Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Final Rescission of the 20th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 39897-39900 [2016-14423]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Notices
(including operations and maintenance),
overhead, and charges for the use of
capital facilities. NTTO also took into
account additional factors when pricing
goods and services, including adequacy
of cost recovery, affordability, available
efficiencies, inflation, pricing history,
fee elasticity considerations (including
client ability to pay for NTTO data), and
service delivery alternatives.
Conclusion
Based on the information provided
above, the NTTO believes its revised
fees are consistent with the objective of
OMB Circular A–25 to ‘‘promote
efficient allocation of the nation’s
resources by establishing charges for
special benefits provided to the
recipient that are at least as great as the
cost to the U.S. Government of
providing the special benefits . . .’’
OMB Circular A–25(5)(b).
Dated: June 15, 2016.
Julie P. Heizer,
Deputy Director, National Travel & Tourism
Office, U.S. Department of Commerce.
[FR Doc. 2016–14527 Filed 6–17–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P
Bird Trading Co., Ltd. (Golden Bird) and
Qingdao Tiantaixing Foods Co., Ltd.
(QTF), withheld requested information,
significantly impeded this
administrative review, and did not
cooperate to the best of their abilities.
Accordingly, pursuant to sections 776(a)
and (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), we continue to use
adverse facts available (AFA) and find
that neither Golden Bird nor QTF is
eligible for separate rate status and thus,
both companies are part of the PRCwide entity. The final dumping margins
are listed below in the ‘‘Final Results of
Administrative Review’’ section of this
notice. The period of review (POR) is
November 1, 2013, through October 31,
2014.
DATES: Effective Date: June 20, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jacqueline Arrowsmith, AD/CVD
Operations, or Thomas Gilgunn, Office
VII, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone 202–
482–5255 or 202–482–4236,
respectively.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
International Trade Administration
Background
[A–570–831]
Fresh Garlic From the People’s
Republic of China: Final Results and
Final Rescission of the 20th
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2013–2014
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) published the
Preliminary Results of the 20th
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on fresh garlic
from the People’s Republic of China
(PRC) on December 7, 2015.1 We gave
interested parties an opportunity to
comment on the Preliminary Results.
Based upon our analysis of the
comments and information received, we
made changes to the margin calculation
for these final results regarding one of
the mandatory respondents, Shenzhen
Xinboda Industrial Co., Ltd. (Xinboda).
We also continue to find that the other
mandatory respondents, Hebei Golden
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
1 See Fresh Garlic From the People’s Republic of
China: Preliminary Results, Preliminary Intent To
Rescind, and Partial Rescission of the 20th
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013–
2014, 80 FR 75972 (December 7, 2015) (Preliminary
Results) and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum (PDM).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
The Department published the
Preliminary Results on December 7,
2015.2 As explained in the
memorandum from the Acting Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance, the Department has
exercised its discretion to toll all
administrative deadlines due to the
recent closure of the Federal
Government. All deadlines in this
segment of the proceeding have been
extended by four business days. The
revised deadline for the final results of
this review was April 11, 2016.3 On
April 4, 2016, the Department extended
the deadline in this proceeding by 30
days to May 11, 2016.4 On May 4, 2016,
the Department extended the deadline
in this proceeding by another 30 days to
June 10, 2016.5
2 See
Preliminary Results.
Memorandum to the Record from Ron
Lorentzen, Acting A/S for Enforcement &
Compliance, regarding ‘‘Tolling of Administrative
Deadlines As a Result of the Government Closure
During Snowstorm Jonas,’’ (January 27, 2016).
4 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, ‘‘Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of China:
Extension of Deadline for Final Results of the
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,’’ (April
4, 2016).
5 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, ‘‘Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of China:
Extension of Deadline for Final Results of the
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,’’ (May
4, 2016).
3 See
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
39897
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.309,
we invited parties to comment on our
Preliminary Results. QTF, Petitioners
and Xinboda all submitted timely-filed
case briefs, pursuant to our regulations.6
Additionally, Petitioners and Xinboda
submitted timely-filed rebuttal briefs.7
Finally, on March 3, 2016, the
Department held a public hearing where
counsel for QTF, Xinboda and
Petitioners presented arguments in their
case and rebuttal briefs.
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) 0703.20.0000,
0703.20.0005, 0703.20.0010,
0703.20.0015, 0703.20.0020,
0703.20.0090, 0710.80.7060,
0710.80.9750, 0711.90.6000,
0711.90.6500, 2005.90.9500,
2005.90.9700, 2005.99.9700. Although
the HTSUS numbers are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written product description remains
dispositive. For a full description of the
scope of this order, please see ‘‘Scope of
the Order’’ in the accompanying Issues
and Decision Memorandum.8
Partial Rescission of Administrative
Review
In the Preliminary Results, we stated
our intention to preliminarily rescind
this administrative review with respect
to Jinxiang Kaihua Imp & Exp Co. Ltd.
