Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2010-2011, 73980-73982 [2012-29986]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
73980
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 12, 2012 / Notices
AVISMA II, and under respectful
protest, the Department reexamined its
calculation methodology to take
VSMPO–AVISMA’s entire production
process into account, including the
stages of production encompassing and
following ilmenite catalyzation, and,
based on that examination, the
Department recalculated the weightedaverage dumping margin for VSMPO–
AVISMA. See Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Remand,
dated November 22, 2010 (Second
Remand) (available at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/remands). As a result of
the Department’s recalculations, the
weighted-average dumping margin for
the period April 1, 2006, through March
31, 2007, for magnesium metal from the
Russian Federation became 8.51 percent
for VSMPO–AVISMA. See Second
Remand. The CIT sustained the
Department’s Second Remand on March
1, 2011. See PSC VSMPO–AVISMA
Corp. v. United States, Consol. Court No
08–00321, Slip Op. 11–22 (Ct. Int’l
Trade March 1, 2011) (AVISMA III).
On March 11, 2011, consistent with
Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d
337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken), as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs.
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d
1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010), and pursuant to
section 516A(c) of the Act, the
Department notified the public that the
final CIT judgment in AVISMA III was
not in harmony with the Department’s
final determination and amended the
final results of the administrative review
with respect to VSMPO–AVISMA to
reflect the final CIT judgment in
AVISMA III. See Magnesium Metal from
the Russian Federation: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony With Final
Results of Administrative Review and
Notice of Amended Final Results of
Administrative Review Pursuant to
Court Decision, 76 FR 13355 (March 11,
2011).
On July 27, 2012, the CAFC reversed
and remanded the decision of the CIT
and ordered it to reinstate the final
results of the administrative review as
applied to VSMPO–AVISMA. See
AVISMA IV, 688 F.3d at 765. In
AVISMA IV, the CAFC found that the
CIT infringed upon the Department’s
authority to implement and enforce
proper procedures for constructing an
agency record in its proceedings by
requiring the Department to consider
the untimely submitted Foster Affidavit.
See id. at 761–62. Further, in AVISMA
IV, the CAFC found that the CIT erred
in its interpretation of section 773(e)(1)
of the Act by mandating the Department
to adopt the facility-wise cost allocation
methodology and that the Department’s
choice of accounting methodology in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:48 Dec 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
the Final Results was supported by
substantial record evidence and in
accordance with law. See id. at 762–65.
On November 20, 2012, the CIT issued
final judgment implementing the
CAFC’s remand order in AVISMA IV
and ordering reinstatement of the Final
Results. See AVISMA V.
Reinstatement of Final Results
Because AVISMA V is a final court
decision with respect to VSMPO–
AVISMA, the Department is amending
the final results of administrative review
by reinstating the weighted-average
dumping margin established in the
Final Results for VSMPO–AVISMA.
Accordingly, the weighted-average
dumping margin for the period April 1,
2006, through March 31, 2007, for
magnesium metal from the Russian
Federation is 15.77 percent for VSMPO–
AVISMA. See Final Results, 73 FR at
52643. The Department will instruct
U.S. Customs and Border Protection to
assess antidumping duties on entries of
the subject merchandise manufactured
and exported during the POR by
VSMPO–AVISMA using the assessment
rates calculated by the Department in
the Final Results. See id.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 5, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012–29990 Filed 12–11–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–831]
Fresh Garlic From the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2010–2011
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Department) is conducting the
administrative review (AR) of the
antidumping duty order on fresh garlic
from the People’s Republic of China
(PRC), covering the period of review
(POR) November 1, 2010, through
October 31, 2011. The mandatory
respondents in this AR are: Hebei
Golden Bird Trading Co., Ltd. (Golden
Bird) and Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial
Co., Ltd. (Xinboda). The Department has
preliminarily determined that during
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the POR the respondents in this
proceeding have made sales of subject
merchandise at less than normal value
(NV). The Department is also
preliminarily determining that five
companies made no shipments.1
DATES: Effective Date: December 12,
2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Lindgren or Lingjun Wang, 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) 482–3870 or (202) 482–
2316, respectively.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the order
includes all grades of garlic, whole or
separated into constituent cloves. Fresh
garlic that are subject to the order are
currently classified under the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) 0703.20.0010,
0703.20.0020, 0703.20.0090,
0710.80.7060, 0710.80.9750,
0711.90.6000, and 2005.90.9700.
