[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 112 (Monday, June 11, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34346-34349]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14152]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-831]


Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Final Results 
of the 2009-2010 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 20, 2011, the Department of Commerce (Department) 
published partial preliminary results of the 2009-2010 administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's 
Republic of China (PRC) covering the two mandatory respondents and five 
separate rate respondents for the period of review (POR) of November 1, 
2009, through October 31, 2010.\1\ Based on the

[[Page 34347]]

analysis of the comments received and factual records, the Department 
has made certain changes to the margin calculations for two fully 
participating mandatory respondents. The changes to the calculations, 
in turn, results in the changes to the separate rate calculated for the 
five additional producers/exporters which demonstrated eligibility for 
separate rate status. The final dumping margins are listed in the 
``Final Results of Review'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Department published the partial final results and 
partial rescission of this review on February 27, 2012. Those 
partial final results covered the PRC-wide entity and the partial 
rescission covered the producers/exporters who certified no sales, 
exports or entries. See Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of 
China: Partial Final Results and Partial Final Rescission of the 
2009-2010 Administrative Review, 77 FR 11486 (February 27, 2012).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: June 11, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lingjun Wang, David Lindgren and 
Nicholas Czajkowski, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230; telephone: (202) 482-2316, (202) 482-3870 and (202) 482-1395, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The Department initiated this review for 113 producers/exporters. 
On December 7, 2011, the Department published partial preliminary 
results of this administrative review which covered the two fully 
participating mandatory respondents, Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co., 
Ltd. (Xinboda) and Hebei Golden Bird Trading Co., Ltd. (Golden Bird), 
and five producers/exporters who certified or applied for separate rate 
status. We invited parties to comment on the partial preliminary 
results.\2\ Since the Preliminary Results, the following events have 
occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Results of the 2009-2010 Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 76 FR 76375 (December 7, 2011) (Preliminary Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 20, 2011, in response to Xinboda's and Golden Bird's 
requests, the Department extended the deadline for parties to file 
post-preliminary surrogate value information. On January 6, 2012, 
Xinboda, Golden Bird, and Petitioners \3\ each timely filed publicly 
available surrogate value information and comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Petitioners are the Fresh Garlic Producers Association, its 
individual members being Christopher Ranch L.L.C., The Garlic 
Company, Valley Garlic, and Vessey and Company, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 13, 2012, in response to Petitioners' request, the 
Department extended the deadline for parties to submit factual 
information to rebut, clarify, or correct the January 6, 2012 
submissions. On January 23, 2012, Golden Bird and submitted factual 
information to rebut, clarify, or correct information in the January 6, 
2012 surrogate value submissions On January 30, 2012, Xinboda argued 
that the Petitioners' January 23, 2012 submission contained new, 
untimely filed, surrogate value information. On February 7, 2012, 
Petitioners rebutted Xinboda's argument by stating that their January 
23, 2012 rebuttal, including the portion disputed by Xinboda, responded 
to surrogate value information in Xinboda's January 6, 2012 submission. 
On February 10, 2012, Xinboda filed a letter arguing that it is not the 
Department's policy to accept alternative surrogate value information 
as rebuttal information. After carefully considering both parties' 
arguments, on March 7, 2012, the Department issued a memorandum to 
accept Petitioners' January 23, 2012 rebuttal submission as timely 
rebuttal information pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(1) and not use the 
information as surrogate value information.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Memorandum to Barbara E. Tillman, Subject: Fresh Garlic 
from the People's Republic of China: Accepting Petitioners' 
submission dated January 23, 2012 as timely (March 7, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 26, 2012, the Department extended the time limit for 
completing the final results of this review from 120 days to 180 
days.\5\ On April 20, 2012, Petitioners, Xinboda and Jinan Farmlady 
Trading Co., Ltd. (Farmlady) each timely filed case briefs. On April 
24, 2012, the Department rejected Golden Bird's untimely filed case 
brief. Subsequently, the Department determined that Xinboda's case 
brief contained untimely filed new factual information, and requested 
that Xinboda submit a redacted case brief. Xinboda timely submitted its 
redacted case brief on May 1, 2012. Rebuttal briefs were timely 
submitted by Xinboda, Golden Bird and Petitioners by May 2, 2012. 
Finally, on May 9, 2012, the Department determined that Xinboda's 
rebuttal brief contained arguments which did not respond to arguments 
raised in other parties' case briefs and requested that Xinboda submit 
a redacted case brief. Xinboda timely submitted its redacted case brief 
on May 11, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: 
Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of the 2009-2010 
Administrative Review, 77 FR 17409 (March 26, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the request of Xinboda, a public hearing was held on May 16, 
2012 in accordance with 19 CFR 351.310.

