitled
‘‘Analysis for the Final Results of the
Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Jining Trans–High Trading Co.,
Ltd.,’’ dated April 26, 2006;
Memorandum to the File, entitled
‘‘Analysis for the Final Results of the
New Shipper Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Shanghai LJ International
Trading Company,’’ dated April 26,
2006; Memorandum to the File, entitled
‘‘Analysis for the Final Results of the
Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Jinxiang Dong Yun Freezing
Storage Co., Ltd.,’’ dated April 26, 2006;
Memorandum to the File, entitled
‘‘Analysis for the Final Results of the
Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Taian Ziyang Food Co., Ltd.,’’
dated April 26, 2006; Memorandum to
the File, entitled ‘‘Analysis for the Final
Results of the Administrative Review of
the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
26332
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Notices
China: Huaiyang Hongda Dehydrated
Vegetable Company,’’ dated April 26,
2006; Memorandum to the File, entitled
‘‘Analysis for the Final Results of the
New Shipper Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Zhangqiu Qingyuan Vegetable
Co., Ltd.,’’ dated April 26, 2006; and
Memorandum to the File, entitled
‘‘Analysis for the Final Results of the
Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China: Taian Fook Huat Tong Kee
Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.,’’ dated April 26,
2006.
Final Results of the Reviews
The Department has determined that
the following final dumping margins
exist for the period November 1, 2003,
through October 31, 2004:
Exporter
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
Fook Huat Tong Kee
Pte., Ltd. ....................
Huaiyang Hongda Dehydrated Vegetable
Company ...................
Jinan Yipin Corporation,
Ltd. ............................
Jining Trans–High Trading Co., Ltd. ..............
Jinxiang Dongyun
Freezing Storage Co.,
Ltd. ............................
Jinxiang Shanyang
Freezing and Storage
Co., Ltd. ....................
Linshu Dading Private
Agricultural Products
Co., Ltd. ....................
Sunny Import & Export
Limited .......................
Taian Ziyang Food Co.,
Ltd. ............................
Weifang Shennong
Foodstuff Co., Ltd. ....
Zhengzhou Harmoni
Spice Co., Ltd.0.27
(de minimis).
Shanghai LJ International Trading Co.,
Ltd. ............................
Zhangqiu Qingyuan
Vegetable Co., Ltd. ...
PRC–wide rate* ............
Weighted–average
percentage margin
5.56
0.00
29.52
0.00
0.29 (de minimis)
14.79
22.47
10.52
0.95
0.00
0.00
15.36
376.67
* includes Pizhou Guangda Import and Export Co., Ltd., H&T Trading Company,
Jinxiang Hongyu and Storing Co., Ltd., Jining
Yun Feng Agriculture Products Co., Ltd., Clipper Manufacturing Ltd., and Heze Ever–Best
International Trade Co., Ltd.
The Department will disclose
calculations performed for these final
results to the parties within five days of
the date of publication of this notice in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(6).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:45 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
Duty Assessment and Cash–Deposit
Requirements
The Department will determine, and
CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on
all appropriate entries. The Department
will issue appropriate assessment
instructions directly to CBP within 15
days of publication of the final results
of these reviews. For assessment
purposes, we divided the total dumping
duties due for each importer (or
customer) by the total quantity of
subject merchandise sold to that
importer during the POR to calculate a
per–unit assessment amount. For duty–
assessment rates calculated on this
basis, we will direct CBP to assess
importer- (or customer-) specific
assessment rates based on the resulting
per–unit (i.e., per kilogram) amount on
each of the applicable importer’s
(customer’s ) entries of the subject
merchandise during the POR.
Bonding will no longer be permitted
to fulfill security requirements for
shipments of fresh garlic from the PRC
produced by Xiangcheng San Li and
exported by Shanghai LJ, and produced
and exported by Qingyuan that are
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication date of the final results of
these new shipper reviews. The
following cash deposit requirements
will be effective upon publication of the
final results of these new shipper
reviews for all shipments of subject
merchandise from Shanghai LJ and
Qingyuan 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 produced by
Xiangcheng San Li and exported by
Shanghai LJ, and produced and
exported by Qingyuan, the cash–deposit
rate will be that established in these
final results of reviews; (2) for subject
merchandise exported by Shanghai LJ
but not manufactured by Xiangcheng
San Li, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the PRC–wide rate (i.e.,
376.67 percent); and (3) for subject
merchandise exported by Qingyuan, but
manufactured by any other party, the
cash deposit rate will be the PRC–wide
rate (i.e., 376.67 percent).
