Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of the 13th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Reviews, 29174-29178 [E9-14358]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
29174
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 117 / Friday, June 19, 2009 / Notices
make an adverse inference.’’ See
Antidumping Duties; Countervailing
Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27340
(May 19, 1997). See also Nippon Steel
Corp. v. United States, 337 F.3d 1373,
1382 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
As discussed in detail in the
Preliminary Determination, 74 FR at
20916–20918, Sunlake refused to
respond to the Department’s
questionnaire despite being given ample
opportunity to do so by the Department.
Thus, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A),
(B), and (C) of the Act, the Department
found that the use of facts available was
appropriate for Sunlake in this
circumvention proceeding.
Furthermore, the Department found that
Sunlake had not acted to the best of its
ability in this circumvention proceeding
within the meaning of section 776(b) of
the Act. Accordingly, we preliminarily
applied adverse facts available (AFA) to
Sunlake. Specifically, we preliminarily
considered all of Sunlake’s exports of
tissue paper products from Thailand to
be of PRC origin and concluded that
Sunlake is circumventing the Order. We
also assigned Sunlake a margin of
112.64 percent, which is the highest
corroborated rate on the record in any
completed segment of the tissue paper
proceeding.
No party filed comments objecting to
the Department’s Preliminary
Determination and no further
information has come to the
Department’s attention warranting
reconsideration of that determination.
Therefore, we continue to find that the
application of facts available is
necessary pursuant to section 776(a) of
the Act, and that Sunlake has failed to
act to the best of its ability in this
circumvention proceeding, warranting
the use of an adverse inference under
section 776(b) of the Act. Thus, as AFA,
we continue to determine that all of
Sunlake’s exports of tissue paper
products from Thailand to the United
States are, in fact, of PRC origin, and
that Sunlake is circumventing the
Order.
Accordingly, for this final
determination, we are applying to
Sunlake a margin of 112.64 percent, as
AFA. This margin is the highest rate on
the record in any completed segment of
this proceeding (i.e., the LTFV
investigation, and the first and second
administrative reviews) and it has been
corroborated in accordance with section
776(c) of the Act, as discussed in detail
in the Preliminary Determination, 74 FR
at 20918.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:25 Jun 18, 2009
Jkt 217001
Suspension of Liquidation and Cash
Deposit Requirement
In accordance with section 19 CFR
351.225(l), the Department will direct
CBP to continue to suspend liquidation
and to require a cash deposit of
estimated duties, at the rate of 112.64
percent, on all unliquidated entries of
certain tissue paper products produced
in and exported from Thailand by
Sunlake that were entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after October 21,
2008, the date of initiation of the
circumvention inquiry.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice also serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of
their responsibility concerning the
return or destruction of proprietary
information disclosed under APO in
accordance with section 351.305 of the
Department’s regulations. Timely
written notification of the return/
destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulation and terms of an APO
is a violation which is subject to
sanction.
This affirmative final circumvention
determination is published in
accordance with section 781(b) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.225.
Dated: June 12, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–14359 Filed 6–18–09; 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 the 13th
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and New Shipper Reviews
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Department) is conducting the
administrative review (AR) and new
shipper reviews (NSRs) of the
antidumping duty order on fresh garlic
from the People’s Republic of China
(PRC) covering the period of review
(POR) of November 1, 2006 through
October 31, 2007. As discussed below,
we determine that sales have been made
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
in the United States at prices below
normal value (NV) with respect to
certain exporters who participated fully
and are entitled to a separate rate in the
AR or NSRs. In addition, we are
rescinding the NSRs for two companies.
Finally, the Department is rescinding
the antidumping duty AR of companies
that timely certified that they had no
shipments of subject merchandise to the
United States during the POR. We
intend to instruct U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) to assess
antidumping duties on entries of subject
merchandise during the POR for which
importer-specific assessment rates are
above de minimis.
DATES: Effective Date: June 19, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Scott Lindsay, Nicholas Czajkowski, or
Summer Avery, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 6, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–0780, (202) 482–1395, and (202)
482–4052, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 8, 2008, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
preliminary results of the AR and NSRs
of the antidumping duty order on fresh
garlic from the PRC. See Fresh Garlic
from the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Results of the Antidumping
Duty Administrative and New Shipper
Reviews and Intent to Rescind, in Part,
the Antidumping Duty Administrative
and New Shipper Reviews, 73 FR 74462
(December 8, 2008) (Preliminary
Results). Since the Preliminary Results,
the following events have occurred.
Shandong Chenhe International
Trading Co., Ltd. (Chenhe) filed letters
on December 12 and December 31,
requesting that the Department rescind
this AR with respect to Chenhe and
remove it from the list of companies
subject to the PRC-wide rate, as
determined in the Preliminary Results.
On December 15, Shenzhen Greening
Trading Co., Ltd. (Greening) also filed a
letter seeking removal from the list of
companies subject to the PRC-wide rate
and revised publication of the
Preliminary Results. On December 18,
the Department notified parties that case
briefs would be due seven days after the
last verification report was issued. On
December 19 and 23, the Fresh Garlic
Producers Association (FGPA) and its
individual members (Christopher Ranch
LLC, the Garlic Company, Valley Garlic,
and Vessey and Company, Inc.)
(collectively, Petitioners), filed letters in
E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM
19JNN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 117 / Friday, June 19, 2009 / Notices
response to those filed by Chenhe and
Greening. On January 14, 2009,
Petitioners filed additional surrogate
value information.
On February 26, the Department
extended the time limit for completion
of the final results of this administrative
review by 60 days. See Fresh Garlic
from the People’s Republic of China:
Extension of Time Limits for Final
Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and New
Shipper Reviews, 74 FR 8774 (February
26, 2009).
