[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 25 (Friday, February 6, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5835-5837]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2630]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-863]


Honey From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of New 
Shipper Antidumping Duty Reviews

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Initiation of new shipper antidumping duty reviews.

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 6, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shireen Pasha or Brandon Farlander at 
(202) 482-0913 or (202) 482-0182, respectively; Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Enforcement Group III, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Department received timely requests from the following 
companies: Anhui Honghui Foodstuff (Group) Co., Ltd. (Anhui Honghui), 
Eurasia Bee's Products Co., Ltd. (Eurasia), Foodworld International 
Club Limited (Foodworld), Inner Mongolia Youth Trade Development Co., 
Ltd. (Inner Mongolia Youth), Jiangsu Kanghong Natural Healthfoods Co., 
Ltd. (Jiangsu Kanghong), and Shanghai Shinomiel International Trade 
Corporation (Shanghai Shinomiel), in accordance with 19 CFR 351.214(c), 
for new shipper reviews of the antidumping duty order on honey from the 
People's Republic of China (PRC), which has a December annual 
anniversary month and a June semiannual anniversary month. See Notice 
of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Antidumping Duty Order; Honey from the People's Republic of China, 66 
FR 63670 (December 10, 2001). Anhui Honghui identified itself as both 
the exporter and producer of the subject merchandise. Eurasia 
identified itself as the exporter and producer of the subject 
merchandise, as well as the exporter of subject merchandise produced by 
its supplier Chuzhou Huadi Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. (Chuzhou). Foodworld 
identified itself as the exporter of honey produced by its producer 
Anhui Tianxin Bee Products Co., Ltd. (Anhui Tianxin). Inner Mongolia 
Youth identified itself as the exporter of the subject merchandise 
produced by Qinhuangdao Municipal Dafeng Industrial Co. Ltd. 
(Qinhuangdao). Jiangsu Kanghong identified itself as both the exporter 
and producer of the subject merchandise. Shanghai Shinomiel identified 
itself as the exporter of subject merchandise produced by Hangzhou 
Green Forever Apiculture Co. (Hangzhou Green), and Hubei Yangzijian 
Apiculture Co. (Hubei Yangzijian).
    As required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i), (ii), and (iii)(A), Anhui 
Honghui, Eurasia, Foodworld, Inner Mongolia, Jiangsu Kanghong, and 
Shanghai Shinomiel certified that they did not export honey to the 
United States during the period of investigation (POI), and that they 
have never been affiliated with any exporter or producer which exported 
honey during the POI. Furthermore, Anhui Honghui, Eurasia, Foodworld, 
Inner Mongolia, Jiangsu Kanghong, and Shanghai Shinomiel certified that 
their export activities are not controlled by the central government of 
the PRC, satisfying the requirements of 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B). 
Pursuant to the Department's regulations at 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv), 
Anhui Honghui, Eurasia, Inner Mongolia, Jiangsu Kanghong, and Shanghai 
Shinomiel submitted documentation establishing the date on which the 
subject merchandise was first entered for consumption in the United 
States, the volume of that first shipment, and the date of the first 
sale to an unaffiliated customer in the United States. We note that 
Foodworld only submitted the volume and date of the first sale to an 
unaffiliated customer in the United States, and did not submit 
documentation establishing the date the merchandise was first entered 
for consumption in the United States. Moreover, Shanghai Shinomiel 
indicated in its new shipper review request that both of its suppliers 
(Hubei Yangzijian and Hangzhou Green Forever) had also previously 
supplied an exporter that exported subject merchandise to the United 
States during the period of investigation and subsequently.
    On December 19, 2003, the Department issued pre-initiation 
supplemental questionnaires to all companies to clarify company 
information submitted in their requests to the Department for new 
shipper reviews. We received supplemental questionnaire responses from 
each company. In Foodworld's supplemental questionnaire response, dated 
December 31, 2003, Foodworld indicated that its shipment had not 
entered the United States during the POR, but that it was expected to 
arrive in the United States before the end of the year, and that the 
official date of entry would likely be in January 2004. Further, 
Foodworld indicated that it would submit a copy of the Customs Form 
7501 when it became available. As of January 30, 2004, Foodworld had 
not submitted to the Department a copy of the Customs Form 7501 for 
this shipment.
    The Department conducted multiple Customs run queries in December 
2003 and January 2004 to determine whether Foodworld's shipment had 
officially entered the United States via assignment of an entry date in 
the Customs database by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). 
We also made multiple phone calls to CBP, including a phone call on 
January 30, 2004, to inquire whether this shipment had entered the 
United States. As of January 30, 2004, and based on available 
information on the record, it appears that Foodworld's shipment did not 
enter the United States for consumption during the POR, nor has it 
entered by the initiation date, which is 60 days after the end of the 
POR. See Memoranda to the File through Richard O. Weible, ``New Shipper 
Review Initiation Checklist,'' dated January 30, 2004, for Foodworld.