Although the HTSUS numbers are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written product
description, available in Antidumping
Duty Order: Fresh Garlic from the
People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 59209
(November 16, 1994), remains
dispositive.
Preliminary Determination of No
Shipments
Of the remaining 20 companies
subject to the review, five companies
listed in Appendix I timely filed ‘‘no
shipment’’ certifications stating that
they had no entries of subject
merchandise during the POR. The
Department subsequently confirmed
with the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) the ‘‘no shipment’’
claim made by these companies. Based
on the certifications by these companies
and our analysis of CBP information, we
preliminarily determine that the
companies listed in Appendix I did not
have any reviewable transactions during
the POR. In addition, the Department
finds that consistent with its recently
announced refinement to its assessment
practice in non-market economy (NME)
cases, further discussed below, it is
appropriate not to rescind the review in
part in these circumstances but, rather,
1 On June 11, 2012, the Department issued a
partial rescission, rescinding the AR for 100
companies for whom requests for review were
withdrawn. See Fresh Garlic From the People’s
Republic of China: Partial Rescission of the 2010–
2011 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77
FR 36480 (June 19, 2012).
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 12, 2012 / Notices
to complete the review with respect to
these companies and issue appropriate
instructions to CBP based on the final
results of the review.2
margins exist for the period November
1, 2010 through October 31, 2011:
PRC-Wide Entity
Companies
Of the remaining 15 companies
subject to these preliminary results, ten
are not eligible for separate rate status
or rescission, as they did not submit
separate rate applications or
certifications.3 As a result, these ten
companies are under review as part of
the PRC-wide entity. For our
determination with respect to the PRCwide entity, see the Preliminary
Decision Memorandum.4
Methodology
The Department has conducted this
review in accordance with section
751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act). Export prices have
been calculated in accordance with
section 772 of the Act. Because the PRC
is an NME within the meaning of
section 771(18) of the Act, NV has been
calculated in accordance with section
773(c) of the Act.
The Preliminary Decision
Memorandum provides a full
description of the methodology
underlying our conclusions. The
Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a
public document and is on file
electronically via Import
Administration’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS).
IA ACCESS is available to registered
users at https://iaaccess.trade.gov and in
the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of
the main Department of Commerce
building. In addition, a complete
version of the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum can be accessed directly
on the Internet at https://www.trade.gov/
ia/. The signed Preliminary Decision
Memorandum and the electronic
versions of the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Preliminary Results of Review
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
The Department has determined that
the following preliminary dumping
2 See Non-Market Economy Antidumping
Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76
FR 65694 (October 24, 2011); see also ‘‘Assessment
Rates’’ section below.
3 See Appendix II for the list of these companies.
4 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations to Ronald K.
Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration regarding ‘‘Decision Memorandum
for the Preliminary Results of the 2010–2011
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated
concurrently with these results and hereby adopted
by this notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:48 Dec 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
73981
Hebei Golden Bird Trading Co.,
Ltd. ........................................
Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial
Co., Ltd. ................................
Qingdao Xintianfeng Foods
Co., Ltd. * ..............................
Shandong Jinxiang Zhengyang
Import & Export Co., Ltd. * ....
Weifang Hongqiao International
Logistics Co., Ltd. * ...............
PRC-Wide Rate ........................
location of the hearing.8 Parties should
confirm by telephone or electronic mail
the date, time and location.
WeightedUnless the deadline is extended
average
pursuant section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the
margin
Act, the Department will issue the final
(dollars
results of this administrative review,
per
including the results of our analysis of
kilogram)
the issues raised by the parties in their
comments, within 120 days after
1.65 issuance of these preliminary results.
Deadline for Submission of Publicly
Available Surrogate Value Information
1.81
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.301(c)(3), the deadline for
1.81
submission of publicly available
1.81 information to value the FOPs under 19
4.71 CFR 351.408(c) is 20 days after the date
of publication of these preliminary
* These companies which applied for or
demonstrated eligibility for a separate rate in results. In accordance with 19 CFR
this administrative review. The rate for these 351.301(c)(1), if an interested party
companies is the simple average of the cal- submits factual information less than
culated antidumping duty rates for Golden Bird ten days before, on, or after (if the
and Xinboda.