Further, the following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of the
administrative review for shipments of
the subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date of the final results, as provided by
section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For
subject merchandise exported by Dong
Yun, FHTK, Hongda, Jinan Yipin,
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Linshu Dading, Sunny, Ziyang, Trans–
High, Harmoni, WSFC, and Shanyang,
the cash–deposit rate will be that
established in these final results of
review; (2) for previously reviewed or
investigated companies not listed above
that have separate rates, the cash–
deposit rate will continue to be the
company–specific rate published for the
most recent period; (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 376.67 percent;
(4) for all non–PRC exporters of subject
merchandise, the cash–deposit rate will
be the rate applicable to the PRC
exporter that supplied that exporter.
These deposit requirements shall
remain in effect until publication of the
final results of the next administrative
review.
Notification of Interested Parties
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 the review period. Pursuant to 19
CFR 351.402(f)(3), failure to comply
with this requirement could result in
the Department’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of doubled antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO as explained in
the administrative protective order
itself. Timely written notification of the
return/destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and the terms of an
APO is a sanctionable violation.
This notice of final results of
administrative review and new shipper
reviews is issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(c)
and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: April 26, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix 1
Decision Memorandum
1. Use of Intermediate Input
Methodology
2. Valuation of Garlic Bulb
3. Calculation of Surrogate Wage Rate
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Notices
4. Double Counting of Selling Expenses,
Profits, Land Cost, Packing or
Processing Costs
5. By–products
6. Valuation of Foreign Brokerage and
Handling
7. Valuation of Ocean Freight
8. Valuation of Cartons
9. Valuation of Jars
10. Financial Ratios
11. Sunny’s Observed Labor Hours at
on–site Verification
12. FHTK’s Observed Labor Hours at
on–site Verification
13. Trans–High’s Observed Labor Hours
at on–site Verification
14. Yield Loss Ratio for Shanyang
15. Yield–Loss Ratio to Processing
Inputs for FHTK
16. Water and Electricity - FHTK
17. Clerical Error - Valuation of Cartons
for Shanyang
18. Clerical Error - Shanyang’s Plastic
Jars and Lids
19. Exchange Rate Application - FHTK
20. Clerical Error - Linshu Dading Select
Gross Unit Prices
21. Clerical Error - Bulb Freight for
Sunny and Qingyuan
22. Clerical Error Calculation of
Electricity for Qingyuan
23. Clerical Error - Normal Value
Calculation for Dong Yun
24. Clerical Error - FOPs for Direct and
Indirect Labor - FHTK
[FR Doc. E6–6759 Filed 5–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–357–812]
Honey from Argentina: Final Results,
Partial Rescission of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review and
Determination Not to Revoke in Part
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 28, 2005, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published its Preliminary
Results and Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and Intent Not to Revoke in Part,
70 FR 76766 (December 28, 2005)
(Preliminary Results). This
administrative review covers two
exporters, Seylinco S.A. (Seylinco) and
Asociacion de Cooperativas Argentinas
(ACA), of subject merchandise to the
United States during the period of
review (POR) of December 1, 2003, to
November 30, 2004. The petitioners
involved this review are the Sioux
Honey Association and the American
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:45 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
Honey Producers Association
(Petitioners). We are rescinding the
review with respect to Nutrin S.A.