(Kaihua), because we found its POR
sales to not be bona fide in the
concurrent new shipper review.9 We
received no comments on our intent to
rescind the review of Kaihua for the
6 See Case Brief filed by Qingdao Tiantaixing
Foods Co., Ltd. (QTF Case Brief) (January 11, 2016);
Petitioners’ Case Brief (January 15, 2016); Letter
from Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Xinboda’’) ‘‘Fresh Garlic from the People’s
Republic of China—Case Brief,’’ (January 19, 2016)
(Xinboda’s Case Brief).
7 See Letter from Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial
Co., Ltd. (‘‘Xinboda’’) ‘‘Fresh Garlic from the
People’s Republic of China—Xinboda Rebuttal
Brief,’’ (February 2, 2016) (Xinboda’s Rebuttal
Brief); see also Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief (February
2, 2016).
8 See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, from
Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations,
‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of
China; 2013–2014,’’ dated concurrently with this
notice (I&D Memo).
9 See Fresh Garlic From the People’s Republic of
China: Final Rescission of the Semiannual
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Jinxiang
Kaihua Imp & Exp Co., Ltd., 80 FR 60881 (October
8, 2015).
E:\FR\FM\20JNN1.SGM
20JNN1
39898
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Notices
Final Results. Therefore, we are
rescinding this administrative review
with respect to Kaihua.
Analysis of Comments Received
We addressed all issues raised in the
case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this
review in the I&D Memo. Appendix I
provides a list of the issues which
parties raised. The I&D Memo is a
public document and is on file in the
Central Records Unit (CRU), Room
B8024 of the main Department of
Commerce building, as well as
electronically via Enforcement and
Compliance’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (ACCESS).
ACCESS is available to registered users
at https://access.trade.gov and in the
CRU. In addition, a complete version of
the I&D Memo can be accessed directly
on the Internet at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
The signed I&D Memo and the
electronic versions of the I&D Memo are
identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Based on a review of the record and
comments received from interested
parties regarding our Preliminary
Results, and for the reasons explained in
the I&D Memo, we revised the margin
calculation for Xinboda. Accordingly,
for the Final Results, the Department
has also updated the margin to be
assigned to companies eligible for a
separate rate but not selected for
individual examination; this margin is
the same as Xinboda’s margin. The
Calculation Memo for Xinboda’s Final
Results and the Surrogate Values Memo
contain further explanation of our
changes to Xinboda’s factors of
production.10 For a list of all issues
addressed in these Final Results, please
refer to Appendix I accompanying this
notice.
10 See Memorandum to the File, through Thomas
Gilgunn Program Manager, Office VII, Enforcement
and Compliance, from Jacqueline Arrowsmith,
International Trade Analyst, Office VII,
Enforcement and Compliance, regarding 20th
Antidumping Administrative Review of Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of China:
Calculation Memorandum for the Final Results of
Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co., Ltd., dated
concurrently with and hereby adopted by this
notice (‘‘Calculation Memo for Xinboda’s Final
Results’’) and Memorandum to the File, through
Thomas Gilgunn Program Manager, Office VII,
Enforcement and Compliance, from Jacqueline
Arrowsmith, International Trade Analyst, Office
VII, Enforcement and Compliance, regarding 20th
Antidumping Administrative Review of Fresh
Garlic from the People’s Republic of China:
Surrogate Values for the Final Results, dated
concurrently with and hereby adopted by this
notice (‘‘Surrogate Values Memo’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
Final Determination of No Shipments
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department preliminarily determined
that the companies listed in Appendix
III timely filed ‘‘no shipment’’
certifications and did not have any
reviewable transactions during the POR.
Consistent with the Department’s
assessment practice in non-market
economy (NME) cases, we completed
the review with respect to the
companies listed in Appendix III. Based
on the certifications submitted by the
aforementioned companies, and the fact
that CBP provided no evidence to
contradict the claims by the
aforementioned companies of no
shipments, we continue to determine
that these companies did not have any
reviewable transactions during the POR.
As noted in the ‘‘Assessment Rates’’
section below, the Department intends
to issue appropriate instructions to CBP
for the companies listed below based on
the final results of this review.
PRC-Wide Entity
As discussed in the Preliminary
Results, the Department preliminarily
determined 38 companies to be part of
the PRC-wide entity.11 In addition to the
two mandatory respondents which
failed to cooperate to the best of their
ability to comply with the Department’s
requests for information, there were 36
companies for which a review was
requested, and not withdrawn, which
did not file a separate rate application
or certification, and did not file a no
shipments certification. Accordingly,
the Department determined that these
companies are part of the PRC-wide
entity.
As discussed in detail in the I&D
Memo, the Department continues to find
Golden Bird and QTF to be part of the
PRC-wide entity. QTF commented on
our preliminary decision that it is part
of the PRC-wide entity, and we have
addressed QTF’s comments in the I&D
Memo.
Thus, for these final results, the
Department continues to find all 38
companies to be part of the PRC-wide
entity. A full list of companies
determined to be part of the PRC-wide
entity can be found in Appendix II.