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, 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 
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 0703.20.0010, 0703.20.0020, 
0703.20.0090, 0710.80.7060, 0710.80.9750, 0711.90.6000, and 
2005.90.9700 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 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 to that effect.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by parties 
are addressed in the Decision Memorandum.\6\ A list of these issues is 
attached to this notice in the Appendix. The Decision Memorandum is a 
public document and is on file electronically via Import 
Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized 
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). Access to IA ACCESS is available 
in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046 of the main Department of 
Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision 
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://www.trade.gov/ia/. The signed Decision Memorandum and electronic 
versions of

[[Page 34348]]

the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to 
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, ``Fresh 
Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Issues and Decision 
Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2009-2010 Administrative 
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order,'' dated June 04, 2012 
(Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    For the final results, based on analysis of the comments received 
and our review of the record, the Department has made certain changes 
to the margin calculations for each respondent. Detailed discussions of 
these changes can be found in the Decision Memorandum, Golden Bird's 
Final Calculation Memorandum, and Xinboda's Final Calculation 
Memorandum.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Memorandum to the File regarding ``Fresh Garlic from the 
People's Republic of China: Calculation Memorandum for the Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review--Hebei Golden Bird 
Trading Co., Ltd.,'' dated June 4, 2012 (Golden Bird's Final 
Calculation Memorandum); see also Memorandum to the File regarding 
``Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Calculation 
Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review--Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co., Ltd.,'' dated June 4, 2012 
(Xinboda's Final Calculation Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Separate Rates

    In proceedings involving non-market economy (NME) countries, the 
Department begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies 
within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should 
be assigned a single antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the 
Department's policy to assign all exporters of subject merchandise in 
an NME country this single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that 
it is sufficiently independent so as to be eligible for a separate 
rate.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Sparklers From the People's Republic of China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 
1991), as further developed in Notice of Final Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide From the People's 
Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994) and 19 CFR 351.107(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Preliminary Results, the Department found that Golden Bird, 
Farmlady, Xinboda, Henan Weite Industrial Co., Ltd., Qingdao 
Xintianfeng Foods Co., Ltd., Chengwu County Yuanxiang Industry & 
Commerce Co., Ltd., and Yantai Jinyan Trading Co., Ltd. demonstrated 
their eligibility for a separate rate.\9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Preliminary Results, 76 FR at 76380-76381.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The separate rate shall be an 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.\10\ In this 
review, Xinboda and Golden Bird are the two mandatory respondents for 
which the Department calculated company-specific rates. Using a 
weighted average of these two company-specific rates to calculate a 
separate rate would risk disclosure of the mandatory respondents' 
business proprietary information. Therefore, the Department used a 
simple average of these two company-specific rates to calculate a 
separate rate, which is $0.41 per kilogram.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Results of Review

    The Department determines that the following dumping margins exist 
for the period November 1, 2009, through October 31, 2010.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Dumping
                                                              margins
                    Producer/Exporter                      (dollars per
                                                             kilogram)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hebei Golden Bird Trading Co., Ltd......................           $0.14
Shenzhen Xinboda Industrial Co., Ltd....................            0.68
Henan Weite Industrial Co., Ltd.........................            0.41
Jinan Farmlady Trading Co., Ltd.........................            0.41
Qingdao Xintianfeng Foods Co., Ltd......................            0.41
Chengwu County Yuanxiang Industry & Commerce Co., Ltd...            0.41
Yantai Jinyan Trading Co., Ltd..........................           $0.41
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    The Department intends to disclose to parties to the proceeding the 
calculations performed within five days after the date of publication 
of final results in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), 
the Department will determine, 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 will direct CBP to assess importer-specific 
assessment rates based on the resulting per-unit (i.e., per kilogram) 
amount on each entry of the subject merchandise during the POR. The 
Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions for 
such producers/exporters directly to CBP 15 days after the date of 
publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

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 exporters 
listed above, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in 
these final results of review; (2) 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 entity rate of $4.71 
per kilogram; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise 
which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be 
the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that non-PRC 
exporter. These requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect 
until further notice.

Notification to Importers

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during the POR. Failure to comply with this 
requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that 
reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to an 
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 
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 terms of an APO 
is a violation which is subject to sanction.
    These final results are issued and published in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.


[[Page 34349]]


    Dated: June 4, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

APPENDIX

Comment 1: Surrogate Country for the Final Results
Comment 2: Cold and Controlled Atmosphere Storage Consumption 
Factors
Comment 3: Whether the Department Must Account for Yield Loss and 
Shrinkage
Comment 4: Whether To Use Garlico Instead of Azadpur for the Raw 
Garlic Input Price
Comment 5: Whether Azadpur Prices Are the Best Source for Raw Garlic 
Input Surrogate Values
Comment 6: Whether To Continue Using Azadpur Grade SA Price Data
Comment 7: Use of Indian Import Statistics for Other Surrogate 
Values
Comment 8: Selection of Surrogate Financial Ratios
Comment 9: Adjustments to the Financial Ratios
Comment 10: Whether the Department Should Apply Zeroing for the 
Final Results
Comment 11: Selection and Corroboration of the PRC-Wide Entity Rate
Comment 12: Review Request Process in Reviews of NME Countries
Comment 13: The Department's 15-Day Liquidation Instructions Policy

[FR Doc. 2012-14152 Filed 6-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P