(Nutrin), Radix S.A. (Radix), Compania
Europea Americana S.A. (CEASA) and
HoneyMax S.A. (HoneyMax) because
these companies had no entries of
subject merchandise to the United
States during the period of review. We
have also determined not to revoke the
antidumping duty order with respect to
ACA. Based on our analysis of
comments received, the margin
calculations for these final results do
not differ from the preliminary results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 4, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Angela Strom for ACA, Brian Sheba for
Seylinco or Robert James, Office 7,
Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2704,
(202) 482–0145, or (202) 482–0649,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 28, 2005, the
Department published its Preliminary
Results of this antidumping duty
administrative review of honey from
Argentina. In response to the
Department’s invitation to comment on
the preliminary results, ACA submitted
its case brief on January 30, 2006, and
petitioners submitted its rebuttal brief
on February 7, 2006. In addition, two ex
parte meetings were held with respect
to this review. See Memorandum to the
file, dated February 27, 2006, on file in
the Central Records Unit (CRU) in room
B–099 of the main Commerce building.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the order
is honey from Argentina. The products
covered are natural honey, artificial
honey containing more than 50 percent
natural honey by weight, preparations of
natural honey containing more than 50
percent natural honey by weight, and
flavored honey. The subject
merchandise includes all grades and
colors of honey whether in liquid,
creamed, comb, cut comb, or chunk
form, and whether packaged for retail or
in bulk form. The merchandise is
currently classifiable under subheadings
0409.00.00, 1702.90.90, and 2106.90.99
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States (HTSUS). Although
the HTSUS subheadings are provided
for convenience and Customs purposes,
the Department’s written description of
the merchandise under this order is
dispositive.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26333
Partial Rescission of Review
As noted in the Preliminary Results,
Nutrin, Radix, CEASA and HoneyMax
had no shipments of subject
merchandise to the United States during
the POR. We have confirmed this with
data from Customs and Border
Protection (CBP). Therefore, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3)
and consistent with the Department’s
practice, we are rescinding our review
with respect to these companies. See,
e.g., Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing
Bars from Turkey; Final Results,
Rescission of Antidumping
Administrative Review in Part, and
Determination Not to Revoke in Part, 69
FR 64731, 64732 (November 8, 2004).
Determination Not to Revoke in Part
For these final results, the Department
has relied upon ACA’s sales activity
during the 2001–2002, 2002–2003, and
2003–2004 PORs in making its decision
with respect to ACA’s revocation
request. Although ACA had two
consecutive years of sales at not less
than normal value (NV), ACA has not
received a zero or de minimis margin in
the instant review. Thus, ACA is not
eligible for consideration for revocation
under section 351.222(b) of the
Department’s regulations. Furthermore,
pursuant to section 351.222(d)(1), we
find that ACA did not ship in
commercial quantities in each of the
three years forming the basis of the
request for revocation. Accordingly, we
have determined not to revoke the
antidumping duty order with respect to
ACA.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this
administrative review are addressed in
the ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’
(Decision Memorandum) from Stephen
J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration, to David M.
Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration. A list of issues
addressed in the Decision Memorandum
is appended to this notice. The Decision
Memorandum is on file in the CRU and
can be accessed directly on the Web at
https://www.ita.doc.gov/.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of comments
received, we have made no changes in
the margin calculation.
Final Results of Review
We determine that the following
dumping margins exist for the period
December 1, 2003, through November
30, 2004.
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26329-26333]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-6759]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-831]
Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Final Results
and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and
Final Results of New Shipper Reviews
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 18, 2005, the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') published the preliminary results of the administrative
review and the preliminary results of the new shipper reviews of the
antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's Republic of
China. The period of review is November 1, 2003, through October 31,
2004. The administrative review covers twenty-one exporters, and the
new shipper reviews cover two exporters.
We invited interested parties to comment on our preliminary
results. We specifically invited comments on surrogate country
selection for water valuation; however, no parties submitted comments
on this issue.\1\ Based on our analysis of the comments received, we
have made certain changes to our calculations. The final dumping
margins for these reviews are listed in the ``Final Results of the
Reviews'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Department determined in the 2002-2003 administrative
review that agrarian water rates for irrigation are highly
subsidized by the Indian government and, therefore, it is
appropriate to use an Indian industrial rate as a surrogate value
for water in the PRC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 4, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katharine Huang or Blanche Ziv, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
5047 and (202) 482-4207, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 18, 2005, the Department published the preliminary
results of the administrative review and new shipper reviews of the
antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's Republic of
China. See Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China:
Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Preliminary Results of New Shipper Reviews,
70 FR 69942 (November 18, 2005) (``Preliminary Results''). On December
19, 2005, Taian Fook Huat Tong Kee Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. (``FHTK'')
submitted comments on minor errors contained in the Department's
preliminary margin calculation for FHTK. In December 2005, we extended
the deadline by which interested parties may submit publicly available
information to value factors of production to January 5, 2006. Also in
December 2005, we postponed the briefing schedule until January 2006
and notified interested parties.