Department has extended the deadline),
the applicable deadline for submission
Disclosure and Public Comment
of such factual information, an
The Department will disclose
interested party may submit factual
calculations performed for these
information to rebut, clarify, or correct
preliminary results to the parties within the factual information no later than ten
ten days of the date of publication of
days after such factual information is
this notice.5 Unless otherwise notified
served on the interested party. However,
by the Department, interested parties
the Department notes that 19 CFR
may submit written comments (case
351.301(c)(1), permits new information
briefs) no later than 30 days after the
only insofar as it rebuts, clarifies, or
date of publication of these preliminary corrects information recently placed on
results of review and rebuttal comments the record.9 Furthermore, the
(rebuttal briefs) within five days after
Department generally will not accept
the time limit for filing case briefs.6
business proprietary information in
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(d)(2),
either the surrogate value submissions
rebuttal briefs must be limited to issues
or the rebuttals thereto, as the regulation
raised in the case briefs. Parties who
regarding the submission of surrogate
submit arguments are requested to
values allows only for the submission of
submit with the argument: (1) A
publicly available information.
statement of the issue; (2) a brief
Assessment Rates
summary of the argument; and, (3) a
table of authorities.
If these preliminary results of review
Interested parties who wish to request are adopted in the final results, then
a hearing, or participate if one is
Department will determine, and CBP
requested, must submit a written
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
request to the Assistant Secretary for
appropriate entries covered by the
Import Administration, U.S. Department review. The Department will direct CBP
of Commerce, filed electronically using
to assess importer-specific assessment
IA ACCESS. An electronically filed
rates based on the resulting per-unit
document must be received successfully (i.e., per kilogram) amount on each
in its entirety by the Department’s IA
entry of the subject merchandise during
ACCESS by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard
the POR. The Department intends to
Time within 30 days after the date of
issue assessment instructions to CBP 15
publication of this notice.7 Requests
days after the publication date of the
should contain the party’s name,
final rescission of and final results of
address, and telephone number, the
the review. In accordance with 19 CFR
number of participants, and a list of the
351.212(b)(1), we calculated exporter/
issues to be discussed. If a request for
8 See 19 CFR 351.310.
a hearing is made, we will inform
9 See, e.g., Glycine from the People’s Republic of
parties of the scheduled date, time and
5 See
1.96
19 CFR 351.224(b).
19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii) and (d)(1).
7 See 19 CFR 351.310(c).
6 See
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Final Rescission, in
Part, 72 FR 58809 (October 17, 2007) and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 2.
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
73982
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 12, 2012 / Notices
importer-specific assessment rates for
the merchandise subject to the review.
Also, the Department recently
announced a refinement to its
assessment practice in NME cases.
Pursuant to this refinement in practice,
for merchandise that was not reported
in the U.S. sales databases submitted by
an exporter individually examined
during this review, but that entered
under the case number of that exporter
(i.e., at the individually-examined
exporter’s cash deposit rate), the
Department will instruct CBP to
liquidate such entries at the NME-wide
rate. In addition, if the Department
determines that an exporter under
review had no shipments of the subject
merchandise, any suspended entries
that entered under that exporter’s case
number (i.e., at that exporter’s rate) will
be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.10
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements, when imposed, will apply
to all shipments of subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication of the final results of this
administrative review, as provided by
section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For
the exporters listed above, the cash
deposit rate will be the rate established
in these final results of review (except,
if the rate is zero or de minimis, a zero
cash deposit rate will be required for
that company); (2) for previously
investigated or reviewed PRC and nonPRC exporters not listed above that have
separate rates (i.e., those companies
with no shipments listed in Appendix
I), the cash deposit rate will continue to
be the exporter-specific rate published
for the most recent period; (3) for all
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 $4.71 per kilogram; and (4) for all
non-PRC exporters of subject
merchandise which have not received
their own rate, the cash deposit 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 preliminary
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this
review period. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
Department’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
We are issuing and publishing these
preliminary results in accordance with
sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of the
Act, and 19 CFR 351.214(h) and
351.221(b)(4).