Separate Rates
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department found that non-selected
companies Jinan Farmlady Trading Co.,
Ltd., Jining Maycarrier Import & Export
Co, Ltd., Jining Shunchang Import &
Export Co., Ltd., Jinxiang Feiteng Import
& Export Co., Ltd., Jinxiang Guiha Food
Co., Ltd., Jinxiang Hejia Co., Ltd., Jining
11 Id.,
PO 00000
at 72626.
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Yongjia Trade Co., Ltd., Shenzhen
Yuting Foodstuff Co., Ltd., Jining
Shengtai Vegetables & Fruits Co., Ltd.,
Shenzhen Bainong Co., Ltd., Weifang
Hongqiao International Logistics Co.,
Ltd., and Yantai Jinyan Trading Inc.
demonstrated their eligibility for a
separate rate.12 No party has placed any
evidence on the record of this review to
contradict that finding. Therefore, we
continue to find that these companies
are eligible for a separate rate.
The separate rate for non-selected
companies is normally the amount
equal to the weighted average of the
calculated weighted-average dumping
margins established for mandatory
respondents, excluding any zero and de
minimis margins, and any margins
determined entirely on adverse facts
available.13 Here, the only individuallyexamined respondent for which the
Department has determined a weightedaverage margin is Xinboda. As that
margin is not zero, de minimis, or based
entirely on facts available, the
Department determines that Xinboda’s
rate will be assigned to the non-selected
separate rate recipients.
Final Results of Administrative Review
The weighted-average dumping
margins for the administrative review
are as follows:
Exporter
Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial
Co., Ltd ...................................
Jinan Farmlady Trading Co., Ltd
Jining Maycarrier Import & Export Co., Ltd ............................
Jining Shunchang Import & Export Co., Ltd ............................
Jinxiang Feiteng Import & Export
Co., Ltd ...................................
Jinxiang Guihua Food Co., Ltd ..
Jinxiang Hejia Co., Ltd ...............
Jining Yongjia Trade Co., Ltd .....
Shenzhen Yuting Foodstuff Co.,
Ltd ...........................................
Jining Shengtai Vegetables &
Fruits Co., Ltd .........................
Shenzhen Bainong Co., Ltd .......
Weifang Hongqiao International
Logistics Co., Ltd ....................
Yantai Jinyan Trading Inc ...........
12 See
Weightedaverage
margin
(dollars per
kilogram)
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
Preliminary Results.
the Act nor the Department’s
regulations address the establishment of the rate
applied to individual companies not selected for
examination where the Department limited its
examination in an administrative review pursuant
to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. The Department’s
practice in cases involving limited selection based
on exporters accounting for the largest volumes of
exports has been to look to section 735(c)(5) of the
Act for guidance, which provides instructions for
calculating the all-others rate in an investigation.
13 Neither
E:\FR\FM\20JNN1.SGM
20JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Notices
Weightedaverage
margin
(dollars per
kilogram)
Exporter
PRC-Wide Rate ..........................
4.71
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
In addition, the Department continues
to find that the companies identified in
Appendix II are part of the PRC-wide
entity.
Assessment Rates
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the
Act, and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the
Department has determined, and U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
shall assess antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries of subject
merchandise in accordance with the
final results of this review. The
Department intends to issue appropriate
assessment instructions directly to CBP
15 days after publication of the final
results of this administrative review.
Where the respondent reported
reliable entered values, we calculated
importer- (or customer-) specific ad
valorem rates by aggregating the
dumping margins calculated for all U.S.
sales to each importer (or customer) and
dividing this amount by the total
entered value of the sales to each
importer (or customer).14 Where the
Department calculated a weightedaverage dumping margin by dividing the
total amount of dumping for reviewed
sales to that party by the total sales
quantity associated with those
transactions, the Department will direct
CBP to assess importer-specific
assessment rates based on the resulting
per-unit rates.15 Where an importer- (or
customer-) specific ad valorem or perunit rate is greater than de minimis, the
Department will instruct CBP to collect
the appropriate duties at the time of
liquidation.16 Where an importer- (or
customer-) specific ad valorem or perunit rate is zero or de minimis, the
Department will instruct CBP to
liquidate appropriate entries without
regard to antidumping duties.17 We
intend to instruct CBP to liquidate
entries containing subject merchandise
exported by the PRC-wide entity at the
PRC-wide rate.
Pursuant to the Department’s
assessment practice, for entries that
were not reported in the U.S. sales
databases submitted by companies
individually examined during this
review, the Department will instruct
CBP to liquidate such entries at the
14 See
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this
administrative review for all shipments
of the subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date, as provided for by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the
exporter listed above, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate established in the
final results of review (except, if the rate
is zero or de minimis, i.e., less than 0.5
percent, 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, 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 exporters that
supplied that non-PRC exporter. The
deposit requirements shall remain in
effect until further notice.
Disclosure
We intend to disclose the calculations
performed within five days of the date
of publication of this notice to parties in
this proceeding in accordance with 19
CFR 351.224(b).
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)
to file a certificate regarding the
reimbursement of antidumping duties
prior to liquidation of the relevant
entries during this POR. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
result in the Department’s presumption
that reimbursement of antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping
duties.