On March 18, the Department issued
a memorandum proposing, and inviting
interested parties to comment in their
case briefs on, revised assessment and
cash deposit methodologies with respect
to the separate rate companies and PRCwide entity in these reviews. See Letter
to All Interested Parties Re: The 2006/
2007 Administrative Review of Garlic
from the People’s Republic of China
(March 18, 2009) (Per Unit
Memorandum).
The Department conducted
verification of the AR and NSR
respondents from March 2 through
March 14. On April 20 and 21, the
Department issued its verification
reports. On April 21, the Department
notified parties that case briefs were due
April 28. In response to requests filed by
the AR and NSR respondents and
Petitioners on April 23 and 24,
respectively, the Department extended
the deadlines for case briefs to May 1.
On April 29, Chenhe submitted a case
brief. On May 1, 2009, Petitioners,
Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading Co. Ltd.
(Yuanli), Ningjin Ruifeng Foodstuff Co.,
Ltd. (Ningjin Ruifeng), as well as
Weifang Shennong Foodstuff Co., Ltd.
(Weifang Shennong), Anqiu Friend
Food Co. Ltd. (Anqiu Friend), and
Anqiu Haoshun Trade Co., Ltd.
(Haoshun) (collectively, WAA),
submitted case briefs. After reviewing
the case briefs, the Department
instructed WAA to re-file their case
briefs because they contained untimely
new factual information. WAA filed the
final versions of their redacted case
briefs on May 7. On May 6 and May 8,
Yuanli, Petitioners, and WAA submitted
rebuttal briefs. On May 28, the
Department instructed Yuanli to re-file
its case brief and Petitioners to re-file
their rebuttal brief because they
contained untimely new factual
information. Yuanli and Petitioners refiled their case and rebuttal briefs,
respectively, on May 29.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this Order
are all grades of garlic, whole or
separated into constituent cloves,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:25 Jun 18, 2009
Jkt 217001
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 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 CBP
to that effect.
Analysis of Comments Received
Issues raised in the case and rebuttal
briefs by parties to this proceeding and
to which we have responded are listed
in Appendix 1 to this notice and
addressed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum (Issues and Decision
Memorandum), which is hereby
adopted by this notice.1 Parties can find
a complete discussion of the issues
raised in these AR and NSRs and the
corresponding recommendations in this
public memorandum, which is on file in
the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room
1117 of the main Department building.
1 In addition, due to the proprietary nature of
much of the information involved in companyspecific discussions, the Department has found it
necessary to address certain issues in separate
memoranda. See Antidumping Duty New Shipper
Review of Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic
of China (PRC): Bona Fides Comments
Memorandum for Ningjin Ruifeng Foodstuff Co.,
Ltd. (Ningjin Ruifeng Comments Memorandum),
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of China (PRC):
Bona Fides Comments Memorandum for Anqiu
Haoshun Foodstuff Co., Ltd. (Haoshun Comments
Memorandum), and the three company-specific
memoranda referenced in the ‘‘Bona Fides
Analysis’’ section below.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29175
In addition, a copy of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on our Web site at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/. The paper copy and
electronic version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Final Partial Rescission of
Administrative Review
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department preliminarily rescinded the
administrative review with respect to
the following three companies: Jinan
Farmlady Trading Co., Ltd. (Jinan
Farmlady), Qingdao Tiantaixing Foods
Co., Ltd. (Qingdao Tiantaixing), and
Qingdao Xintianfeng Foods Co., Ltd.
(Qingdao Xintianfeng). Jinan Farmlady,
Qingdao Tiantaixing, and Qingdao
Xintianfeng reported that they had no
shipments of subject merchandise to the
United States during the POR. See
Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 74465. As
we stated in the Preliminary Results, our
examination of shipment data from CBP
for the three no-shipment companies
confirmed that there were no entries of
subject merchandise which they
exported during the POR. Id. We also
received no comments or information to
change our preliminary rescission.
Therefore, we are rescinding this
administrative review with respect to all
three aforementioned companies.
Final Rescission of New Shipper
Review With Respect to Anqiu Haoshun
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department preliminarily rescinded
Haoshun’s new shipper review. See
Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 74465.
Based on our analysis of arguments
made by the parties, the Department
will not change its preliminary
rescission. Therefore, we are rescinding
this new shipper review with respect to
Haoshun. (See ‘‘Bona Fides Analysis’’
section below; Comment 10 of the
accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum; and the memorandum
from Scott Lindsay to Barbara Tillman,
Final Results of Antidumping Duty New
Shipper Review of Fresh Garlic from the
People’s Republic of China: Bona Fide
Analysis of Anqiu Haoshun Trade Co.,
Ltd.’s Sale (June 8, 2009) (Haoshun
Final Bona Fide Memorandum), and
Haoshun Comments Memorandum.)
Bona Fides Analysis
As noted in the Preliminary Results,
while conducting a review, particularly
a review where a company’s margin
would be based on a single sale, the
Department examines price, quantity,
and other circumstances associated with
the sale under review, and must
determine if the sale was based on
E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM
19JNN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
29176
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 117 / Friday, June 19, 2009 / Notices
normal commercial considerations and
presents an accurate representation of
the company’s normal business
practices. If the Department determines
that the price was not based on normal
commercial considerations or is atypical
of the respondent’s normal business
practices, including other sales of
comparable merchandise, the sale may
be considered non-bona fide.
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department preliminarily concluded
that the single sale made by Haoshun
during the POR was a not a bona fide
commercial transaction and
preliminarily rescinded the NSR with
respect to Haoshun. In addition, the
Department preliminarily found the
sales made by Yuanli and Ningjin
Ruifeng to be bona fide commercial
transactions. Petitioners, Respondents,
Yuanli, and Ningjin Ruifeng have
submitted extensive arguments
regarding the Department’s preliminary
bona fides analyses of Haoshun’s,
Yuanli’s and Ningjin Ruifeng’s new
shipper sales. In addition, these parties
have submitted arguments as to whether
the Department should rescind each
company’s NSR in these final results.