Scope

    The merchandise under review is honey from the PRC. The products 
covered are natural honey, artificial honey containing more than 50 
percent natural honey by weight, preparations of natural honey 
containing more than 50 percent natural honey by weight, and flavored 
honey. The subject merchandise includes all grades and colors of honey 
whether in liquid, creamed, comb, cut comb, or chunk form, and whether 
packaged for retail or in bulk form. The merchandise under review is 
currently classifiable under item 0409.00.00, 1702.90.90, and 
2106.90.99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and 
customs

[[Page 5836]]

purposes, the written description of the merchandise under review is 
dispositive.

Initiation of Review

    In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act, as amended, and 
19 CFR 351.214(d)(1), and based on information on the record, we are 
initiating new shipper reviews for Anhui Honghui, Eurasia, Inner 
Mongolia, and Jiangsu Kanghong. See Memoranda to the File through 
Richard O. Weible, ``New Shipper Review Initiation Checklist,'' dated 
January 30, 2004, for each respective company. We intend to issue the 
preliminary results of these reviews not later than 180 days after the 
date on which these reviews were initiated, and the final results of 
these reviews within 90 days after the date on which the preliminary 
results were issued.
    The Department is not initiating new shipper reviews for the 
remaining two companies (i.e., Foodworld and Shanghai Shinomiel). With 
regard to Foodworld, as noted above, Foodworld's shipment did not enter 
the United States during the POR. Under section 351.214(f)(2)(ii) of 
the Department's regulations, when the sale of the subject merchandise 
occurs within the POR, but the entry occurs after the normal POR, the 
POR may be extended unless it would be likely to prevent the completion 
of the review within the time limits set by the Department's 
regulations. While the regulations do not provide a definitive date by 
which the entry must occur, the preamble to the Department's 
regulations state that both the entry and the sale should occur during 
the POR, and that only under ``appropriate'' circumstances should the 
POR be extended when the entry is made after the POR. See Antidumping 
Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27319 (May 19, 
1997). In this instance, Foodworld's shipment has not entered by the 
date of initiation. Accordingly, we are not initiating the new shipper 
review request for Foodworld for the period December 1, 2002 through 
November 30, 2003. For further information, see the Letter to Foodworld 
from Richard O. Weible, dated January 30, 2004. See Memoranda to the 
File through Richard O. Weible, ``New Shipper Review Initiation 
Checklist,'' dated January 30, 2004, for Foodworld. We note that an 
administrative review was requested for Foodworld. See Initiation of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request 
for Revocation in Part, 69 FR 3117 (January 22, 2004).
    With regard to Shanghai Shinomiel, we note that both of its 
suppliers (Hangzhou Green Forever and Hubei Yangzijian) previously 
supplied subject merchandise to an exporter during the original 
investigation, which was subsequently exported to the United States. 
Moreover, the Department examined the factors of production data for 
both of Shanghai Shinomiel's suppliers in the original investigation. 
For further information, see the Letter to Shanghai Shinomiel from 
Richard O. Weible, dated January 30, 2004. See Memoranda to File 
through Richard O. Weible, ``New Shipper Review Initiation Checklist,'' 
dated January 30, 2004.
    Based on these facts, we determine that Shanghai Shinomiel is not a 
new shipper within the meaning of Section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act, and 
section 351.214 of the Department's regulations. Because Shanghai 
Shinomiel's two suppliers had established a chain of distribution for 
exporting their subject merchandise to the United States during the 
POI, Shanghai Shinomiel may not claim new shipper status for 
merchandise supplied by these same two suppliers. We note that this 
decision is consistent with our established practice of limiting the 
benefits of new shipper reviews to particular producer/exporter 
combinations. See Import Administration Policy Bulletin 03.2--
Combination Rates in New Shipper Reviews (March 4, 2003). We note also 
that an administrative review was requested for Shanghai Shinomiel. See 
Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 69 FR 3117 (January 22, 
2004).
    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(g)(1)(i)(A) of the Department's 
regulations, the period of review (POR) for a new shipper review 
initiated in the month immediately following the anniversary month will 
be the twelve-month period immediately preceding the anniversary month. 
Therefore, the POR for these new shipper reviews is:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Antidumping duty proceeding             Period to be reviewed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exporter: Anhui Honghui Foodstuff (Group) Co.,         12/01/02-11/30/03
 Ltd..........................................
Producer: Anhui Honghui Foodstuff (Group) Co.,
 Ltd..........................................
Exporter: Eurasia Bee's Products Co., Ltd.....         12/01/02-11/30/03
Producer: Eurasia Bee's Products Co., Ltd.....
Producer: Chuzhou Huadi Foodstuffs Co., Ltd...
Exporter: Inner Mongolia Youth Trade                   12/01/02-11/30/03
 Development Co., Ltd.........................
Producer: Qinhuangdao Municipal Dafeng
 Industrial Co., Ltd..........................
Exporter: Jiangsu Kanghong Natural Healthfoods         12/01/02-11/30/03
 Co., Ltd.....................................
Producer: Jiangsu Kanghong Natural Healthfoods
 Co., Ltd.....................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is the Department's usual practice in cases involving non-market 
economies to require that a company seeking to establish eligibility 
for an antidumping duty rate separate from the country-wide rate to 
provide evidence of de jure and de facto absence of government control 
over the company's export activities. Accordingly, we will issue 
questionnaires to Anhui Honghui, Eurasia, Inner Mongolia, and Jiangsu 
Kanghong, including a separate rates section. The review will proceed 
if the responses provide sufficient indication that Anhui Honghui, 
Eurasia, Inner Mongolia, and Jiangsu Kanghong are not subject to either 
de jure or de facto government control with respect to their exports of 
honey. However, if Anhui Honghui, Eurasia, Inner Mongolia, and Jiangsu 
Kanghong do not demonstrate their eligibility for a separate rate, then 
they will be deemed not separate from other companies that exported 
during the POI and the new shipper review of that respondent will be 
rescinded.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We note that Anhui Honghui, Eurasia, Inner Mongolia, and 
Jiangsu Kanghong requested administrative reviews, in addition to 
the new shipper reviews. If for any reason the Department rescinds 
any of the aforementioned companies' new shipper reviews, we will 
then include any such company in the administrative review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.214(e), we will instruct the U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border 
Protection (BCBP) to allow, at the option of the importer, the posting, 
until the