Dated: December 3, 2012.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I
Companies That Have Certified No
Shipments
1. Chengwu County Yuanxiang Industry &
Commerce Co., Ltd.
2. Jinan Farmlady Trading Co., Ltd.
3. Jinxiang Chengda Import & Export Co., Ltd.
4. Jinxiang Hejia Co., Ltd.
5. Qingdao Sea-line International Trading Co.
Appendix II
List of Companies Subject to the PRC-Wide
Rate
1. Foshan Fuyi Food Co., Ltd.
2. Henan Weite Industrial Co., Ltd.
3. Jining Yongjia Trade Co., Ltd.
4. Qingdao Tiantaixing Foods Co., Ltd.
5. Shandong Chenhe Intl Trading Co., Ltd.
6. Shanghai LJ International Trading Co., Ltd.
7. Sunny Import & Export Limited
8. Yantai Jinyan Trading Co., Ltd.
9. Zhengzhou Huachao Industrial Co., Ltd.
10. Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading Co., Ltd.
Appendix III
List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary
Decision Memorandum
Preliminary Determination of No Shipments
Separate Rates
Separate Rate for Non-Selected Companies
PRC-Wide Entity
Surrogate Country
Date of Sale
Fair-Value Comparisons
Export Price
Normal Value
Raw Garlic Bulb Input Valuation
Labor
Financial Ratios
Other Surrogate Values
Currency Conversion
[FR Doc. 2012–29986 Filed 12–11–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
a full discussion of this practice, see NonMarket Economy Antidumping Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694
(October 24, 2011).
15:48 Dec 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
International Trade Administration
[A–570–988]
Silica Bricks and Shapes From the
People’s Republic of China: Initiation
of Antidumping Duty Investigation
DATES:
Effective Date: December 12,
2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeffrey Pedersen or Rebecca Pandolph,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, (202)
482–2769 or (202) 482–3627,
respectively; Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
November 15, 2012, the Department of
Commerce (‘‘Department’’) received a
petition concerning imports of silica
bricks and shapes (‘‘silica bricks’’) from
the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’)
filed in proper form by Utah
Refractories Corporation (‘‘Petitioner’’).1
On November 16, 2012, Petitioner refiled the petition to correct the
bracketing of business proprietary
information in certain exhibits. On
November 19, 2012, the Department
issued a supplemental questionnaire
requesting information and clarification
of certain areas of the Petition.
Petitioner timely filed additional
information on November 21, 2012
(‘‘Lost Sales and Revenue Supplement’’)
and November 26, 2012 (‘‘First
Supplement to the Petition’’). At the
Department’s request, Petitioner filed
additional information on November 28,
2012 (‘‘Second Supplement to the
Petition’’). At the Department’s request,
Petitioner filed further information on
December 4, 2012.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is
April 1, 2012, through September 30,
2012.2
The Petition
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), Petitioner alleges that imports of
silica bricks from the PRC are being, or
are likely to be, sold in the United States
at less than fair value, within the
meaning of section 731 of the Act, and
that such imports are materially
injuring, or threatening material injury
1 See Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping
Duties: Silica Bricks and Shapes from the People’s
Republic of China dated November 15, 2012
(‘‘Petition’’).
2 See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
10 For
VerDate Mar<15>2010
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 239 (Wednesday, December 12, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73980-73982]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29986]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-831]
Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2010-2011
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Department) is conducting the
administrative review (AR) of the antidumping duty order on fresh
garlic from the People's Republic of China (PRC), covering the period
of review (POR) November 1, 2010, through October 31, 2011. The
mandatory respondents in this AR are: Hebei Golden Bird Trading Co.,
Ltd. (Golden Bird) and Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co., Ltd. (Xinboda).