Most of the parties’ arguments are based
on information which is business
proprietary. Thus, the parties’
comments are fully discussed in the
Haoshun Comments Memorandum,
Ningjin Ruifeng Comments
Memorandum, and Final Results of
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review
of Fresh Garlic from the People’s
Republic of China: Bona Fide Analysis
of Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading Co. Ltd’s
Sale (June 8, 2009) (Yuanli Final Bona
Fide Memorandum).
Based on the totality of the
circumstances as discussed in the
memoranda addressing bona fides
issues, for these final results, the
Department continues to find the price
and quantity of Haoshun’s single POR
sale to be unreasonable and atypical,
and therefore find the sale to be not
bona fide. Thus, the Department has
rescinded the NSR with respect to
Haoshun. In addition, we determine that
the new shipper sale made by Ningjin
was not a bona fide commercial
transaction because Ningjin failed to
establish payment terms while
negotiating its U.S. sale, the quantity of
garlic sold was unreasonably low, and
there is other evidence that this
transaction may not have been made on
an arm’s-length basis. Thus, the
Department has also rescinded the NSR
with respect to Ningjin. Finally, we
continue to find that Yuanli’s sales was
bona fide. Given the proprietary nature
of the underlying data used to formulate
the Department’s analysis and
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:25 Jun 18, 2009
Jkt 217001
determinations, see the Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 10,
Haoshun Final Bona Fide
Memorandum, Haoshun Comments
Memorandum, Final Results of
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review
of Fresh Garlic from the People’s
Republic of China: Bona Fide Analysis
of Ningjin Ruifeng Foodstuff Co., Ltd.’s
Sale (June 8, 2009), Ningjin Ruifeng
Comments Memorandum, and Yuanli
Final Bona Fide Memorandum, for
details of the proprietary data that
support the decisions contained herein.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on a review of the record as
well as comments received from parties
regarding our Preliminary Results, we
have made revisions to the margin
calculations for Anqiu Friend, Weifang
Shennong, and Yuanli. Specifically, the
Department will use an average of the
financial ratios of ADF Foods Ltd.
(ADF); Tata Tea Ltd. (Tata Tea); and
Limtex to value the factory overhead
(FOH), selling, general & administrative
(SG&A) expenses, and profit used to
calculate NV. (See 19 CFR
351.408(c)(4).) We note that using an
average of three Indian processors’ data
will allow us to calculate financial
ratios that better reflect the broader
experience of the surrogate industry.
Moreover, as ADF’s and Tata Tea’s
production processes are more
comparable to that of peeled garlic,
which comprises an increasing share of
all PRC garlic imports, and Limtex’s
production process is comparable to
that of non-processed whole garlic
bulbs, which continue to comprise a
large share of PRC garlic imports
nonetheless, the resulting financial
ratios will be a better surrogate for the
garlic industry in the PRC as a whole.
See Issues and Decision Memorandum
at Comment 3. See also Administrative
Review and New Shipper Review of
Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic
of China: Surrogate Values for the Final
Results (Final Surrogate Values
Memorandum).
As a result of the revisions made to
Anqiu Friend’s and Weifang Shennong’s
company-specific margins, the margin
calculated for the four separate rate
companies, Jinxiang Dongyun Freezing
Storage Co., Ltd. (Jinxiang Dongyun),
Qingdao Saturn International Trade Co.,
Ltd. (Qingdao Saturn), Qufu Dongbao
Import & Export Trade Co., Ltd. (Qufu
Dongbao), and Shanghai LJ International
Trading Co., Ltd. (Shanghai LJ), has also
changed. For all changes to the
calculations for Anqiu Friend, Weifang
Shennong, and Yuanli, see the Issues
and Decision Memorandum and the
company-specific analysis memoranda.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
With respect to the surrogate value for
paper labels, information on the record
indicates that the paper labels used by
respondents appear to be a self-adhesive
rectangular sheet, similar to the
description of the Indian HTS
#4811.41.00. Thus, in accordance with
our surrogate value selection criteria,
the Department finds that in this case
the Indian HTS #4811.41.00 represents
the best surrogate value based on the
available information on the record and
we have changed our surrogate value
calculations accordingly. See Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 6.
See also Final Surrogate Values
Memorandum.
Lastly, following the methodologies
established in the aforementioned PerUnit Memorandum and consistent with
the Department’s practice, we are
calculating per-unit cash deposit and
assessment rates for the separate rate
companies and companies that are part
of the PRC-wide entity. See Per-Unit
Memorandum, Final Results of the
Administrative Review of Fresh Garlic
from the People’s Republic of China:
Separate Rate Companies and PRCWide Entity—Per-Unit Assessment Rates
(June 8, 2009), and Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 8. See also
Honey from the People’s Republic of
China: Final Results and Rescission, In
Part, of Aligned Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and New
Shipper Review, 73 FR 42321 (July 21,
2008).
Final Results of Reviews
As a result of our reviews, we
determine that the following margins
exist for the period November 1, 2006
through October 31, 2007:
Manufacturer/Exporter
WeightAveraged margin (percent)
Fresh Garlic from the PRC 2006–2007
Administrative Review
Anqiu Friend Food Co., Ltd.
Weifang Shennong Foodstuff
Co., Ltd .............................
Jinxiang Dongyun Freezing
Storage Co., Ltd ................
Qingdao Saturn International
Trade Co., Ltd ...................
Qufu Dongbao Import & Export Trade Co., Ltd ...........
Shanghai LJ International
Trading Co., Ltd ................
PRC-wide Rate .....................
(see Appendix 2) ..................
E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM
19JNN1
64.78
80.69
72.74
72.74
72.74
72.74
376.67
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 117 / Friday, June 19, 2009 / Notices
Manufacturer/Exporter
WeightAveraged margin (percent)
Fresh Garlic from the PRC 2006–2007 New
Shipper Review
Exported and Produced by
Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading
Co., Ltd .............................
