[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 164 (Wednesday, August 25, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52229-52231]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E4-1920]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-831]


Initiation and Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed 
Circumstances Review: Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In response to a letter from Shandong Heze International Trade 
and Developing Company (Shandong Heze) notifying the Department of 
Commerce

[[Page 52230]]

(the Department) that its corporate name has changed to Heze Ever-Best 
International Trade Co., Ltd. (Heze Ever-Best), the Department is 
initiating a changed circumstances administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's Republic of 
China (see Antidumping Duty Order: Fresh Garlic From the People's 
Republic of China, 59 FR 59209 (November 16, 1994)).
    Based on information submitted by Shandong Heze, we preliminarily 
determine that Heze Ever-Best is the successor-in-interest to Shandong 
Heze and, as such, is entitled to Shandong Heze's cash deposit rate 
with respect to entries of subject merchandise.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 25, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sochieta Moth or Charles Riggle at 
(202) 482-0168 or (202) 482-0650, respectively; NME Office, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 8, 2004, Shandong Heze requested that the Department 
initiate a changed circumstances review to confirm that Heze Ever-Best 
is the successor-in-interest to Shandong Heze for purposes of 
determining antidumping duty liabilities. On July 28, 2004, the 
Department requested additional information from Heze Ever-Best 
concerning the circumstances of the name change. On August 4, 2004, 
Heze Ever-Best responded to our request for information.

Scope of the Review

    The products subject to this antidumping duty order are all grades 
of garlic, whole or separated into constituent cloves, whether or not 
peeled, fresh, chilled, frozen, provisionally preserved, or packed in 
water or other neutral substance, but not prepared or preserved by the 
addition of other ingredients or heat processing. The differences 
between grades are based on color, size, sheathing, and level of decay.
    The scope of this order does not include (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, 0710.80.7060, 0710.80.9750, 0711.90.6000, and 
2005.90.9500 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience 
and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of this 
proceeding is dispositive.
    In order to be excluded from antidumping duties, 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 the U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(CBP) to that effect.

Initiation and Preliminary Results of Changed Circumstances Review

    Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(the Act), and 19 CFR 351.216, the Department will conduct a changed 
circumstances review upon receipt of information concerning, or a 
request from an interested party for a review of, an antidumping duty 
finding which shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a 
review of the order. Therefore, in accordance with section 751(b)(1) of 
the Act, we are initiating a changed circumstances review based upon 
the information contained in Shandong Heze's submissions.
    Section 351.221(c)(3)(ii) of the regulations permits the Department 
to combine the notice of initiation of a changed circumstances review 
and the notice of preliminary results in a single notice, if the 
Department concludes that expedited action is warranted. In this 
instance, because we have the information necessary to make a 
preliminary finding already on the record and no other interested party 
has commented on, or objected to, Shandong Heze's request for a changed 
circumstances review, we find that expedited action is warranted and 
have combined the notice of initiation and the notice of preliminary 
results.
    In determining whether one company is the successor to another for 
purposes of applying the antidumping duty law, the Department examines 
a number of factors including, but not limited to, changes in (1) 
management, (2) production facilities, (3) suppliers, and (4) customer 
base. See, e.g., Industrial Phosphoric Acid From Israel; Final Results 
of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR 6944 (February 
14, 1994). While no single factor, or combination of factors, will 
necessarily provide a dispositive indication of succession, the 
Department will generally consider one company to be a successor to 
another company if its resulting operation is essentially the same as 
that of its predecessor. Thus, if the evidence demonstrates that, with 
respect to the production and sale of the subject merchandise, the new 
company operates as the same business entity as the prior company, the 
Department will assign the new company the cash deposit rate of its 
predecessor.
    In its July 8, 2004, submission, Shandong Heze stated that the name 
change was effected solely for the purpose of enhancing its 
international and domestic sales, explaining that ``Ever-Best'' 
describes the quality of their products, and that the deletion of 
``Shandong'' and ``Developing'' from its name specifies its operations 
as a trading company. Shandong Heze also stated that the name change 
was not due to any changes in ownership, corporate structure, 
management, supplier relationships, or customer base, all of which 
remain the same. Shandong Heze provided documentation in support of 
these claims including copies of the business licenses of the company 
before and after the name change, the resolution of the Board of 
Directors authorizing the name change, the application for the name 
change filed with the Heze Industry and Commerce Administration Bureau 
and the Bureau's approval of the application, and corporate 
organization charts before and after the name change. Shandong Heze 
also stated that since the name change, subject merchandise was 
produced at the same facilities that had been utilized by the company 
prior to the name change, and provided a copy of its lease as 
supporting documentation. Shandong Heze has provided evidence that 
there were no changes in the company's corporate structure and 
management as a result of, or contemporaneously with, the change of 
name.
    With respect to supplier relationships, Shandong Heze stated that 
Heze Ever-Best works with the same subject merchandise supplier as 
Shandong Heze did prior to the name change. Finally, Shandong Heze 
asserts that there have been no changes in its customer relationships 
or customer base due to the name change and there have been no changes 
in product names or product brands. Shandong Heze submitted copies of 
e-mails and fascimiles that were sent to the company's suppliers and 
customers informing them of the name change to support their assertion 
that Heze Ever-Best has the same

[[Page 52231]]

supplier and customer base as Shandong Heze.
    Based on information submitted by Shandong Heze, we preliminarily 
find that Heze Ever-Best is the successor-in-interest to Shandong Heze. 
We find that the company's organizational structure, senior management, 
production facilities, supplier relationships, and customers have 
remained essentially unchanged. Furthermore, Shandong Heze has provided 
sufficient documentation of its name change. Based on all the evidence 
reviewed, we find that Heze Ever-Best operates as the same business 
entity as Shandong Heze. Thus, we preliminarily find that Heze Ever-
Best should receive the same antidumping duty cash-deposit rate with 
respect to the subject merchandise as Shandong Heze, its predecessor 
company.
    Should our final results remain the same as these preliminary 
results, we will instruct CBP to assign Heze Ever-Best the antidumping 
duty cash deposit rate applicable to Shandong Heze.

Public Comment

    Any interested party may request a hearing within 14 days of 
publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Any hearing, if 
requested, will be held 28 days after the date of publication of this 
notice, or the first working day thereafter. Interested parties may 
submit case briefs and/or written comments not later than 14 days after 
the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals 
to written comments, which must be limited to issues raised in such 
briefs or comments, may be filed not later than 21 days after the date 
of publication of this notice. Parties who submit case briefs or 
rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are requested to submit with each 
argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary of the 
argument with an electronic version included. Consistent with section 
351.216(e) of the Department's regulations, we will issue the final 
results of this changed circumstances review not later than 270 days 
after the date on which this review was initiated, or within 45 days if 
all parties agree to our preliminary finding. We are issuing and 
publishing this finding and notice in accordance with sections 
751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and sections 351.216 and 
351.221(c)(3) of the Department's regulations.

    Dated: August 18, 2004.
James J. Jochum,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
 [FR Doc. E4-1920 Filed 8-24-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P