The Department has preliminarily determined that during the POR the
respondents in this proceeding have made sales of subject merchandise
at less than normal value (NV). The Department is also preliminarily
determining that five companies made no shipments.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On June 11, 2012, the Department issued a partial
rescission, rescinding the AR for 100 companies for whom requests
for review were withdrawn. See Fresh Garlic From the People's
Republic of China: Partial Rescission of the 2010-2011 Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 36480 (June 19, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: December 12, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Lindgren or Lingjun Wang, 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-
3870 or (202) 482-2316, respectively.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the order includes all grades of garlic,
whole or separated into constituent cloves. Fresh garlic that are
subject to the order are currently classified under the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 0703.20.0010,
0703.20.0020, 0703.20.0090, 0710.80.7060, 0710.80.9750, 0711.90.6000,
and 2005.90.9700. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the written product description,
available in Antidumping Duty Order: Fresh Garlic from the People's
Republic of China, 59 FR 59209 (November 16, 1994), remains
dispositive.
Preliminary Determination of No Shipments
Of the remaining 20 companies subject to the review, five companies
listed in Appendix I timely filed ``no shipment'' certifications
stating that they had no entries of subject merchandise during the POR.
The Department subsequently confirmed with the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) the ``no shipment'' claim made by these companies.
Based on the certifications by these companies and our analysis of CBP
information, we preliminarily determine that the companies listed in
Appendix I did not have any reviewable transactions during the POR. In
addition, the Department finds that consistent with its recently
announced refinement to its assessment practice in non-market economy
(NME) cases, further discussed below, it is appropriate not to rescind
the review in part in these circumstances but, rather,
[[Page 73981]]
to complete the review with respect to these companies and issue
appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of the
review.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011); see also
``Assessment Rates'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-Wide Entity
Of the remaining 15 companies subject to these preliminary results,
ten are not eligible for separate rate status or rescission, as they
did not submit separate rate applications or certifications.\3\ As a
result, these ten companies are under review as part of the PRC-wide
entity. For our determination with respect to the PRC-wide entity, see
the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Appendix II for the list of these companies.
\4\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations to
Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration regarding ``Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary
Results of the 2010-2011 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review:
Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China,'' dated
concurrently with these results and hereby adopted by this notice
(Preliminary Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methodology
The Department has conducted this review in accordance with section
751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Export
prices have been calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act.
Because the PRC is an NME within the meaning of section 771(18) of the
Act, NV has been calculated in accordance with section 773(c) of the
Act.
The Preliminary Decision Memorandum provides a full description of
the methodology underlying our conclusions. The Preliminary Decision
Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via
Import Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://iaaccess.trade.gov and in the Central
Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In
addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can
be accessed directly on the Internet at https://www.trade.gov/ia/. The
signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of
the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Preliminary Results of Review
The Department has determined that the following preliminary
dumping margins exist for the period November 1, 2010 through October
31, 2011:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
margin
Companies (dollars
per
kilogram)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hebei Golden Bird Trading Co., Ltd......................... 1.65
Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co., Ltd....................... 1.96
Qingdao Xintianfeng Foods Co., Ltd. *...................... 1.81
Shandong Jinxiang Zhengyang Import & Export Co., Ltd. *.... 1.81
Weifang Hongqiao International Logistics Co., Ltd. *....... 1.81
PRC-Wide Rate.............................................. 4.71
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These companies which applied for or demonstrated eligibility for a
separate rate in this administrative review. The rate for these
companies is the simple average of the calculated antidumping duty
rates for Golden Bird and Xinboda.
Disclosure and Public Comment
The Department will disclose calculations performed for these
preliminary results to the parties within ten days of the date of
publication of this notice.\5\ Unless otherwise notified by the
Department, interested parties may submit written comments (case
briefs) no later than 30 days after the date of publication of these
preliminary results of review and rebuttal comments (rebuttal briefs)
within five days after the time limit for filing case briefs.\6\
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(d)(2), rebuttal briefs must be limited to
issues raised in the case briefs. Parties who submit arguments are
requested to submit with the argument: (1) A statement of the issue;
(2) a brief summary of the argument; and, (3) a table of authorities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 19 CFR 351.224(b).
\6\ See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii) and (d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or participate if
one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, filed
electronically using IA ACCESS. An electronically filed document must
be received successfully in its entirety by the Department's IA ACCESS
by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice.\7\ Requests should contain the party's
name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a
list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made,
we will inform parties of the scheduled date, time and location of the
hearing.\8\ Parties should confirm by telephone or electronic mail the
date, time and location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 19 CFR 351.310(c).