On January 5, 2006, we received surrogate value submissions from
the petitioners\2\ and five respondents.\3\ On January 17, 2006, we
received additional surrogate value information from the petitioners in
rebuttal to the January 5, 2006, submissions from respondents. We also
received submissions from seven respondents\4\ in rebuttal to the
January 5, 2006, submission from the petitioners. On January 23, 2006,
we received a case brief from the petitioners and their request for a
public hearing. We also received case briefs from Linshu Dading, Sunny,
Harmoni, Shanyang, Jinan Yipin, FHTK, Weifang Shennong Foodstuff Co.,
Ltd. (``WSFC''), Jining Trans-High Trading Co., Ltd. (``Trans-High''),
Shanghai LJ International Trading Company (``Shanghai LJ''), and
Jinxiang Dong Yun Freezing Storage Co., Ltd. (``Dong Yun''). On January
30, 2006, we received rebuttal submissions from the petitioners, Linshu
Dading, Sunny, Harmoni, Shanyang, Jinan Yipin, FHTK, Trans-High,
Shanghai LJ, Dong Yun, and Taian Ziyang Food Co., Ltd. (``Ziyang''). No
comments were submitted by Huaiyang Hongda Dehydrated Vegetable Company
(``Hongda'') or Zhangqiu Qingyuan Vegetable Co., Ltd. (``Qingyuan'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Fresh Garlic Producers Association (``FGPA'') and its
individual members. The individual members are Christopher Ranch
L.L.C., The Garlic Company, Valley Garlic, and Vessey and Company,
Inc.
\3\ The five respondents are Linshu Dading Private Agricultural
Products Co., Ltd. (``Linshu Dading''), Sunny Import and Export Ltd.
(``Sunny''), Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd. (``Harmoni''),
Jinxiang Shanyang Freezing Storage Co., Ltd. (``Shanyang''), and
Jinan Yipin Co., Ltd. (``Jinan Yipin``).
\4\ The seven respondents are Linshu Dading, Sunny, Harmoni,
Shanyang, Jinan Yipin, FHTK, and Taian Ziyang Food Co., Ltd.
(``Ziyang'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 14, 2006, the petitioners submitted a letter
withdrawing their request for a hearing. As there were no other
requests for a hearing, the Department did not conduct a hearing in
these reviews.
On February 14, 2006, we evaluated Trans-High's comments in its
case briefs with regard to the copying error in the verification report
and identified that Trans-High had based its comments on a draft of the
report released for bracketing of business proprietary information,
rather than on the official version of the verification report released
to the parties. Pursuant to its relevant comments in its case brief,
the Department discovered that Trans-High had not picked up the
official version of the report from the Department's Central Records
Unit (``CRU''). In response to Trans-High's omission, we re-released
the official version of the verification report to Trans-High and
allowed it one week to submit any comments relevant to the official
version. See Letter from Blanche Ziv to Francis Sailer, dated February
14, 2006. Trans-High did not submit any comments in response to this
opportunity. See Memorandum from Jennifer Moats to the File entitled,
``No Comments on Official Version of Trans-High Verification Report,''
dated March 9, 2006.
On March 1, 2006, we issued a letter to all interested parties
requesting comments on a change in our allocation of certain labor
items from direct labor to manufacturing overhead in the calculation of
the surrogate financial ratios. We received comments on our allocation
methodology from Linshu Dading, Sunny, Harmoni, Shanyang, and Jinan
Yipin on March 10, 2006.
On March 16, 2006, we extended the time limit for the completion of
the final results of these reviews, including our analysis of issues
raised in case or rebuttal briefs until April 17, 2006. See Notice of
Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and New
[[Page 26330]]
Shipper Reviews: Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China, 71
FR 14681 (March 23, 2006).
On March 22, 2006, we issued a letter to all interested parties
requesting comments on publicly available information to value garlic
bulbs for the final results of review. We received comments from the
petitioners, Linshu Dading, Sunny, Harmoni, Shanyang, Jinan Yipin,
Ziyang, and FHTK on March 28, 2006.
