Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of the 23rd Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017, 35601-35604 [2019-15745]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2019 / Notices We intend to issue assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review. Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: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) The cash deposit rate for respondents noted above will be the rate established in the final results of this administrative review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent and, therefore, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(I), in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this administrative review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fairvalue (LTFV) investigation, but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of the subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 20.58 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation.11 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 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 the POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. Administrative Protective Order 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(a)(3), 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. Notice to Interested Parties We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221. Dated: July 16, 2019. Jeffrey I. Kessler, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix List of Topics Discussed in the Final Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. Changes Made Since the Preliminary Results V. Discussion of the Issues General Issue Comment 1: Whether ArcelorMittal Celaya Should be Included in the Liquidation Instructions Deacero Issues Comment 2: Whether Commerce Should Continue to Apply Partial AFA to Deacero for Not Reporting Downstream Resales of Rebar Made by Its Home Market Affiliate Comment 3: Whether Commerce Properly Accounted for Deacero’s Non-Prime Sales Comment 4: Whether Commerce Mistakenly Performed the Arm’s-Length Test on Deacero Sales Grupo Simec Issues Comment 5: Whether Commerce Should Continue Collapsing Sigosa with AEST and FUNACE Comment 6: Whether Commerce Should Correct an Error in Grupo Simec’s Margin Calculation Program VI. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2019–15743 Filed 7–23–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 11 See Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Mexico: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 79 FR 54967 (September 15, 2014). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:53 Jul 23, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 35601 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–831] Fresh Garlic From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of the 23rd Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016–2017 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that Shandong Jinxiang Zhengyang Import & Export Co., Ltd. (Zhengyang) made sales of fresh garlic from the People’s Republic of China (China) at less than normal value during the period of review (POR) November 1, 2016 through October 31, 2017. Commerce finds that Qingdao Sea-line International Trading Co., Ltd. (Sea-line) withheld requested information, significantly impeded the review, and did not cooperate to the best of its ability. Accordingly, pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), we are relying on adverse facts available. These determinations and the final dumping margins are discussed below in the ‘‘Final Results’’ section of this notice. DATES: Applicable July 24, 2019. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn Wallace or Alexander Cipolla, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202–482–6251 or 202–482–4956, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background Commerce published the preliminary results of this administrative review of the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from China on December 10, 2018.1 We preliminarily found that the mandatory respondents, Zhengyang and Sea-line, sold subject merchandise to the United States at less than normal value. Furthermore, we found that two companies certified that they made no shipments during the POR and that six companies, in addition to the mandatory respondents, qualified for separate rate status. Commerce exercised its discretion to toll all deadlines affected by the partial federal government closure from 1 See Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016–2017, 83 FR 63479 (December 10, 2018) (Preliminary Results). Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24JYN1.SGM 24JYN1 35602 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2019 / Notices December 22, 2018 through the resumption of operations on January 29, 2019.2 If the new deadline falls on a non-business day, in accordance with Commerce’s practice, the deadline will become the next business day. The revised deadline for the final results was tolled to May 20, 2019. Between March 8 and March 11, 2019, Zhengyang, Sea-line, and the petitioners 3 submitted their respective case briefs.4 On March 14, 2019, in response to requests from the petitioners 5 and Sea-line,6 we extended the deadline for interested parties to submit rebuttal briefs by five days.7 On March 20, 2019, Sea-line and the petitioners submitted rebuttal briefs.8 On May 10, 2019, Commerce extended the deadlines for the final results of this administrative review from 120 days to 180 days after the publication of the Preliminary Results. The new deadline is now July 18, 2019.9 Scope of the Order The products covered by the order are all grades of garlic, whole or separated into constituent cloves, whether or not peeled, fresh, chilled, frozen, water or other neutral substance, but not khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES 2 See Memorandum to the Record from Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Deadlines Affected by the Partia1 Shutdown of the Federal Government,’’ dated January 28, 2019. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by 40 days. 3 The petitioners are the Fresh Garlic Producers Association and its individual members: Christopher Ranch L.L.C.; The Garlic Company; and Valley Garlic. 4 See Zhengyang’s Letter, ‘‘Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China—Case Brief,’’ dated March 8, 2019; see also Sea-line’s Letter, ‘‘Fresh Garlic from the PRC: Case Brief of Qingdao Sea-line International Trading Co., Ltd.,’’ dated March 8, 2019; Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China: Petitioners’ Case Brief,’’ dated March 11, 2019. 5 See Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘23rd Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China— Petitioners’ Request for Extension of deadline for Submission of Rebuttal Case Briefs,’’ dated March 12, 2019. 6 See Sea-line’s Letter, ‘‘Fresh Garlic from the PRC: Extension Request for Submission of Rebuttal Brief on Behalf of Qingdao Sea-Line International Trading Co., Ltd.,’’ dated March 14, 2019. 7 See Memorandum, ‘‘23rd Administrative Review of Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China: Extension of Rebuttal Briefing Schedule,’’ dated March 14, 2019. 8 See Sea-line’s Letter, ‘‘Fresh Garlic from the PRC: Rebuttal Brief of Qingdao Sea-line International Trading Co., Ltd.,’’ dated May 20, 2019; see also Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China: Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated March 20, 2019. 9 See Memorandum, ‘‘Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China—23rd Administrative Review: Extension of Deadline for the Final Results of Review,’’ dated May 10, 2019. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:53 Jul 23, 2019 Jkt 247001 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 the 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: 0703.20.0000, 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, of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).10 Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of the 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 nonfresh use or (2) specially prepared and cultivated prior to planting and then harvested and otherwise prepared for use as seed must be accompanied by declarations to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to that effect. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs are addressed in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.11 The issues are identified in Appendix I to this notice. The Issues and 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 http://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at http:// 10 See Antidumping Duty Order: Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 59209 (November 16, 1994). 11 See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China; 2016– 2017,’’ dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum) at ‘‘Discussion of the Issues.’’ PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum 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 Issues and Decision Memorandum, we have applied facts available with an adverse inference to Sea-line. As such, and as described below, we have revised the margin assigned to the separate rate respondents. Final Determination of No Shipments In the Preliminary Results, Commerce determined that the QTF-Entity 12 and Jining Shengtai Fruits & Vegetables Co., Ltd. each had no shipments during the POR.13 As we have not received any information to contradict our preliminary findings, we determine that these entities did not have any shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. China-Wide Entity As discussed in the Preliminary Results, the China-wide entity will not be under review unless a party specifically requests, or Commerce selfinitiates, a review of the entity.14 Because no party requested a review of the China-wide entity, the entity is not under review and the entity’s rate (i.e., $4.71 per-kilogram (kg)) is not subject to change. Aside from the no-shipment companies discussed above, Commerce considers all other companies for which a review was requested, and which did not qualify for a separate rate, to be part of the China-wide entity. A list of the companies determined to be part of the China-wide entity is provided in Appendix III to this notice. Separate Rates In the Preliminary Results, in accordance with section 777A(c)(2)(B) 12 The QTF-Entity includes Qingdao Lianghe International Trade Co., Ltd. (Lianghe); Qingdao Xintianfeng Foods Co., Ltd. (QXF); Qingdao Tiantaixing Foods Co., Ltd. (QTF); Qingdao Tianhefeng Foods Co., Ltd. (QTHF); Qingdao Beixing Trading Co., Ltd. (QBT); Hebei Golden Bird Trading Co., Ltd.; and Huamei Consulting. See Memorandum, ‘‘23rd Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China: Status of the QTFEntity,’’ dated October 22, 2018, at Attachment. 13 See Preliminary Results, 83 FR at 63480–82. 14 See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963 (November 4, 2013). E:\FR\FM\24JYN1.SGM 24JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2019 / Notices of the Act, Commerce employed a limited examination methodology, as we determined that it would not be practicable to examine individually all companies for which a review request was made.15 There were six exporters of subject merchandise from China that demonstrated their eligibility for a separate rate but were not selected for individual examination in this review. These six exporters are listed in Appendix II. Neither the Act nor Commerce’s regulations address the establishment of the rate applied to individual companies not selected for examination where Commerce limited its examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. Commerce’s practice in cases involving limited selection based on exporters accounting for the largest volume of imports 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. Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act instructs Commerce to base an allothers rate on the rates established for individually investigated producers and exporters, excluding any rates that are zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts available in investigations. In these final results of review, we calculated a weighted-average dumping margin for Zhengyang, but based Sea-line’s margin on facts available. As Zhengyang’s margin is the only margin that is not either de minimis or based entirely on adverse facts available, we have assigned Zhengyang’s margin to the separate rate respondents. Final Results of Review Commerce finds that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period November 1, 2016 through October 31, 2017: Weighted-average dumping margin (dollars per-kg) Exporter Shandong Jinxiang Zhengyang Import & Export Co., Ltd .......................................................................................................... Qingdao Sea-line International Trading Co., Ltd ......................................................................................................................... Chengwu County Yuanxiang Industry & Commerce Co., Ltd ..................................................................................................... Jining Alpha Food Co., Ltd .......................................................................................................................................................... Qingdao Maycarrier Import & Export Co., Ltd ............................................................................................................................. Shandong Chenhe International Trading Co., Ltd ...................................................................................................................... Shandong Happy Foods Co., Ltd ................................................................................................................................................ Weifang Hongqiao International Logistics Co., Ltd ..................................................................................................................... khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Assessment Rates Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) and (C) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.212(b), Commerce has determined, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review. Commerce intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of this notice. Pursuant to Commerce’s assessment practice in non-market economy (NME) cases, 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 individuallyexamined exporter’s cash deposit rate), Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the NME-wide rate. In addition, if Commerce 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 NME-wide rate.16 Cash Deposit Requirements Commerce intends to instruct CBP to require a cash deposit for antidumping duties equal to the weighted-average margin by which normal value exceeds 15 See Memorandum, ‘‘Selection of Respondents for Individual Examination,’’ dated February 28, 2018. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:53 Jul 23, 2019 Jkt 247001 35603 2.87 4.71 2.87 2.87 2.87 2.87 2.87 2.87 U.S. price. The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of these final results of this administrative review for shipments of the subject merchandise from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of this notice, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters listed above, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this review; (2) for previously investigated or reviewed Chinese and non-Chinese exporters not listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) for all Chinese exporters of subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate for the China-wide entity (i.e., 4.71 dollars per-kg); and (4) for all non-Chinese exporters of subject merchandise that have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the Chinese exporter that supplied that non-Chinese exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, 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). 16 For a full discussion of this practice, see NonMarket Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011). PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 Commerce’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties has occurred, and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. Administrative Protective Order This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition 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 return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial E:\FR\FM\24JYN1.SGM 24JYN1 35604 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2019 / Notices protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. Notification to Interested Parties We are issuing and publishing these final results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213. Dated: July 18, 2019. Jeffrey I. Kessler, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. 19. Qingdao Gabsan Trading Co., Ltd. 20. Qingdao Jiashan Trading Co., Ltd. 21. Qingdao Justop Industries and Trading Co., Ltd. 22. Qingdao Ritai Food Co., Ltd. 23. Shandong Galaxy International 24. Shandong Helu International Trade Co., Ltd. 25. Shandong Lejianda Food Co., Ltd. 26. Victoria Foods Co., Ltd. 27. Weifang Huashun Import & Export Co., Ltd. 28. Weifang Wangyuan Food Co., Ltd. [FR Doc. 2019–15745 Filed 7–23–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Appendix I List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. Final Determination of No Shipments V. Use of Facts Available and Adverse Facts Available (AFA) VI. Discussion of the Issues: Comment 1: Whether Sea-line Provided Reliable Sales Information to Calculate a Dumping Margin Comment 2: Whether Romania is the Appropriate Surrogate Country Comment 3: Whether Commerce DoubleCounted Chemicals in Sea-line’s Calculation VII. Recommendation Appendix II List of Companies Receiving a Separate Rate 1. Chengwu County Yuanxiang Industry & Commerce Co., Ltd. 2. Jining Alpha Food Co., Ltd. 3. Qingdao Maycarrier Import & Export Co., Ltd. 4. Shandong Chenhe International Trading Co., Ltd. 5. Shandong Happy Foods Co., Ltd. 6. Weifang Hongqiao International Logistics Co., Ltd. khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Appendix III List of Companies Not Receiving Separate Rate Status 1. Bestway Logistics Inc. 2. Chengwu Yuanxiang Industry and Commerce Co., Ltd. 3. China Union Agri. (Qingdao) Co., Ltd. 4. Dongying Richmond International 5. Jiangyoung Gunagafa Vegetable Professional Corperation 6. Jinan Farmlady Trading Co., Ltd. 7. Jining City Billion Garlic Products Co., Ltd. 8. Jining New Silk Road Food Co., Ltd. 9. Jining Rich Farmer International 10. Jining Yifa Garlic Produce Co., Ltd. 11. Jining Yongjia Trade Co., Ltd. 12. Jinxiang County Jinji Trade Co., Ltd. 13. Jinxiang Hongyu Freezing & Storing Co., Ltd. 14. Jinxiang Richfar Fruits & Vegetables Co., Ltd. 15. Juxian Huateng Organic Ginger Co., Ltd. 16. Laiwu Ever Green Food Co., Ltd. 17. Lanling Xinxinyuan Food Co., Ltd. 18. Pinacle Sourcing & Marketing, Ltd. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:53 Jul 23, 2019 Jkt 247001 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–580–884] Countervailing Duty Order on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Amended Final Results of the First Administrative Review Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is amending the final results of the administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on certain hot-rolled steel flat products (hot-rolled steel) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) to correct a ministerial error. The period of review (POR) is August 12, 2016 through December 31, 2016. DATES: Applicable July 24, 2019. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hannah Falvey, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4889. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background In accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), on June 19, 2019, Commerce published its final results of the administrative review of the CVD order of hot-rolled steel from Korea.1 On June 24, 2019, POSCO alleged a calculation error in these Final Results regarding POSCO’s policy loans from the Korea Resources Corporation 1 See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Final Results of the Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 2016, 84 FR 28461 (June 19, 2019) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM). PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 (KORES).2 We did not receive any other ministerial error comments or rebuttal comments. Scope of the Order The merchandise covered by the order is certain hot-rolled steel flat products from Korea. For a complete description of the scope of the order, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum accompanying the Final Results.3 Ministerial Errors Section 751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(f) define a ‘‘ministerial error’’ as an error in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other similar type of unintentional error which the Secretary considers ministerial. As discussed in the Amended Final Issues and Decision Memorandum, Commerce finds that the error alleged by POSCO constitutes a ministerial error within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.224(f).4 Specifically, Commerce made an error in the calculation of the benefit to POSCO from POSCO’s KORES loans.5 In accordance with section 751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(e), we are amending the Final Results to correct the ministerial error. Specifically, we are amending the net subsidy rate for POSCO.6 The revised net subsidy rate is provided below. Amended Final Results Company POSCO ................................. Subsidy rate (percent valorem) 7 0.54 2 See POSCO’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea, 8/12/ 2016–12/31/2016 Administrative Review, Case No. C–580–884: POSCO’s Ministerial Error Allegation,’’ dated June 24, 2019. 3 See Final Results and accompanying IDM. 4 See Memorandum, ‘‘Allegation of Ministerial Errors in the Final Results of the First Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea,’’ dated concurrently with, and herby adopted by, this notice (Amended Final Issues and Decision Memorandum). 5 See Memorandum, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Review of Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Final Results Calculations for POSCO,’’ dated June 11, 2019. 6 Id. Because we relied on POSCO’s subsidy rates to calculate the rate for non-selected companies under review, we are revising the calculation for non-selected companies under review in these amended final results. After this revision, the rate for non-selected companies is unchanged from the Final Results. See Memorandum, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea; Amended Final Results Rate Calculation for the Non-Selected Companies,’’ dated concurrently with the amended final results. E:\FR\FM\24JYN1.SGM 24JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 24, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35601-35604]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15745]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-831]


Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results 
of the 23rd Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that Shandong 
Jinxiang Zhengyang Import & Export Co., Ltd. (Zhengyang) made sales of 
fresh garlic from the People's Republic of China (China) at less than 
normal value during the period of review (POR) November 1, 2016 through 
October 31, 2017. Commerce finds that Qingdao Sea-line International 
Trading Co., Ltd. (Sea-line) withheld requested information, 
significantly impeded the review, and did not cooperate to the best of 
its ability. Accordingly, pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), we are relying on adverse 
facts available.
    These determinations and the final dumping margins are discussed 
below in the ``Final Results'' section of this notice.

DATES: Applicable July 24, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn Wallace or Alexander Cipolla, 
AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202-482-6251 
or 202-482-4956, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    Commerce published the preliminary results of this administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from China on 
December 10, 2018.\1\ We preliminarily found that the mandatory 
respondents, Zhengyang and Sea-line, sold subject merchandise to the 
United States at less than normal value. Furthermore, we found that two 
companies certified that they made no shipments during the POR and that 
six companies, in addition to the mandatory respondents, qualified for 
separate rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-
2017, 83 FR 63479 (December 10, 2018) (Preliminary Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce exercised its discretion to toll all deadlines affected by 
the partial federal government closure from

[[Page 35602]]