[[Page 5837]]

completion of the review, of a single entry bond or security in lieu of 
a cash deposit for certain entries of the merchandise exported by the 
above-listed companies, e.g.: Exporter Anhui Honghui certified that it 
produced and exported the subject merchandise for the sale under 
review; thus, we will instruct Customs to limit Anhui Honghui's bonding 
option only to entries of such merchandise for which it is both the 
producer and exporter. Exporter Eurasia certified itself and Chuzhou as 
the producer of subject merchandise for the sale under review; thus, we 
will instruct Customs to limit the bonding option only to entries of 
subject merchandise exported by Eurasia and produced either by Eurasia 
or Chuzhou. Exporter Inner Mongolia Youth certified Qinhuangdao as the 
producer of subject merchandise; thus, we will limit the bonding option 
to entries of subject merchandise produced by Qinhuangdao and exported 
by Inner Mongolia Youth. Exporter Jiangsu Kanghong certified that it 
produced and exported the subject merchandise; thus, we will instruct 
Customs to limit Jiangsu Kanghong's bonding option only to entries of 
subject merchandise for which it is both the producer and exporter.
    Interested parties that need access to proprietary information in 
these new shipper reviews should submit applications for disclosure 
under administrative protective orders in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.305 and 351.306. This initiation and notice are in accordance with 
section 751(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)) and 19 CFR 351.214(d).

    Dated: January 30, 2004.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Group III.
[FR Doc. 04-2630 Filed 2-5-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P