On April 14, 2006, we extended the time limit for the completion of
the final results of these reviews, including our analysis of issues
raised in case or rebuttal briefs, until April 26, 2006. See Notice of
Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and New Shipper Reviews: Fresh Garlic from the
People's Republic of China, 71 FR 20645 (April 21, 2006).
We have conducted these reviews in accordance with sections 751 and
777 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), and 19 CFR
351.213, 351.214 and 352.221 (2005).
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this antidumping duty order are all grades
of garlic, whole or separated into constituent cloves, whether or not
peeled, fresh, chilled, frozen, provisionally preserved, or packed in
water or other neutral substance, but not prepared or preserved by the
addition of other ingredients or heat processing. The differences
between grades are based on color, size, sheathing, and level of decay.
The scope of this order does not include the following: (a) Garlic
that has been mechanically harvested and that is primarily, but not
exclusively, destined for non-fresh use; or (b) garlic that has been
specially prepared and cultivated prior to planting and then harvested
and otherwise prepared for use as seed.
The subject merchandise is used principally as a food product and
for seasoning. The subject garlic is currently classifiable under
subheadings 0703.20.0010, 0703.20.0020, 0703.20.0090, 0710.80.7060,
0710.80.9750, 0711.90.6000, and 2005.90.9700 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our
written description of the scope of this order is dispositive. In order
to be excluded from the antidumping duty order, garlic entered under
the HTSUS subheadings listed above that is (1) mechanically harvested
and primarily, but not exclusively, destined for non-fresh use or (2)
specially prepared and cultivated prior to planting and then harvested
and otherwise prepared for use as seed must be accompanied by
declarations to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to that
effect.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the post-preliminary comments by parties in
this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, dated
April 26, 2006 (``Decision Memorandum''), which is hereby adopted by
this notice. A list of the issues which parties raised and to which we
respond in the Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as an
Appendix. The Decision Memorandum is a public document which is on file
in CRU in room B-099 in the main Department building, and is accessible
on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper copy and electronic
version of the memorandum are identical in content.
Partial Recession of Administrative Reviews
In the Preliminary Results, the Department issued a notice of
intent to rescind the administrative review with respect to Shanghai
Ever Rich Trade Company (``Ever Rich'') because we found no evidence
that Ever Rich made shipments of subject merchandise during the POR.
The Department also issued a notice of intent to rescind the
administrative review with respect to Linyi Sanshan Import & Export
Trading Co., Ltd. (``Linyi''), Shandong Jining Jishan Textile Co., Ltd.
(``Shandong Jining''), Tacheng County Dexing Foods Co., Ltd.
(``Tancheng''), and Xiangcheng Yisheng Foodstuff Co., Ltd.
(``Yisheng'') because no other parties requested a review of these
companies and the petitioners have withdrawn their request. See
Preliminary Results, 70 FR at 69944. The Department received no
comments on this issue, and we did not receive any further information
since the issuance of the Preliminary Results that provides a basis for
reconsideration of this determination. Therefore, the Department is
rescinding this administrative review with respect to Ever Rich, Linyi,
Shandong Jining, Tancheng, and Yisheng.
Separate Rates
In our Preliminary Results, we determined that Dong Yun, FHTK,
Hongda, Harmoni, Linshu Dading, Sunny, Ziyang, Jinan Yipin, Trans-High,
WSFC, Shanyang, Shanghai LJ, and Qingyuan met the criteria for the
application of a separate rate. We determined that Pizhou Guangda
Import and Export Co., Ltd. (``Guangda''), H&T Trading Company
(``H&T''), Jinxiang Hongyu Freezing and Storing Co., Ltd. (``Hongyu''),
Jining Yun Feng Agriculture Products Co., Ltd. (``Yun Feng''), Clipper
Manufacturing Ltd. (``Clipper''), and Heze Ever-Best International
Trade Co., Ltd. (``Ever Best'') did not qualify for separate rate
status and, therefore, are deemed to be included in the PRC entity. See
Preliminary Results, 70 FR at 69943. We have not received any
information since the issuance of the Preliminary Results that provides
a basis for reconsideration of these determinations.