December 22, 2018 through the resumption of operations on January 29, 
2019.\2\ If the new deadline falls on a non-business day, in accordance 
with Commerce's practice, the deadline will become the next business 
day. The revised deadline for the final results was tolled to May 20, 
2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Memorandum to the Record from Gary Taverman, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ``Deadlines 
Affected by the Partia1 Shutdown of the Federal Government,'' dated 
January 28, 2019. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding 
have been extended by 40 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Between March 8 and March 11, 2019, Zhengyang, Sea-line, and the 
petitioners \3\ submitted their respective case briefs.\4\ On March 14, 
2019, in response to requests from the petitioners \5\ and Sea-line,\6\ 
we extended the deadline for interested parties to submit rebuttal 
briefs by five days.\7\ On March 20, 2019, Sea-line and the petitioners 
submitted rebuttal briefs.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The petitioners are the Fresh Garlic Producers Association 
and its individual members: Christopher Ranch L.L.C.; The Garlic 
Company; and Valley Garlic.
    \4\ See Zhengyang's Letter, ``Fresh Garlic from the People's 
Republic of China--Case Brief,'' dated March 8, 2019; see also Sea-
line's Letter, ``Fresh Garlic from the PRC: Case Brief of Qingdao 
Sea-line International Trading Co., Ltd.,'' dated March 8, 2019; 
Petitioners' Letter, ``Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of 
China: Petitioners' Case Brief,'' dated March 11, 2019.
    \5\ See Petitioners' Letter, ``23rd Administrative Review of the 
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of 
China--Petitioners' Request for Extension of deadline for Submission 
of Rebuttal Case Briefs,'' dated March 12, 2019.
    \6\ See Sea-line's Letter, ``Fresh Garlic from the PRC: 
Extension Request for Submission of Rebuttal Brief on Behalf of 
Qingdao Sea-Line International Trading Co., Ltd.,'' dated March 14, 
2019.
    \7\ See Memorandum, ``23rd Administrative Review of Fresh Garlic 
from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Rebuttal Briefing 
Schedule,'' dated March 14, 2019.
    \8\ See Sea-line's Letter, ``Fresh Garlic from the PRC: Rebuttal 
Brief of Qingdao Sea-line International Trading Co., Ltd.,'' dated 
May 20, 2019; see also Petitioners' Letter, ``Fresh Garlic from the 
People's Republic of China: Petitioners' Rebuttal Brief,'' dated 
March 20, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 10, 2019, Commerce extended the deadlines for the final 
results of this administrative review from 120 days to 180 days after 
the publication of the Preliminary Results. The new deadline is now 
July 18, 2019.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Memorandum, ``Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of 
China--23rd Administrative Review: Extension of Deadline for the 
Final Results of Review,'' dated May 10, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the order are all grades of garlic, whole 
or separated into constituent cloves, whether or not peeled, fresh, 
chilled, frozen, 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 the 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: 
0703.20.0000, 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, of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Antidumping Duty Order: Fresh Garlic from the People's 
Republic of China, 59 FR 59209 (November 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes, our written description of the scope of the 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 U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to that 
effect.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs are addressed in 
the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.\11\ The issues are 
identified in Appendix I to this notice. The Issues and 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 http://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records 
Unit, room B8024 of the main Commerce building. In addition, a complete 
version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly 
on the internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed and 
electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical 
in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Memorandum, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 
Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Fresh 
Garlic from the People's Republic of China; 2016-2017,'' dated 
concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and 
Decision Memorandum) at ``Discussion of the Issues.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Issues and Decision Memorandum, we have 
applied facts available with an adverse inference to Sea-line. As such, 
and as described below, we have revised the margin assigned to the 
separate rate respondents.