19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
15 Id.
18 See Non-Market Economy Antidumping
Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76
FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
16 Id.
17 See
PRC-wide entity rate. Additionally, if
the Department determines that an
exporter 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 entity rate.18
19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
39899
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a 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 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which
continues to govern business
proprietary information in this segment
of the proceeding. Timely written
notification of the return or 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.
We are issuing and publishing these
final results of administrative review in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i) of the Act.
Dated: June 10, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix I—Issues and Decision
Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Discussion of the Issues
Comment 1: Whether the Department’s
Selection of Romania as the Surrogate
Country Was Appropriate
Comment 2: The Department’s Rejection of
Mexico as a Surrogate Country Violated
the Department’s New Factual
Information Regulations and Was Not in
Accordance With Law
Comment 3: Whether QTF Cooperated to
the Best of Its Ability in This Review
Comment 4: Accounting for Storage and
Transportation Factors for Input Garlic
Bulbs Consumed by Excelink
Comment 5: The Department Should
Adjust the Weight Denominator for
Brokerage and Handling and Trucking
and Remove Letter of Credit Expense
Comment 6: Modifying Preliminary
Analysis To Account for Water
Consumed in Producing Fresh PeeledClove Garlic
V. Conclusion
Appendix II—List of Companies Under
Review Subject to the PRC-Wide Rate
1. Anqiu Friend Food Co., Ltd.
2. Dalian New Century Food Co., Ltd.
3. Foshan Fuyi Food Co, Ltd.
4. Goodwave Technology Development Ltd.
5. Guangxi Lin Si Fu Bang Trade Co., Ltd.
6. Hebei Golden Bird Trading Co., Ltd.
7. Hejiahuan (Zhongshan) Electrical AP
8. Henan Weite Industrial Co., Ltd.
9. Heze Ever-Best International Trade Co.,
Ltd. (f/k/a Shandong Heze International
Trade and Developing Company)
10. Jining Trans-High Trading Co., Ltd.
11. Jinxiang Dongyun Freezing Storage Co.,
Ltd. (a/k/a Jinxiang Eastward Shipping
Import and Export Limited Company)
E:\FR\FM\20JNN1.SGM
20JNN1
39900
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Notices
12. Jinxiang Dongyun Import & Export Co.,
Ltd.
13. Jinxiang Grand Agricultural Co., Ltd.
14. Jinxiang Infarm Fruits & Vegetables Co.,
Ltd.
15. Jinxiang Meihua Garlic Produce Co., Ltd.
16. Jinxiang Shanyang Freezing Storage Co.,
Ltd.
17. Jinxiang Tianma Freezing Storage Co.,
Ltd.
18. Jinxiang Xian Baishite Trade Co., Ltd.
(a/k/a Jinxiang Best Trade Co., Ltd.)
19. Juye Homestead Fruits and Vegetables
Co., Ltd.
20. Laiwu Jiahe Fruit and Vegatable Co., Ltd.
21. Qingdao Everfresh Trading Co., Ltd.
22. Qingdao Tiantaixing Foods Co., Ltd.
23. Shandong Longtai Fruits and Vegetables
Co., Ltd.
24. Shanghai Ever Rich Trade Company
25. Shanghai LJ International Trading Co.,
Ltd.
26. Shenzhen Xunong Trade Co., Ltd.
27. Sunny Import & Export Limited
28. Tangerine International Trading Co.
29. Weifang Chenglong Import & Export Co.,
Ltd.
30. Weifang He Lu Food Import & Export Co.,
Ltd.
31. Weifang Naike Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.
32. Weifang Shennong Foodstuff Co., Ltd.
33. XuZhou Heiners Agricultural Co., Ltd.
34. Zhengzhou Dadi Garlic Industry Co., Ltd.
35. Zhengzhou Huachao Industrial Co., Ltd.
36. Zhengzhou Xuri Import & Export Co., Ltd.
37. Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading Co., Ltd.
38. Zhong Lian Farming Product (Qingdao)
Co., Ltd.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Appendix III—Companies That Have
Certified No Shipments
Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty
(CVD) Determination With Final
Antidumping Duty (AD) Determination
1. Jining Yifa Garlic Produce Co., Ltd.
2. Jinxiang Richfar Fruits & Vegetables Co.,
Ltd.
3. Jinxiang Yuanxin Import & Export Co., Ltd.
4. Landling Qingshui Vegetable Foods Co.,
Ltd.
5. Qingdao Lianghe International Trade Co.,
Ltd.
6. Qingdao Sea-line International Trading Co.
7. Qingdao Xiangtiangfeng Foods Co., Ltd.
8. Shandong Chenhe International Tradeing
Co., Ltd.
9. Shandong Jinxiang Zhengyang Import &
Export Co., Ltd.