120.18
determined to be part of the PRC-wide
entity, the Department employed the
methodology discussed above, except
we calculated an AUV exclusive of
entries from the two mandatory
respondents and the four separate rate
companies, and then multiplied the
AUV by the PRC-wide rate.
Cash Deposit Requirements
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations used
in our analysis to parties to these
proceedings within five days of the date
of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR
351.224(b).
Assessment Rates
Consistent with the final results of the
12th NSR review of Fresh Garlic from
the PRC, we will direct CBP to assess
importer-specific assessment rates based
on the resulting per-unit (i.e., per
kilogram) amount on each entry of the
subject merchandise during the POR.
See Fresh Garlic from the People’s
Republic of China: Final Results and
Rescission, in Part, of Twelfth New
Shipper Reviews, 73 FR 56550, 56552
(September 29, 2008) (12th NSR of
Fresh Garlic from the PRC). Therefore,
the Department will determine, and CBP
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries pursuant to section
751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1). The Department will
issue appropriate assessment
instructions directly to CBP 15 days
after publication of the final results of
this review. For assessment purposes,
we calculated importer-specific
assessment rates for fresh garlic from the
PRC. Specifically, we divided the total
dumping margins for each importer by
the total quantity of subject
merchandise sold to that importer
during the POR to calculate a per-unit
assessment amount. We will direct CBP
to assess importer-specific assessment
rates based on the resulting per-unit
(i.e., per kilogram) amount on each
entry of the subject merchandise during
the POR if any importer-specific
assessment rate calculated in the final
results of this review is above de
minimis.
Moreover, as noted above, the
Department is calculating per-unit cash
deposit and assessment rates for
separate rate companies and companies
that are part of the PRC-wide entity.
Using CBP data, we totaled the quantity
and value of the entries made by the
four separate rate companies to derive a
weighted average unit value (AUV),
which we then multiplied by the
separate rate to calculate a per-unit
assessment amount. For companies
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:25 Jun 18, 2009
Jkt 217001
Consistent with the final results of the
12th NSR of Fresh Garlic from the PRC,
we have established and will collect a
per kilogram cash-deposit amount
which will be the per-unit equivalent of
the company-specific dumping margin
published in the final results of these
reviews. The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of these
reviews for all 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)(1)
of the Act: (1) For subject merchandise
exported by Anqiu Friend and exported
by Weifang Shennong the cash deposit
rates will be the per unit rates
determined in the final results of the
administrative review; (2) for subject
merchandise produced and exported by
Yuanli, the cash deposit rates will be
the per unit rate determined in the final
results of the new shipper review; (3) for
subject merchandise exported by but not
produced by Yuanli, the cash deposit
rate will be the PRC-wide rate; (4) for
subject merchandise exported by
Jinxiang Dongyun, Qingdao Saturn,
Qufu Dongbao, and Shanghai LJ, the
cash deposit rates will be the per unit
rates determined in the final results of
the administrative review; (5) for
previously-investigated or previouslyreviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters
who received a separate rate in a prior
segment of the proceeding (which were
not reviewed in this segment of the
proceeding), the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the rate assigned in that
segment of the proceeding; (6) for
subject merchandise exported by
Haoshun, Ningjin, Chenhe, Greening
and all other PRC exporters of subject
merchandise that have not been found
to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash
deposit rate will be the per-unit PRCwide rate; and (7) the cash deposit rate
for non-PRC exporters of subject
merchandise which have not received
their own rate will be the rate applicable
to the PRC exporter that supplied that
non-PRC exporter. These requirements,
when imposed, shall remain in effect
until further notice.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29177
Notification to Importers
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 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.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective orders (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues
to govern business proprietary
information in this segment of the
proceeding. 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 terms of an APO is a violation
which is subject to sanction.
These administrative and new shipper
reviews and notice are issued and
published in accordance with sections
751(a)(1), 751(a)(2)(B), and 777(i) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.213 and 351.214.
Dated: June 8, 2009.
Carole Showers,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy
and Negotiations.
Appendix 1
Comment 1: Intermediate Input
Methodology.
Comment 2: Garlic Bulb Surrogate
Value.
Comment 3: Surrogate Financial Ratios.
Comment 4: Timing of Petitioners’
Surrogate Value Submission.
Comment 5: Water Valuation.
Comment 6: Paper Label Valuation.
Comment 7: Yield Factor Valuation.
Comment 8: Per Unit Assessment.
Comment 9: Anqiu Friend’s Affiliations.
Comment 10: Bona Fides of New
Shipper Companies.
Comment 11: Rescission of Chenhe and
Greening.
Appendix 2
The following companies subject to
this antidumping duty administrative
review did not apply for a separate rate
and thus have been assigned the PRCwide rate for their imports of subject
merchandise during the POR.
1. APS Qingdao.
E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM
19JNN1
29178
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 117 / Friday, June 19, 2009 / Notices
2. American Pioneer Shipping.
3. Beijing Jim International Food Co.,
Ltd.
4. Burgeon International Inc.
5. Fujian Meitan Import & Export
Xiamen Corporation.
6. Jining Meiya Foods Co., Ltd.
7. Jining Trans-High Trading Co., Ltd.
8. Jinxian County Huaguang Food
Import & Export Co., Ltd.
9. Junan Auto Imp and Exp Co., Ltd.
10. Linyi Futai Foodstuff Co., Ltd.
11. Marnex (HongKong) Company.
12. New Future International Trading
Co.
13. Omni Decor China Ltd.
14. Qingdao Rock-It Sports Inc.
15. Sea Trade International
Incorporated.
16. Shandong Chengshun Farm Produce
Trading Co., Ltd.
17. Shandong Chenhe Int’l Trading Co.,
Ltd.
18. Shandong Dongsheng Eastsun Foods
Co., Ltd.
19. Shandong Garlic Company.
20. Shanghai New Long March
International Trade Co., Ltd.