The PRC-Wide Rate and Use of Adverse Facts Available
Guangda, H&T, Hongyu, Yun Feng, Clipper, and Ever-Best
In the Preliminary Results, we determined that the PRC entity
(including Guangda, H&T, Hongyu, Yun Feng, Clipper, and Ever-Best)
received copies of the questionnaire but did not respond and,
therefore, failed to cooperate to the best of its ability in the
administrative review. Accordingly, we determined that the use of facts
otherwise available in reaching our determination is appropriate
pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act and that the use
of an adverse inference in selecting from the facts available is
appropriate pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act. In accordance with
the Department's practice, as adverse facts available, we assigned to
the PRC entity (including Guangda, H&T, Hongyu, Yun Feng, Clipper, and
Ever-Best) the PRC-wide rate of 376.67 percent. For detailed
information on the Department's corroboration of this rate, see
Preliminary Results, 70 FR at 69942, and Memorandum to the File,
entitled ``2003-2004 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Fresh
Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Corroboration of the PRC-
Wide Adverse Facts-Available Rate,'' dated November 10, 2005.
Normal Value Methodology
The Department's general policy, consistent with section
773(c)(1)(B) of the Act, is to calculate normal value (``NV'') using
the factors of production (``FOPs'') that a respondent consumes in
order to produce a unit of the subject merchandise. There are
circumstances, however, in which the Department will modify its
standard FOP methodology, choosing to apply a surrogate value to an
intermediate input instead of the individual FOPs used to produce that
intermediate input. First, in some cases, a respondent may report
factors used to produce an intermediate input that
[[Page 26331]]
accounts for an insignificant share of total output. When the potential
increase in accuracy to the overall calculation that results from
valuing each of the FOPs is outweighed by the resources, time, and
burden such an analysis would place on all parties to the proceeding,
the Department has valued the intermediate input directly using a
surrogate value. See, e.g., Notice of Final Antidumping Duty
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Critical
Circumstances: Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam, 68 FR 37116 (June 23, 2003), and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 3 (``Fish Fillets Final'').
Also, there are circumstances in which valuing the FOPs used to
yield an intermediate product would lead to an inaccurate result
because the Department would not be able to account for a significant
element of cost adequately in the overall factors buildup. In this
situation, the Department would also value the intermediate input
directly. See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Ukraine,
67 FR 55785 (August 30, 2002), and Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from the
People's Republic of China, 66 FR 49632 (September 28, 2001). See also
Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Final
Results of First New Shipper Review and First Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 66 FR 31204 (June 11, 2001), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2; Notice of Preliminary
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Affirmative Preliminary
Determination of Critical Circumstances and Postponement of Final
Determination: Certain Frozen Fish Fillets From the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam, 68 FR 498, 449 (January 31, 2003); and Fish Fillets Final.
In the Preliminary Results, the Department found that the
respondents in these proceedings are unable to accurately record and
substantiate the complete costs of growing garlic based on our analysis
of the information on the record and for the reasons outlined in the
Memorandum to the File entitled, ``2003-2004 Administrative and New
Shipper Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic From the
People's Republic of China: Intermediate Input Methodology,'' dated
November 10, 2005 (``Intermediate Product Memorandum''). See
Preliminary Results, at 69948. In order to eliminate the distortions in
our calculation of NV for all of the reasons identified in the
Intermediate Product Memorandum, we have applied an intermediate-
product valuation methodology to all companies for these final results
of review. Using this methodology, we calculated NV by starting with a
surrogate value for the garlic bulb (i.e., the ``intermediate
product''), adjusted for yield losses during the processing stages, and
adding the respondents' processing costs, which were calculated using
their reported usage rates for processing fresh garlic. For a complete
explanation of the Department's analysis, and for a more detailed
analysis of these issues with respect to each respondent, see
Intermediate Product Memorandum and the Decision Memorandum at Comment
1.
In future reviews, should a respondent be able provide sufficient
factual evidence that it maintains the necessary information in its
internal books and records that would allow us to establish the
completeness and accuracy of the reported FOPs, we will revisit this
issue and consider whether to use its reported FOPs in the calculation
of NV. For further details, see Intermediate Product Memorandum.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of information on the record of these
reviews, and comments received from the interested parties, we have
made changes to the margin calculations for certain respondents.