10. Shijazhuang Goodman Trading Co., Ltd.
[FR Doc. 2016–14423 Filed 6–17–16; 8:45 am]
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
International Trade Administration
[C–542–801]
Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road
Tires From Sri Lanka: Preliminary
Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, Preliminary Affirmative
Critical Circumstances Determination,
and Alignment of Final Determination
With Final Antidumping Determination
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) preliminarily
determines that countervailable
subsidies are being provided to
producers and exporters of certain new
pneumatic off-the-road tires (off road
tires) from Sri Lanka and that critical
circumstances exist. The period of
investigation is January 1, 2015, through
December 31, 2015. Interested parties
are invited to comment on this
preliminary determination.
DATES: Effective Date: June 20, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elizabeth Eastwood, AD/CVD
Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3874.
AGENCY:
On February 3, 2016, the Department
initiated this CVD investigation of off
road tires from Sri Lanka.1 On the same
day, the Department also initiated
antidumping duty (AD) and CVD
investigations of off road tires from
India.2 3 This CVD investigation and the
India AD investigation cover the same
class or kind of merchandise.
On May 11, 2016, in accordance with
section 705(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of
1 See
Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires
From India, the People’s Republic of China, and Sri
Lanka: Initiation of Countervailing Duty
Investigations, 81 FR 7067 (February 10, 2016)
(Initiation Notice).
2 See Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires
From India and the People’s Republic of China:
Initiation of Less Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 81
FR 7073 (February 10, 2016).
3 At this time, the Department also initiated AD
and CVD investigations of off road tires from the
People’s Republic of China (PRC). However, on
March 1, 2016, the U.S. International Trade
Commission (ITC) found that imports of off road
tires from the PRC were negligible and terminated
the PRC AD and CVD investigations. See Certain
New Pneumatic Off-the-Road-Tires From China,
India, and Sri Lanka, 81 FR 10663 (March 1, 2016).
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1930, as amended (Act), Petitioners 4
requested alignment of the final CVD
determination of off road tires from Sri
Lanka with the final AD determination
of off road tires from India. Therefore,
in accordance with section 705(a)(1) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(4), we
are aligning the final CVD determination
with the India final AD determination.
Consequently, the final CVD
determination will be issued on the
same date as the India final AD
determination, which is currently
scheduled to be issued no later than
October 25, 2016, unless postponed.
Scope of the Investigation
The scope of the investigation covers
off road tires, which are tires with an off
road tire size designation. For a
complete description of the scope of the
investigation, see Appendix I.
Scope Comments
Certain interested parties commented
on the scope of the investigation as it
appeared in the Initiation Notice. For
discussion of those comments, see the
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.5
Methodology
The Department is conducting this
CVD investigation in accordance with
section 701 of the Act. For each of the
subsidy programs found
countervailable, we preliminarily
determine that there is a subsidy (i.e., a
financial contribution by an ‘‘authority’’
that gives rise to a benefit to the
recipient) and that the subsidy is
specific.6 For a full description of the
methodology underlying our
preliminary conclusions, see the
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
The Preliminary Decision
Memorandum is a public document and
is on file electronically via Enforcement
and Compliance’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (ACCESS).
ACCESS is available to registered users
at https://access.trade.gov, and is
4 Petitioners in this investigation are Titan Tire
Corporation and the United Steel, Paper and
Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied
Industrial and Service Workers International Union,
AFL–CIO, CLC.
5 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance, regarding ‘‘Decision Memorandum for
the Affirmative Preliminary Determination in the
Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain New
Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires from Sri Lanka,’’
dated concurrently with this notice (Preliminary
Decision Memorandum).
6 See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act
regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E)
of the Act regarding benefit; and section 771(5A) of
the Act regarding specificity.
E:\FR\FM\20JNN1.SGM
20JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 118 (Monday, June 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39897-39900]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14423]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-831]
Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results
and Final Rescission of the 20th Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2013-2014
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) published the
Preliminary Results of the 20th administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's Republic of
China (PRC) on December 7, 2015.\1\ We gave interested parties an
opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results. Based upon our
analysis of the comments and information received, we made changes to
the margin calculation for these final results regarding one of the
mandatory respondents, Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co., Ltd. (Xinboda).
We also continue to find that the other mandatory respondents, Hebei
Golden Bird Trading Co., Ltd. (Golden Bird) and Qingdao Tiantaixing
Foods Co., Ltd. (QTF), withheld requested information, significantly
impeded this administrative review, and did not cooperate to the best
of their abilities. Accordingly, pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), we continue to use
adverse facts available (AFA) and find that neither Golden Bird nor QTF
is eligible for separate rate status and thus, both companies are part
of the PRC-wide entity. The final dumping margins are listed below in
the ``Final Results of Administrative Review'' section of this notice.
The period of review (POR) is November 1, 2013, through October 31,
2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China:
Preliminary Results, Preliminary Intent To Rescind, and Partial
Rescission of the 20th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-
2014, 80 FR 75972 (December 7, 2015) (Preliminary Results) and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (PDM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: June 20, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqueline Arrowsmith, AD/CVD
Operations, or Thomas Gilgunn, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone
202-482-5255 or 202-482-4236, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published the Preliminary Results on December 7,
2015.\2\ As explained in the memorandum from the Acting Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, the Department has exercised
its discretion to toll all administrative deadlines due to the recent
closure of the Federal Government. All deadlines in this segment of the
proceeding have been extended by four business days. The revised
deadline for the final results of this review was April 11, 2016.\3\ On
April 4, 2016, the Department extended the deadline in this proceeding
by 30 days to May 11, 2016.\4\ On May 4, 2016, the Department extended
the deadline in this proceeding by another 30 days to June 10, 2016.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Preliminary Results.