Final Determination of No Shipments

    In the Preliminary Results, Commerce determined that the QTF-Entity 
\12\ and Jining Shengtai Fruits & Vegetables Co., Ltd. each had no 
shipments during the POR.\13\ As we have not received any information 
to contradict our preliminary findings, we determine that these 
entities did not have any shipments of subject merchandise during the 
POR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The QTF-Entity includes Qingdao Lianghe International Trade 
Co., Ltd. (Lianghe); Qingdao Xintianfeng Foods Co., Ltd. (QXF); 
Qingdao Tiantaixing Foods Co., Ltd. (QTF); Qingdao Tianhefeng Foods 
Co., Ltd. (QTHF); Qingdao Beixing Trading Co., Ltd. (QBT); Hebei 
Golden Bird Trading Co., Ltd.; and Huamei Consulting. See 
Memorandum, ``23rd Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty 
Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Status of 
the QTF-Entity,'' dated October 22, 2018, at Attachment.
    \13\ See Preliminary Results, 83 FR at 63480-82.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

China-Wide Entity

    As discussed in the Preliminary Results, the China-wide entity will 
not be under review unless a party specifically requests, or Commerce 
self-initiates, a review of the entity.\14\ Because no party requested 
a review of the China-wide entity, the entity is not under review and 
the entity's rate (i.e., $4.71 per-kilogram (kg)) is not subject to 
change. Aside from the no-shipment companies discussed above, Commerce 
considers all other companies for which a review was requested, and 
which did not qualify for a separate rate, to be part of the China-wide 
entity. A list of the companies determined to be part of the China-wide 
entity is provided in Appendix III to this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in 
Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty 
Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity 
in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963 (November 4, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Separate Rates

    In the Preliminary Results, in accordance with section 
777A(c)(2)(B)

[[Page 35603]]

of the Act, Commerce employed a limited examination methodology, as we 
determined that it would not be practicable to examine individually all 
companies for which a review request was made.\15\ There were six 
exporters of subject merchandise from China that demonstrated their 
eligibility for a separate rate but were not selected for individual 
examination in this review. These six exporters are listed in Appendix 
II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Memorandum, ``Selection of Respondents for Individual 
Examination,'' dated February 28, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Neither the Act nor Commerce's regulations address the 
establishment of the rate applied to individual companies not selected 
for examination where Commerce limited its examination in an 
administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. 
Commerce's practice in cases involving limited selection based on 
exporters accounting for the largest volume of imports 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. 
Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act instructs Commerce to base an all-
others rate on the rates established for individually investigated 
producers and exporters, excluding any rates that are zero, de minimis, 
or based entirely on facts available in investigations. In these final 
results of review, we calculated a weighted-average dumping margin for 
Zhengyang, but based Sea-line's margin on facts available. As 
Zhengyang's margin is the only margin that is not either de minimis or 
based entirely on adverse facts available, we have assigned Zhengyang's 
margin to the separate rate respondents.

Final Results of Review

    Commerce finds that the following weighted-average dumping margins 
exist for the period November 1, 2016 through October 31, 2017:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-average
                      Exporter                          dumping margin
                                                       (dollars per-kg)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shandong Jinxiang Zhengyang Import & Export Co., Ltd                2.87
Qingdao Sea-line International Trading Co., Ltd.....                4.71
Chengwu County Yuanxiang Industry & Commerce Co.,                   2.87
 Ltd................................................
Jining Alpha Food Co., Ltd..........................                2.87
Qingdao Maycarrier Import & Export Co., Ltd.........                2.87
Shandong Chenhe International Trading Co., Ltd......                2.87
Shandong Happy Foods Co., Ltd.......................                2.87
Weifang Hongqiao International Logistics Co., Ltd...                2.87
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) and (C) of the Act, and 19 CFR 
351.212(b), Commerce has determined, and CBP shall assess, antidumping 
duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance 
with the final results of this review. Commerce intends to issue 
appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after 
publication of this notice.
    Pursuant to Commerce's assessment practice in non-market economy 
(NME) cases, 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), Commerce 
will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the NME-wide rate. In 
addition, if Commerce 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 NME-wide rate.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 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