We have revalued several of the surrogate values used in the
Preliminary Results. The values that were modified for these final
results are those for garlic bulbs, foreign brokerage and handling,
ocean freight, and the surrogate financial ratio for overhead, selling,
general and administrative expenses, and profit. For further details
see ``Factors Valuations for the Final Results of the Administrative
Review,'' dated April 26, 2006.
In addition, we have made some company-specific changes since the
Preliminary Results. Specifically, we have incorporated, where
applicable, post-preliminary clarifications, and performed clerical
error corrections for Shanyang, FHTK, Qingyuan, Sunny and Linshu
Dading. For further details on these company-specific changes, see
Decision Memorandum at Comments 14 through 22. For further information
detailing all of these changes, see Memorandum to the File, entitled
``Analysis for the Final Results of the Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of
China: Jinan Yipin Corporation, Ltd.,'' dated April 26, 2006;
Memorandum to the File, entitled ``Analysis for the Final Results of
the Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic
from the People's Republic of China: Linshu Dading Private Agricultural
Products Co., Ltd.,'' dated April 26, 2006; Memorandum to the File,
entitled ``Analysis for the Final Results of the Administrative Review
of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's
Republic of China: Sunny Import and Export Ltd.,'' dated April 26,
2006; Memorandum to the File, entitled ``Analysis for the Final Results
of the Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice
Co., Ltd.,'' dated April 26, 2006; Memorandum to the File, entitled
``Analysis for the Final Results of the Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of
China: Jinxiang Shanyang Freezing Storage Co.,'' dated April 26, 2006;
Memorandum to the File, entitled ``Analysis for the Final Results of
the Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic
from the People's Republic of China: Weifang Shennong Foodstuff Co.,
Ltd.,'' dated April 26, 2006; Memorandum to the File, entitled
``Analysis for the Final Results of the Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of
China: Jining Trans-High Trading Co., Ltd.,'' dated April 26, 2006;
Memorandum to the File, entitled ``Analysis for the Final Results of
the New Shipper Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic
from the People's Republic of China: Shanghai LJ International Trading
Company,'' dated April 26, 2006; Memorandum to the File, entitled
``Analysis for the Final Results of the Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of
China: Jinxiang Dong Yun Freezing Storage Co., Ltd.,'' dated April 26,
2006; Memorandum to the File, entitled ``Analysis for the Final Results
of the Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh
Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Taian Ziyang Food Co.,
Ltd.,'' dated April 26, 2006; Memorandum to the File, entitled
``Analysis for the Final Results of the Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of
[[Page 26332]]
China: Huaiyang Hongda Dehydrated Vegetable Company,'' dated April 26,
2006; Memorandum to the File, entitled ``Analysis for the Final Results
of the New Shipper Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic
from the People's Republic of China: Zhangqiu Qingyuan Vegetable Co.,
Ltd.,'' dated April 26, 2006; and Memorandum to the File, entitled
``Analysis for the Final Results of the Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of
China: Taian Fook Huat Tong Kee Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.,'' dated April 26,
2006.
Final Results of the Reviews
The Department has determined that the following final dumping
margins exist for the period November 1, 2003, through October 31,
2004:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-average
Exporter percentage margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fook Huat Tong Kee Pte., Ltd........................ 5.56
Huaiyang Hongda Dehydrated Vegetable Company........ 0.00
Jinan Yipin Corporation, Ltd........................ 29.52
Jining Trans-High Trading Co., Ltd.................. 0.00
Jinxiang Dongyun Freezing Storage Co., Ltd.......... 0.29 (de minimis)
Jinxiang Shanyang Freezing and Storage Co., Ltd..... 14.79
Linshu Dading Private Agricultural Products Co., 22.47
Ltd................................................
Sunny Import & Export Limited....................... 10.52
Taian Ziyang Food Co., Ltd.......................... 0.95
Weifang Shennong Foodstuff Co., Ltd................. 0.00
Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd.0.27 (de minimis)..