\3\ See Memorandum to the Record from Ron Lorentzen, Acting A/S
for Enforcement & Compliance, regarding ``Tolling of Administrative
Deadlines As a Result of the Government Closure During Snowstorm
Jonas,'' (January 27, 2016).
\4\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, ``Fresh Garlic from the
People's Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Final Results
of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,'' (April 4, 2016).
\5\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, ``Fresh Garlic from the
People's Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Final Results
of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,'' (May 4, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.309, we invited parties to comment on
our Preliminary Results. QTF, Petitioners and Xinboda all submitted
timely-filed case briefs, pursuant to our regulations.\6\ Additionally,
Petitioners and Xinboda submitted timely-filed rebuttal briefs.\7\
Finally, on March 3, 2016, the Department held a public hearing where
counsel for QTF, Xinboda and Petitioners presented arguments in their
case and rebuttal briefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Case Brief filed by Qingdao Tiantaixing Foods Co., Ltd.
(QTF Case Brief) (January 11, 2016); Petitioners' Case Brief
(January 15, 2016); Letter from Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co.,
Ltd. (``Xinboda'') ``Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of
China--Case Brief,'' (January 19, 2016) (Xinboda's Case Brief).
\7\ See Letter from Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co., Ltd.
(``Xinboda'') ``Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China--
Xinboda Rebuttal Brief,'' (February 2, 2016) (Xinboda's Rebuttal
Brief); see also Petitioners' Rebuttal Brief (February 2, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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) 0703.20.0000,
0703.20.0005, 0703.20.0010, 0703.20.0015, 0703.20.0020, 0703.20.0090,
0710.80.7060, 0710.80.9750, 0711.90.6000, 0711.90.6500, 2005.90.9500,
2005.90.9700, 2005.99.9700. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the written product description
remains dispositive. For a full description of the scope of this order,
please see ``Scope of the Order'' in the accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance, from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations,
``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Fresh Garlic from the
People's Republic of China; 2013-2014,'' dated concurrently with
this notice (I&D Memo).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Partial Rescission of Administrative Review
In the Preliminary Results, we stated our intention to
preliminarily rescind this administrative review with respect to
Jinxiang Kaihua Imp & Exp Co. Ltd. (Kaihua), because we found its POR
sales to not be bona fide in the concurrent new shipper review.\9\ We
received no comments on our intent to rescind the review of Kaihua for
the
[[Page 39898]]
Final Results. Therefore, we are rescinding this administrative review
with respect to Kaihua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final
Rescission of the Semiannual Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of
Jinxiang Kaihua Imp & Exp Co., Ltd., 80 FR 60881 (October 8, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
We addressed all issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by
parties in this review in the I&D Memo. Appendix I provides a list of
the issues which parties raised. The I&D Memo is a public document and
is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room B8024 of the main
Department of Commerce building, as well as electronically via
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://access.trade.gov and in the CRU. In
addition, a complete version of the I&D Memo can be accessed directly
on the Internet at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The
signed I&D Memo and the electronic versions of the I&D Memo are
identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on a review of the record and comments received from
interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, and for the
reasons explained in the I&D Memo, we revised the margin calculation
for Xinboda. Accordingly, for the Final Results, the Department has
also updated the margin to be assigned to companies eligible for a
separate rate but not selected for individual examination; this margin
is the same as Xinboda's margin. The Calculation Memo for Xinboda's
Final Results and the Surrogate Values Memo contain further explanation
of our changes to Xinboda's factors of production.\10\ For a list of
all issues addressed in these Final Results, please refer to Appendix I
accompanying this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Memorandum to the File, through Thomas Gilgunn Program
Manager, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, from Jacqueline
Arrowsmith, International Trade Analyst, Office VII, Enforcement and
Compliance, regarding 20th Antidumping Administrative Review of
Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Calculation
Memorandum for the Final Results of Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co.,
Ltd., dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice
(``Calculation Memo for Xinboda's Final Results'') and Memorandum to
the File, through Thomas Gilgunn Program Manager, Office VII,
Enforcement and Compliance, from Jacqueline Arrowsmith,
International Trade Analyst, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance,
regarding 20th Antidumping Administrative Review of Fresh Garlic
from the People's Republic of China: Surrogate Values for the Final
Results, dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice
(``Surrogate Values Memo'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Determination of No Shipments
In the Preliminary Results, the Department preliminarily determined
that the companies listed in Appendix III timely filed ``no shipment''
certifications and did not have any reviewable transactions during the
POR. Consistent with the Department's assessment practice in non-market
economy (NME) cases, we completed the review with respect to the
companies listed in Appendix III. Based on the certifications submitted
by the aforementioned companies, and the fact that CBP provided no
evidence to contradict the claims by the aforementioned companies of no
shipments, we continue to determine that these companies did not have
any reviewable transactions during the POR. As noted in the
``Assessment Rates'' section below, the Department intends to issue
appropriate instructions to CBP for the companies listed below based on
the final results of this review.