21. Shenzhen Greening Trading Co.,
Ltd.
22. Shenzhen Imp & Exp. Ltd.
23. T&S International, LLC.
24. Taiwan Wachine Co., Ltd.
25. Taizhou Overseas Int’l Ltd.
[FR Doc. E9–14358 Filed 6–18–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A–570–891)
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Notice of Partial Rescission, Intent To
Rescind and Extension of Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Hand Trucks
and Certain Parts Thereof From the
People’s Republic of China
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce
SUMMARY: In response to requests from
Gleason Industrial Products, Inc., and
Precision Products, Inc. (collectively,
petitioners), the U.S. Department of
Commerce (the Department) initiated an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on hand trucks
and certain parts thereof from the
People’s Republic of China for the
companies listed below for the period
December 1, 2007, through November
30, 2008. No other interested party
requested a review for this period of
review. For the reasons discussed
below, the Department is partially
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:25 Jun 18, 2009
Jkt 217001
rescinding this administrative review
with respect to two companies and
intends to rescind the review with
respect to a third company.
EFFECTIVE DATES: June 19, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Cordell or Robert James, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 7, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–0408 or (202) 482–
0649 respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 1, 2008, the Department
published in the Federal Register its
notice of opportunity to request an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on hand trucks
and certain parts thereof from the
People’s Republic of China. See
Antidumping or Countervailing Duty
Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation; Opportunity to Request
Administrative Review, 73 FR 72764
(December 1, 2008). On December 30,
2008, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.213(b)(1), petitioners requested that
the Department conduct an
administrative review for the following
exporters of the subject merchandise:
Qingdao Huatian Hand Truck Co., Ltd.
(Huatian); True Potential Co., Ltd. (True
Potential); Since Hardware (Guangzhou)
Co., Ltd. (Since Hardware); and NewTec Integration (Xiamen) Co., Ltd. (NewTec).
On February 2, 2009, the Department
published in the Federal Register a
notice of the initiation of the
antidumping duty administrative review
of hand trucks from the PRC for the
period December 1, 2007, through
November 30, 2008, with respect to the
four companies named above. See
Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews and Request for Revocation in
Part, 74 FR 5821 (February 2, 2009)
(Initiation Notice).
On February 19, 2009, the Department
issued a memorandum indicating its
intention to select mandatory
respondents based upon U.S. Customs
and Border Protection data for U.S.
imports of hand trucks from the PRC
during the POR. On February 13, 2009
petitioners provided comments to the
Department in which they requested
that the Department select Huatian and
True Potential as mandatory
respondents. On March 4, 2009, Huatian
and True Potential both provided the
Department with separate rate
certifications, thereby meeting the 30-
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
day deadline for submission of such
certifications as detailed in the
Initiation Notice. On March 16, 2009,
the Department determined that it was
not practicable to examine individually
all of the companies covered by the
2007–2008 administrative review. The
Department stated it was limiting its
examination to the largest producers/
exporters that could reasonably be
reviewed, pursuant to section
777A(c)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Tariff Act). The
Department selected Huatian and True
Potential as the two respondents
required to submit a full questionnaire
response in the administrative review.
See memorandum titled ‘‘Respondent
Selection Memorandum: Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review of Hand
Trucks and Parts Thereof from the
People’s Republic of China’’ dated
March 16, 2009.
Huatian and True Potential filed their
section A responses on April 13, 2009
and their section C and D responses on
April 28, 2009. On May 1, 2009,
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1),
petitioners withdrew their requests for
review of Huatian and True Potential
but did not withdraw the request with
respect to Since Hardware and New-Tec
On March 4, 2009, New-Tec provided
certification that New-Tec did not ship
to the United States any subject
merchandise during the POR and
requested the Department rescind the
review with respect to New-Tec. On
April 21, 2009, the Department’s no
shipments inquiry with respect to NewTec was posted by CBP. See message
number 9120201 dated April 21, 2009.
The Department has received no
information from that inquiry, and has
found no evidence of shipments of
subject merchandise to the United
States by New-Tec of subject
merchandise during the POR.
Rescission of Review
Section 351.213(d)(1) of the
Department’s regulations provide that
the Department will rescind an
administrative review if the party that
requested the review withdraws its
request for review within 90 days of the
date of publication of the notice of
initiation of the requested review, or
withdraws at a later date if the
Department determines that it is
reasonable to extend the time limit for
withdrawing the request. The
Department initiated the administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on February 2, 2009. Petitioners
withdrew their request for review of
Huatian and True Potential on May 1,
2009. As the party that requested this
review has timely withdrawn the
E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM
19JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 117 (Friday, June 19, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29174-29178]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14358]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-831]
Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results
and Partial Rescission of the 13th Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and New Shipper Reviews
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Department) is conducting the
administrative review (AR) and new shipper reviews (NSRs) of the
antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's Republic of
China (PRC) covering the period of review (POR) of November 1, 2006
through October 31, 2007. As discussed below, we determine that sales
have been made in the United States at prices below normal value (NV)
with respect to certain exporters who participated fully and are
entitled to a separate rate in the AR or NSRs. In addition, we are
rescinding the NSRs for two companies. Finally, the Department is
rescinding the antidumping duty AR of companies that timely certified
that they had no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States
during the POR. We intend to instruct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on entries of subject
merchandise during the POR for which importer-specific assessment rates
are above de minimis.
DATES: Effective Date: June 19, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Lindsay, Nicholas Czajkowski, or
Summer Avery, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-0780, (202) 482-1395, and (202) 482-4052, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 8, 2008, the Department published in the Federal
Register the preliminary results of the AR and NSRs of the antidumping
duty order on fresh garlic from the PRC. See Fresh Garlic from the
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative and New Shipper Reviews and Intent to Rescind, in Part,
the Antidumping Duty Administrative and New Shipper Reviews, 73 FR
74462 (December 8, 2008) (Preliminary Results). Since the Preliminary
Results, the following events have occurred.