    Commerce intends to instruct CBP to require a cash deposit for 
antidumping duties equal to the weighted-average margin by which normal 
value exceeds U.S. price. The following cash deposit requirements will 
be effective upon publication of these final results of this 
administrative review for shipments of the subject merchandise from 
China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after 
the publication date of this notice, as provided by section 
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters listed above, the cash 
deposit rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin 
established in the final results of this review; (2) for previously 
investigated or reviewed Chinese and non-Chinese exporters not listed 
above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to 
be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recently completed 
segment of this proceeding; (3) for all Chinese exporters of subject 
merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a separate 
rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate for the China-wide entity 
(i.e., 4.71 dollars per-kg); and (4) for all non-Chinese exporters of 
subject merchandise that have not received their own rate, the cash 
deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the Chinese exporter that 
supplied that non-Chinese exporter. These deposit requirements, when 
imposed, 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 Commerce's presumption that reimbursement 
of antidumping duties has occurred, and the subsequent assessment of 
double antidumping duties.

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition 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 return or destruction of APO materials, 
or conversion to judicial

[[Page 35604]]

protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the 
regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

Notification to Interested Parties

    We are issuing and publishing these final results in accordance 
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213.

    Dated: July 18, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Final Determination of No Shipments
V. Use of Facts Available and Adverse Facts Available (AFA)
VI. Discussion of the Issues:
    Comment 1: Whether Sea-line Provided Reliable Sales Information 
to Calculate a Dumping Margin
    Comment 2: Whether Romania is the Appropriate Surrogate Country
    Comment 3: Whether Commerce Double-Counted Chemicals in Sea-
line's Calculation
VII. Recommendation

Appendix II

List of Companies Receiving a Separate Rate

1. Chengwu County Yuanxiang Industry & Commerce Co., Ltd.
2. Jining Alpha Food Co., Ltd.
3. Qingdao Maycarrier Import & Export Co., Ltd.
4. Shandong Chenhe International Trading Co., Ltd.
5. Shandong Happy Foods Co., Ltd.
6. Weifang Hongqiao International Logistics Co., Ltd.

Appendix III

List of Companies Not Receiving Separate Rate Status

1. Bestway Logistics Inc.
2. Chengwu Yuanxiang Industry and Commerce Co., Ltd.
3. China Union Agri. (Qingdao) Co., Ltd.
4. Dongying Richmond International
5. Jiangyoung Gunagafa Vegetable Professional Corperation
6. Jinan Farmlady Trading Co., Ltd.
7. Jining City Billion Garlic Products Co., Ltd.
8. Jining New Silk Road Food Co., Ltd.
9. Jining Rich Farmer International
10. Jining Yifa Garlic Produce Co., Ltd.
11. Jining Yongjia Trade Co., Ltd.
12. Jinxiang County Jinji Trade Co., Ltd.
13. Jinxiang Hongyu Freezing & Storing Co., Ltd.
14. Jinxiang Richfar Fruits & Vegetables Co., Ltd.
15. Juxian Huateng Organic Ginger Co., Ltd.
16. Laiwu Ever Green Food Co., Ltd.
17. Lanling Xinxinyuan Food Co., Ltd.
18. Pinacle Sourcing & Marketing, Ltd.
19. Qingdao Gabsan Trading Co., Ltd.
20. Qingdao Jiashan Trading Co., Ltd.
21. Qingdao Justop Industries and Trading Co., Ltd.
22. Qingdao Ritai Food Co., Ltd.
23. Shandong Galaxy International
24. Shandong Helu International Trade Co., Ltd.
25. Shandong Lejianda Food Co., Ltd.
26. Victoria Foods Co., Ltd.
27. Weifang Huashun Import & Export Co., Ltd.
28. Weifang Wangyuan Food Co., Ltd.

[FR Doc. 2019-15745 Filed 7-23-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P