PRC-Wide Entity
As discussed in the Preliminary Results, the Department
preliminarily determined 38 companies to be part of the PRC-wide
entity.\11\ In addition to the two mandatory respondents which failed
to cooperate to the best of their ability to comply with the
Department's requests for information, there were 36 companies for
which a review was requested, and not withdrawn, which did not file a
separate rate application or certification, and did not file a no
shipments certification. Accordingly, the Department determined that
these companies are part of the PRC-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Id., at 72626.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in detail in the I&D Memo, the Department continues to
find Golden Bird and QTF to be part of the PRC-wide entity. QTF
commented on our preliminary decision that it is part of the PRC-wide
entity, and we have addressed QTF's comments in the I&D Memo.
Thus, for these final results, the Department continues to find all
38 companies to be part of the PRC-wide entity. A full list of
companies determined to be part of the PRC-wide entity can be found in
Appendix II.
Separate Rates
In the Preliminary Results, the Department found that non-selected
companies Jinan Farmlady Trading Co., Ltd., Jining Maycarrier Import &
Export Co, Ltd., Jining Shunchang Import & Export Co., Ltd., Jinxiang
Feiteng Import & Export Co., Ltd., Jinxiang Guiha Food Co., Ltd.,
Jinxiang Hejia Co., Ltd., Jining Yongjia Trade Co., Ltd., Shenzhen
Yuting Foodstuff Co., Ltd., Jining Shengtai Vegetables & Fruits Co.,
Ltd., Shenzhen Bainong Co., Ltd., Weifang Hongqiao International
Logistics Co., Ltd., and Yantai Jinyan Trading Inc. demonstrated their
eligibility for a separate rate.\12\ No party has placed any evidence
on the record of this review to contradict that finding. Therefore, we
continue to find that these companies are eligible for a separate rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Preliminary Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The separate rate for non-selected companies is normally the amount
equal to the weighted average of the calculated weighted-average
dumping margins established for mandatory respondents, excluding any
zero and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely on
adverse facts available.\13\ Here, the only individually-examined
respondent for which the Department has determined a weighted-average
margin is Xinboda. As that margin is not zero, de minimis, or based
entirely on facts available, the Department determines that Xinboda's
rate will be assigned to the non-selected separate rate recipients.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Neither the Act nor the Department's regulations address
the establishment of the rate applied to individual companies not
selected for examination where the Department limited its
examination in an administrative review pursuant to section
777A(c)(2) of the Act. The Department's practice in cases involving
limited selection based on exporters accounting for the largest
volumes of exports has been to look to section 735(c)(5) of the Act
for guidance, which provides instructions for calculating the all-
others rate in an investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of Administrative Review
The weighted-average dumping margins for the administrative review
are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
margin
Exporter (dollars
per
kilogram)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co., Ltd........................ 2.75
Jinan Farmlady Trading Co., Ltd............................. 2.75
Jining Maycarrier Import & Export Co., Ltd.................. 2.75
Jining Shunchang Import & Export Co., Ltd................... 2.75
Jinxiang Feiteng Import & Export Co., Ltd................... 2.75
Jinxiang Guihua Food Co., Ltd............................... 2.75
Jinxiang Hejia Co., Ltd..................................... 2.75
Jining Yongjia Trade Co., Ltd............................... 2.75
Shenzhen Yuting Foodstuff Co., Ltd.......................... 2.75
Jining Shengtai Vegetables & Fruits Co., Ltd................ 2.75
Shenzhen Bainong Co., Ltd................................... 2.75
Weifang Hongqiao International Logistics Co., Ltd........... 2.75
Yantai Jinyan Trading Inc................................... 2.75
[[Page 39899]]
PRC-Wide Rate............................................... 4.71
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Department continues to find that the companies
identified in Appendix II are part of the PRC-wide entity.
Assessment Rates
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.212(b),
the Department has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) shall assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of
subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this
review. The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment
instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of the final
results of this administrative review.
Where the respondent reported reliable entered values, we
calculated importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem rates by
aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales to each
importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the total entered
value of the sales to each importer (or customer).\14\ Where the
Department calculated a weighted-average dumping margin by dividing the
total amount of dumping for reviewed sales to that party by the total
sales quantity associated with those transactions, the Department will
direct CBP to assess importer-specific assessment rates based on the
resulting per-unit rates.\15\ Where an importer- (or customer-)
specific ad valorem or per-unit rate is greater than de minimis, the
Department will instruct CBP to collect the appropriate duties at the
time of liquidation.\16\ Where an importer- (or customer-) specific ad
valorem or per-unit rate is zero or de minimis, the Department will
instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to
antidumping duties.\17\ We intend to instruct CBP to liquidate entries
containing subject merchandise exported by the PRC-wide entity at the
PRC-wide rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
\15\ Id.