Shandong Chenhe International Trading Co., Ltd. (Chenhe) filed
letters on December 12 and December 31, requesting that the Department
rescind this AR with respect to Chenhe and remove it from the list of
companies subject to the PRC-wide rate, as determined in the
Preliminary Results. On December 15, Shenzhen Greening Trading Co.,
Ltd. (Greening) also filed a letter seeking removal from the list of
companies subject to the PRC-wide rate and revised publication of the
Preliminary Results. On December 18, the Department notified parties
that case briefs would be due seven days after the last verification
report was issued. On December 19 and 23, the Fresh Garlic Producers
Association (FGPA) and its individual members (Christopher Ranch LLC,
the Garlic Company, Valley Garlic, and Vessey and Company, Inc.)
(collectively, Petitioners), filed letters in
[[Page 29175]]
response to those filed by Chenhe and Greening. On January 14, 2009,
Petitioners filed additional surrogate value information.
On February 26, the Department extended the time limit for
completion of the final results of this administrative review by 60
days. See Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Extension
of Time Limits for Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and New Shipper Reviews, 74 FR 8774 (February 26, 2009).
On March 18, the Department issued a memorandum proposing, and
inviting interested parties to comment in their case briefs on, revised
assessment and cash deposit methodologies with respect to the separate
rate companies and PRC-wide entity in these reviews. See Letter to All
Interested Parties Re: The 2006/2007 Administrative Review of Garlic
from the People's Republic of China (March 18, 2009) (Per Unit
Memorandum).
The Department conducted verification of the AR and NSR respondents
from March 2 through March 14. On April 20 and 21, the Department
issued its verification reports. On April 21, the Department notified
parties that case briefs were due April 28. In response to requests
filed by the AR and NSR respondents and Petitioners on April 23 and 24,
respectively, the Department extended the deadlines for case briefs to
May 1.
On April 29, Chenhe submitted a case brief. On May 1, 2009,
Petitioners, Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading Co. Ltd. (Yuanli), Ningjin
Ruifeng Foodstuff Co., Ltd. (Ningjin Ruifeng), as well as Weifang
Shennong Foodstuff Co., Ltd. (Weifang Shennong), Anqiu Friend Food Co.
Ltd. (Anqiu Friend), and Anqiu Haoshun Trade Co., Ltd. (Haoshun)
(collectively, WAA), submitted case briefs. After reviewing the case
briefs, the Department instructed WAA to re-file their case briefs
because they contained untimely new factual information. WAA filed the
final versions of their redacted case briefs on May 7. On May 6 and May
8, Yuanli, Petitioners, and WAA submitted rebuttal briefs. On May 28,
the Department instructed Yuanli to re-file its case brief and
Petitioners to re-file their rebuttal brief because they contained
untimely new factual information. Yuanli and Petitioners re-filed their
case and rebuttal briefs, respectively, on May 29.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this 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 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 CBP to that effect.
Analysis of Comments Received
Issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this
proceeding and to which we have responded are listed in Appendix 1 to
this notice and addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum (Issues
and Decision Memorandum), which is hereby adopted by this notice.\1\
Parties can find a complete discussion of the issues raised in these AR
and NSRs and the corresponding recommendations in this public
memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room
1117 of the main Department building. In addition, a copy of the Issues
and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on our Web site at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/. The paper copy and electronic version of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In addition, due to the proprietary nature of much of the
information involved in company-specific discussions, the Department
has found it necessary to address certain issues in separate
memoranda. See Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Fresh Garlic
from the People's Republic of China (PRC): Bona Fides Comments
Memorandum for Ningjin Ruifeng Foodstuff Co., Ltd. (Ningjin Ruifeng
Comments Memorandum), Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Fresh
Garlic from the People's Republic of China (PRC): Bona Fides
Comments Memorandum for Anqiu Haoshun Foodstuff Co., Ltd. (Haoshun
Comments Memorandum), and the three company-specific memoranda
referenced in the ``Bona Fides Analysis'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Partial Rescission of Administrative Review
In the Preliminary Results, the Department preliminarily rescinded
the administrative review with respect to the following three
companies: Jinan Farmlady Trading Co., Ltd. (Jinan Farmlady), Qingdao
Tiantaixing Foods Co., Ltd. (Qingdao Tiantaixing), and Qingdao
Xintianfeng Foods Co., Ltd. (Qingdao Xintianfeng). Jinan Farmlady,
Qingdao Tiantaixing, and Qingdao Xintianfeng reported that they had no
shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR.
See Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 74465. As we stated in the
Preliminary Results, our examination of shipment data from CBP for the
three no-shipment companies confirmed that there were no entries of
subject merchandise which they exported during the POR. Id. We also
received no comments or information to change our preliminary
rescission. Therefore, we are rescinding this administrative review
with respect to all three aforementioned companies.
Final Rescission of New Shipper Review With Respect to Anqiu Haoshun
In the Preliminary Results, the Department preliminarily rescinded
Haoshun's new shipper review. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 74465.
Based on our analysis of arguments made by the parties, the Department
will not change its preliminary rescission. Therefore, we are
rescinding this new shipper review with respect to Haoshun. (See ``Bona
Fides Analysis'' section below; Comment 10 of the accompanying Issues
and Decision Memorandum; and the memorandum from Scott Lindsay to
Barbara Tillman, Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review
of Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Bona Fide Analysis
of Anqiu Haoshun Trade Co., Ltd.'s Sale (June 8, 2009) (Haoshun Final
Bona Fide Memorandum), and Haoshun Comments Memorandum.)
Bona Fides Analysis
As noted in the Preliminary Results, while conducting a review,
particularly a review where a company's margin would be based on a
single sale, the Department examines price, quantity, and other
circumstances associated with the sale under review, and must determine
if the sale was based on
[[Page 29176]]
normal commercial considerations and presents an accurate
representation of the company's normal business practices. If the
Department determines that the price was not based on normal commercial
considerations or is atypical of the respondent's normal business
practices, including other sales of comparable merchandise, the sale
may be considered non-bona fide.