Shanghai LJ International Trading Co., Ltd.......... 0.00
Zhangqiu Qingyuan Vegetable Co., Ltd................ 15.36
PRC-wide rate[ast].................................. 376.67
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ast] includes Pizhou Guangda Import and Export Co., Ltd., H&T Trading
Company, Jinxiang Hongyu and Storing Co., Ltd., Jining Yun Feng
Agriculture Products Co., Ltd., Clipper Manufacturing Ltd., and Heze
Ever-Best International Trade Co., Ltd.
The Department will disclose calculations performed for these final
results to the parties within five days of the date of publication of
this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(6).
Duty Assessment and Cash-Deposit Requirements
The Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries. The Department will issue
appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of
publication of the final results of these reviews. For assessment
purposes, we divided the total dumping duties due for each importer (or
customer) by the total quantity of subject merchandise sold to that
importer during the POR to calculate a per-unit assessment amount. For
duty-assessment rates calculated on this basis, we will direct CBP to
assess importer- (or customer-) specific assessment rates based on the
resulting per-unit (i.e., per kilogram) amount on each of the
applicable importer's (customer's ) entries of the subject merchandise
during the POR.
Bonding will no longer be permitted to fulfill security
requirements for shipments of fresh garlic from the PRC produced by
Xiangcheng San Li and exported by Shanghai LJ, and produced and
exported by Qingyuan that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of
these new shipper reviews. The following cash deposit requirements will
be effective upon publication of the final results of these new shipper
reviews for all shipments of subject merchandise from Shanghai LJ and
Qingyuan 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 produced by Xiangcheng San Li and
exported by Shanghai LJ, and produced and exported by Qingyuan, the
cash-deposit rate will be that established in these final results of
reviews; (2) for subject merchandise exported by Shanghai LJ but not
manufactured by Xiangcheng San Li, the cash deposit rate will continue
to be the PRC-wide rate (i.e., 376.67 percent); and (3) for subject
merchandise exported by Qingyuan, but manufactured by any other party,
the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate (i.e., 376.67 percent).
Further, the following cash deposit requirements will be effective
upon publication of the final results of the administrative review for
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the
final results, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For
subject merchandise exported by Dong Yun, FHTK, Hongda, Jinan Yipin,
Linshu Dading, Sunny, Ziyang, Trans-High, Harmoni, WSFC, and Shanyang,
the cash-deposit rate will be that established in these final results
of review; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not
listed above that have separate rates, the cash-deposit rate will
continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent
period; (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 376.67 percent; (4) for all non-PRC
exporters of subject merchandise, the cash-deposit rate will be the
rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that exporter. These
deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the
final results of the next administrative review.
Notification of Interested Parties
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 the review period. Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.402(f)(3), failure to comply with this requirement could result in
the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO as explained in the administrative protective order itself. Timely
written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to
comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable
violation.
This notice of final results of administrative review and new
shipper reviews is issued and published in accordance with sections
751(a)(2)(c) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: April 26, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix 1
Decision Memorandum
1. Use of Intermediate Input Methodology
2. Valuation of Garlic Bulb
3. Calculation of Surrogate Wage Rate
[[Page 26333]]
4. Double Counting of Selling Expenses, Profits, Land Cost, Packing or
Processing Costs
5. By-products
6. Valuation of Foreign Brokerage and Handling
7. Valuation of Ocean Freight
8. Valuation of Cartons
9. Valuation of Jars
10. Financial Ratios
11. Sunny's Observed Labor Hours at on-site Verification
12. FHTK's Observed Labor Hours at on-site Verification
13. Trans-High's Observed Labor Hours at on-site Verification
14. Yield Loss Ratio for Shanyang
15. Yield-Loss Ratio to Processing Inputs for FHTK
16. Water and Electricity - FHTK
17. Clerical Error - Valuation of Cartons for Shanyang
18. Clerical Error - Shanyang's Plastic Jars and Lids
19. Exchange Rate Application - FHTK
20. Clerical Error - Linshu Dading Select Gross Unit Prices
21. Clerical Error - Bulb Freight for Sunny and Qingyuan
22. Clerical Error Calculation of Electricity for Qingyuan
23. Clerical Error - Normal Value Calculation for Dong Yun
24. Clerical Error - FOPs for Direct and Indirect Labor - FHTK
[FR Doc. E6-6759 Filed 5-3-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