\8\ See 19 CFR 351.310.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unless the deadline is extended pursuant section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv)
of the Act, the Department will issue the final results of this
administrative review, including the results of our analysis of the
issues raised by the parties in their comments, within 120 days after
issuance of these preliminary results.
Deadline for Submission of Publicly Available Surrogate Value
Information
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3), the deadline for
submission of publicly available information to value the FOPs under 19
CFR 351.408(c) is 20 days after the date of publication of these
preliminary results. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(1), if an
interested party submits factual information less than ten days before,
on, or after (if the Department has extended the deadline), the
applicable deadline for submission of such factual information, an
interested party may submit factual information to rebut, clarify, or
correct the factual information no later than ten days after such
factual information is served on the interested party. However, the
Department notes that 19 CFR 351.301(c)(1), permits new information
only insofar as it rebuts, clarifies, or corrects information recently
placed on the record.\9\ Furthermore, the Department generally will not
accept business proprietary information in either the surrogate value
submissions or the rebuttals thereto, as the regulation regarding the
submission of surrogate values allows only for the submission of
publicly available information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See, e.g., Glycine from the People's Republic of China:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final
Rescission, in Part, 72 FR 58809 (October 17, 2007) and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
If these preliminary results of review are adopted in the final
results, then Department will determine, and CBP shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by the review.
The Department 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. The Department
intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the
publication date of the final rescission of and final results of the
review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we calculated
exporter/
[[Page 73982]]
importer-specific assessment rates for the merchandise subject to the
review.
Also, the Department recently announced a refinement to its
assessment practice in NME cases. Pursuant to this refinement in
practice, for merchandise that was not reported in the U.S. sales
databases submitted by an exporter individually examined during this
review, but that entered under the case number of that exporter (i.e.,
at the individually-examined exporter's cash deposit rate), the
Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the NME-wide
rate. In addition, if the Department determines that an exporter under
review had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any suspended
entries that entered under that exporter's case number (i.e., at that
exporter's rate) will be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ For a full discussion of this practice, see Non-Market
Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties,
76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements, when imposed, will apply
to all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication of the final
results of this administrative review, as provided by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters listed above, the cash
deposit rate will be the rate established in these final results of
review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, a zero cash deposit
rate will be required for that company); (2) for previously
investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not listed above
that have separate rates (i.e., those companies with no shipments
listed in Appendix I), the cash deposit rate will continue to be the
exporter-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) for
all 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 $4.71 per kilogram; and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of
subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash
deposit 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 preliminary reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
We are issuing and publishing these preliminary results in
accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR
351.214(h) and 351.221(b)(4).
Dated: December 3, 2012.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I
Companies That Have Certified No Shipments
1. Chengwu County Yuanxiang Industry & Commerce Co., Ltd.
2. Jinan Farmlady Trading Co., Ltd.
3. Jinxiang Chengda Import & Export Co., Ltd.
4. Jinxiang Hejia Co., Ltd.
5. Qingdao Sea-line International Trading Co.
Appendix II
List of Companies Subject to the PRC-Wide Rate
1. Foshan Fuyi Food Co., Ltd.
2. Henan Weite Industrial Co., Ltd.
3. Jining Yongjia Trade Co., Ltd.
4. Qingdao Tiantaixing Foods Co., Ltd.
5. Shandong Chenhe Intl Trading Co., Ltd.
6. Shanghai LJ International Trading Co., Ltd.
7. Sunny Import & Export Limited
8. Yantai Jinyan Trading Co., Ltd.
9. Zhengzhou Huachao Industrial Co., Ltd.
10. Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading Co., Ltd.
Appendix III
List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum
Preliminary Determination of No Shipments
Separate Rates
Separate Rate for Non-Selected Companies
PRC-Wide Entity
Surrogate Country
Date of Sale
Fair-Value Comparisons
Export Price
Normal Value
Raw Garlic Bulb Input Valuation
Labor
Financial Ratios
Other Surrogate Values
Currency Conversion
[FR Doc. 2012-29986 Filed 12-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