In the Preliminary Results, the Department preliminarily concluded
that the single sale made by Haoshun during the POR was a not a bona
fide commercial transaction and preliminarily rescinded the NSR with
respect to Haoshun. In addition, the Department preliminarily found the
sales made by Yuanli and Ningjin Ruifeng to be bona fide commercial
transactions. Petitioners, Respondents, Yuanli, and Ningjin Ruifeng
have submitted extensive arguments regarding the Department's
preliminary bona fides analyses of Haoshun's, Yuanli's and Ningjin
Ruifeng's new shipper sales. In addition, these parties have submitted
arguments as to whether the Department should rescind each company's
NSR in these final results. Most of the parties' arguments are based on
information which is business proprietary. Thus, the parties' comments
are fully discussed in the Haoshun Comments Memorandum, Ningjin Ruifeng
Comments Memorandum, and Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper
Review of Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Bona Fide
Analysis of Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading Co. Ltd's Sale (June 8, 2009)
(Yuanli Final Bona Fide Memorandum).
Based on the totality of the circumstances as discussed in the
memoranda addressing bona fides issues, for these final results, the
Department continues to find the price and quantity of Haoshun's single
POR sale to be unreasonable and atypical, and therefore find the sale
to be not bona fide. Thus, the Department has rescinded the NSR with
respect to Haoshun. In addition, we determine that the new shipper sale
made by Ningjin was not a bona fide commercial transaction because
Ningjin failed to establish payment terms while negotiating its U.S.
sale, the quantity of garlic sold was unreasonably low, and there is
other evidence that this transaction may not have been made on an
arm's-length basis. Thus, the Department has also rescinded the NSR
with respect to Ningjin. Finally, we continue to find that Yuanli's
sales was bona fide. Given the proprietary nature of the underlying
data used to formulate the Department's analysis and determinations,
see the Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 10, Haoshun Final
Bona Fide Memorandum, Haoshun Comments Memorandum, Final Results of
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Fresh Garlic from the People's
Republic of China: Bona Fide Analysis of Ningjin Ruifeng Foodstuff Co.,
Ltd.'s Sale (June 8, 2009), Ningjin Ruifeng Comments Memorandum, and
Yuanli Final Bona Fide Memorandum, for details of the proprietary data
that support the decisions contained herein.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on a review of the record as well as comments received from
parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we have made revisions to
the margin calculations for Anqiu Friend, Weifang Shennong, and Yuanli.
Specifically, the Department will use an average of the financial
ratios of ADF Foods Ltd. (ADF); Tata Tea Ltd. (Tata Tea); and Limtex to
value the factory overhead (FOH), selling, general & administrative
(SG&A) expenses, and profit used to calculate NV. (See 19 CFR
351.408(c)(4).) We note that using an average of three Indian
processors' data will allow us to calculate financial ratios that
better reflect the broader experience of the surrogate industry.
Moreover, as ADF's and Tata Tea's production processes are more
comparable to that of peeled garlic, which comprises an increasing
share of all PRC garlic imports, and Limtex's production process is
comparable to that of non-processed whole garlic bulbs, which continue
to comprise a large share of PRC garlic imports nonetheless, the
resulting financial ratios will be a better surrogate for the garlic
industry in the PRC as a whole. See Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 3. See also Administrative Review and New Shipper Review of
Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Surrogate Values for
the Final Results (Final Surrogate Values Memorandum).
As a result of the revisions made to Anqiu Friend's and Weifang
Shennong's company-specific margins, the margin calculated for the four
separate rate companies, Jinxiang Dongyun Freezing Storage Co., Ltd.
(Jinxiang Dongyun), Qingdao Saturn International Trade Co., Ltd.
(Qingdao Saturn), Qufu Dongbao Import & Export Trade Co., Ltd. (Qufu
Dongbao), and Shanghai LJ International Trading Co., Ltd. (Shanghai
LJ), has also changed. For all changes to the calculations for Anqiu
Friend, Weifang Shennong, and Yuanli, see the Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the company-specific analysis memoranda.
With respect to the surrogate value for paper labels, information
on the record indicates that the paper labels used by respondents
appear to be a self-adhesive rectangular sheet, similar to the
description of the Indian HTS 4811.41.00. Thus, in accordance
with our surrogate value selection criteria, the Department finds that
in this case the Indian HTS 4811.41.00 represents the best
surrogate value based on the available information on the record and we
have changed our surrogate value calculations accordingly. See Issues
and Decision Memorandum at Comment 6. See also Final Surrogate Values
Memorandum.
Lastly, following the methodologies established in the
aforementioned Per-Unit Memorandum and consistent with the Department's
practice, we are calculating per-unit cash deposit and assessment rates
for the separate rate companies and companies that are part of the PRC-
wide entity. See Per-Unit Memorandum, Final Results of the
Administrative Review of Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of
China: Separate Rate Companies and PRC-Wide Entity--Per-Unit Assessment
Rates (June 8, 2009), and Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 8.
See also Honey from the People's Republic of China: Final Results and
Rescission, In Part, of Aligned Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
and New Shipper Review, 73 FR 42321 (July 21, 2008).