\16\ Id.
\17\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the Department's assessment practice, for entries that
were not reported in the U.S. sales databases submitted by companies
individually examined during this review, the Department will instruct
CBP to liquidate such entries at the PRC-wide entity rate.
Additionally, if the Department determines that an exporter 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 entity rate.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as
provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporter
listed above, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in the
final results of review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis,
i.e., less than 0.5 percent, 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, 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 exporters that supplied that non-PRC
exporter. The deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further
notice.
Disclosure
We intend to disclose the calculations performed within five days
of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding
the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Department's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a 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 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which
continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of
the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or
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.
We are issuing and publishing these final results of administrative
review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: June 10, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix I--Issues and Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Discussion of the Issues
Comment 1: Whether the Department's Selection of Romania as the
Surrogate Country Was Appropriate
Comment 2: The Department's Rejection of Mexico as a Surrogate
Country Violated the Department's New Factual Information
Regulations and Was Not in Accordance With Law
Comment 3: Whether QTF Cooperated to the Best of Its Ability in
This Review
Comment 4: Accounting for Storage and Transportation Factors for
Input Garlic Bulbs Consumed by Excelink
Comment 5: The Department Should Adjust the Weight Denominator
for Brokerage and Handling and Trucking and Remove Letter of Credit
Expense
Comment 6: Modifying Preliminary Analysis To Account for Water
Consumed in Producing Fresh Peeled-Clove Garlic
V. Conclusion
Appendix II--List of Companies Under Review Subject to the PRC-Wide
Rate
1. Anqiu Friend Food Co., Ltd.
2. Dalian New Century Food Co., Ltd.
3. Foshan Fuyi Food Co, Ltd.
4. Goodwave Technology Development Ltd.
5. Guangxi Lin Si Fu Bang Trade Co., Ltd.
6. Hebei Golden Bird Trading Co., Ltd.
7. Hejiahuan (Zhongshan) Electrical AP
8. Henan Weite Industrial Co., Ltd.
9. Heze Ever-Best International Trade Co., Ltd. (f/k/a Shandong Heze
International Trade and Developing Company)
10. Jining Trans-High Trading Co., Ltd.
11. Jinxiang Dongyun Freezing Storage Co., Ltd. (a/k/a Jinxiang
Eastward Shipping Import and Export Limited Company)
[[Page 39900]]
12. Jinxiang Dongyun Import & Export Co., Ltd.
13. Jinxiang Grand Agricultural Co., Ltd.
14. Jinxiang Infarm Fruits & Vegetables Co., Ltd.
15. Jinxiang Meihua Garlic Produce Co., Ltd.
16. Jinxiang Shanyang Freezing Storage Co., Ltd.
17. Jinxiang Tianma Freezing Storage Co., Ltd.
18. Jinxiang Xian Baishite Trade Co., Ltd. (a/k/a Jinxiang Best
Trade Co., Ltd.)
19. Juye Homestead Fruits and Vegetables Co., Ltd.
20. Laiwu Jiahe Fruit and Vegatable Co., Ltd.
21. Qingdao Everfresh Trading Co., Ltd.
22. Qingdao Tiantaixing Foods Co., Ltd.
23. Shandong Longtai Fruits and Vegetables Co., Ltd.
24. Shanghai Ever Rich Trade Company
25. Shanghai LJ International Trading Co., Ltd.
26. Shenzhen Xunong Trade Co., Ltd.
27. Sunny Import & Export Limited
28. Tangerine International Trading Co.
29. Weifang Chenglong Import & Export Co., Ltd.
30. Weifang He Lu Food Import & Export Co., Ltd.
31. Weifang Naike Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.
32. Weifang Shennong Foodstuff Co., Ltd.
33. XuZhou Heiners Agricultural Co., Ltd.
34. Zhengzhou Dadi Garlic Industry Co., Ltd.
35. Zhengzhou Huachao Industrial Co., Ltd.
36. Zhengzhou Xuri Import & Export Co., Ltd.
37. Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading Co., Ltd.
38. Zhong Lian Farming Product (Qingdao) Co., Ltd.
Appendix III--Companies That Have Certified No Shipments
1. Jining Yifa Garlic Produce Co., Ltd.
2. Jinxiang Richfar Fruits & Vegetables Co., Ltd.
3. Jinxiang Yuanxin Import & Export Co., Ltd.
4. Landling Qingshui Vegetable Foods Co., Ltd.
5. Qingdao Lianghe International Trade Co., Ltd.
6. Qingdao Sea-line International Trading Co.
7. Qingdao Xiangtiangfeng Foods Co., Ltd.
8. Shandong Chenhe International Tradeing Co., Ltd.
9. Shandong Jinxiang Zhengyang Import & Export Co., Ltd.
10. Shijazhuang Goodman Trading Co., Ltd.
[FR Doc. 2016-14423 Filed 6-17-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P