Final Results of Reviews
As a result of our reviews, we determine that the following margins
exist for the period November 1, 2006 through October 31, 2007:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weight-
Averaged
Manufacturer/Exporter margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fresh Garlic from the PRC 2006-2007 Administrative Review
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anqiu Friend Food Co., Ltd.............................. 64.78
Weifang Shennong Foodstuff Co., Ltd..................... 80.69
Jinxiang Dongyun Freezing Storage Co., Ltd.............. 72.74
Qingdao Saturn International Trade Co., Ltd............. 72.74
Qufu Dongbao Import & Export Trade Co., Ltd............. 72.74
Shanghai LJ International Trading Co., Ltd.............. 72.74
PRC-wide Rate........................................... 376.67
(see Appendix 2)........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 29177]]
Fresh Garlic from the PRC 2006-2007 New Shipper Review
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exported and Produced by Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading Co., 120.18
Ltd....................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations used in our analysis to parties
to these proceedings within five days of the date of publication of
this notice. See 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Assessment Rates
Consistent with the final results of the 12th NSR review of Fresh
Garlic from the PRC, we will direct CBP to assess importer-specific
assessment rates based on the resulting per-unit (i.e., per kilogram)
amount on each entry of the subject merchandise during the POR. See
Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Final Results and
Rescission, in Part, of Twelfth New Shipper Reviews, 73 FR 56550, 56552
(September 29, 2008) (12th NSR of Fresh Garlic from the PRC).
Therefore, the Department will determine, and CBP shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries pursuant to section
751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). The Department will
issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after
publication of the final results of this review. For assessment
purposes, we calculated importer-specific assessment rates for fresh
garlic from the PRC. Specifically, we divided the total dumping margins
for each importer by the total quantity of subject merchandise sold to
that importer during the POR to calculate a per-unit assessment amount.
We will direct CBP to assess importer-specific assessment rates based
on the resulting per-unit (i.e., per kilogram) amount on each entry of
the subject merchandise during the POR if any importer-specific
assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above
de minimis.
Moreover, as noted above, the Department is calculating per-unit
cash deposit and assessment rates for separate rate companies and
companies that are part of the PRC-wide entity. Using CBP data, we
totaled the quantity and value of the entries made by the four separate
rate companies to derive a weighted average unit value (AUV), which we
then multiplied by the separate rate to calculate a per-unit assessment
amount. For companies determined to be part of the PRC-wide entity, the
Department employed the methodology discussed above, except we
calculated an AUV exclusive of entries from the two mandatory
respondents and the four separate rate companies, and then multiplied
the AUV by the PRC-wide rate.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Consistent with the final results of the 12th NSR of Fresh Garlic
from the PRC, we have established and will collect a per kilogram cash-
deposit amount which will be the per-unit equivalent of the company-
specific dumping margin published in the final results of these
reviews. The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of these reviews for all 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)(1) of the Act: (1) For subject merchandise
exported by Anqiu Friend and exported by Weifang Shennong the cash
deposit rates will be the per unit rates determined in the final
results of the administrative review; (2) for subject merchandise
produced and exported by Yuanli, the cash deposit rates will be the per
unit rate determined in the final results of the new shipper review;
(3) for subject merchandise exported by but not produced by Yuanli, the
cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate; (4) for subject
merchandise exported by Jinxiang Dongyun, Qingdao Saturn, Qufu Dongbao,
and Shanghai LJ, the cash deposit rates will be the per unit rates
determined in the final results of the administrative review; (5) for
previously-investigated or previously-reviewed PRC and non-PRC
exporters who received a separate rate in a prior segment of the
proceeding (which were not reviewed in this segment of the proceeding),
the cash deposit rate will continue to be the rate assigned in that
segment of the proceeding; (6) for subject merchandise exported by
Haoshun, Ningjin, Chenhe, Greening and all other PRC exporters of
subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the per-unit PRC-wide
rate; and (7) the cash deposit rate for non-PRC exporters of subject
merchandise which have not received their own rate will be the rate
applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that non-PRC exporter.
These requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further
notice.
Notification to Importers
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 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.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the
proceeding. 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 terms of an APO
is a violation which is subject to sanction.
These administrative and new shipper reviews and notice are issued
and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1), 751(a)(2)(B), and
777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213 and 351.214.
Dated: June 8, 2009.
Carole Showers,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations.
Appendix 1
Comment 1: Intermediate Input Methodology.
Comment 2: Garlic Bulb Surrogate Value.
Comment 3: Surrogate Financial Ratios.
Comment 4: Timing of Petitioners' Surrogate Value Submission.
Comment 5: Water Valuation.
Comment 6: Paper Label Valuation.
Comment 7: Yield Factor Valuation.
Comment 8: Per Unit Assessment.
Comment 9: Anqiu Friend's Affiliations.
Comment 10: Bona Fides of New Shipper Companies.
Comment 11: Rescission of Chenhe and Greening.
Appendix 2
The following companies subject to this antidumping duty
administrative review did not apply for a separate rate and thus have
been assigned the PRC-wide rate for their imports of subject
merchandise during the POR.
1. APS Qingdao.
[[Page 29178]]
2. American Pioneer Shipping.
3. Beijing Jim International Food Co., Ltd.
4. Burgeon International Inc.
5. Fujian Meitan Import & Export Xiamen Corporation.
6. Jining Meiya Foods Co., Ltd.
7. Jining Trans-High Trading Co., Ltd.
8. Jinxian County Huaguang Food Import & Export Co., Ltd.
9. Junan Auto Imp and Exp Co., Ltd.
10. Linyi Futai Foodstuff Co., Ltd.
11. Marnex (HongKong) Company.
12. New Future International Trading Co.
13. Omni Decor China Ltd.
14. Qingdao Rock-It Sports Inc.
15. Sea Trade International Incorporated.
16. Shandong Chengshun Farm Produce Trading Co., Ltd.
17. Shandong Chenhe Int'l Trading Co., Ltd.
18. Shandong Dongsheng Eastsun Foods Co., Ltd.
19. Shandong Garlic Company.
20. Shanghai New Long March International Trade Co., Ltd.
21. Shenzhen Greening Trading Co., Ltd.
22. Shenzhen Imp & Exp. Ltd.
23. T&S International, LLC.
24. Taiwan Wachine Co., Ltd.
25. Taizhou Overseas Int'l Ltd.
[FR Doc. E9-14358 Filed 6-18-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
