Notice2021-15413
Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Final Rescission, in Part, of the 25th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2018-2019
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
July 20, 2021
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentInternational Trade Administration
Abstract
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) published the preliminary results of the 25th administrative review of the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's Republic of China (China) on March 25, 2021. Commerce determines that mandatory respondent, Shijiazhuang Goodman Trading Co., Ltd. (Goodman) failed to establish its eligibility for a separate rate and is part of the China- wide entity. We also find that the review request made by The Roots Farm Inc. (Roots Farm) was not valid and, accordingly, we have rescinded the review with respect to the other mandatory respondent, Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd. (Harmoni).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 136 (Tuesday, July 20, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 136 (Tuesday, July 20, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38272-38273]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15413]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-831]
Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results
and Final Rescission, in Part, of the 25th Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2018-2019
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) published the
preliminary results of the 25th administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's Republic of
China (China) on March 25, 2021. Commerce determines that mandatory
respondent, Shijiazhuang Goodman Trading Co., Ltd. (Goodman) failed to
establish its eligibility for a separate rate and is part of the China-
wide entity. We also find that the review request made by The Roots
Farm Inc. (Roots Farm) was not valid and, accordingly, we have
rescinded the review with respect to the other mandatory respondent,
Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd. (Harmoni).
DATES: Applicable July 20, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leo Ayala, 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) 482-3945.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 25, 2021, Commerce published the preliminary results of
the 25th administrative review of fresh garlic from China.\1\ We
preliminarily found that the mandatory respondent Goodman was part of
the China-wide entity. We rescinded the review with respect to five
companies for which their sole requests for review had been timely
withdrawn.\2\ Furthermore, we preliminarily determined that the review
request submitted by Roots Farm was invalid and preliminarily rescinded
the review with respect to Harmoni. Additionally, we found that two
companies, Shandong Happy Foods Co., Ltd. and Jining Alpha Food Co.,
Ltd., qualified for separate rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China:
Preliminary Results, Preliminary Rescission, and Final Rescission,
In Part, of the 25th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2018-
2019, 86 FR 15903 (March 25, 2021) (Preliminary Results), and
accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM).
\2\ The companies are: (1) China Jiangsu International Economic
Technical Cooperation Corporation; (2) Hebei Holy Flame
International; (3) Jinxiang Qingtian Garlic Industries; (4) Qingdao
Ritai Food Co., Ltd.; and (5) Yingxin (Wuqiang) International Trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 26, 2021, the Fresh Garlic Producers Association (FGPA)
and its individual members \3\ submitted comments on the Preliminary
Results.\4\ No other party submitted comments. The deadline for the
final results is July 23, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The individual members of the FGPA are: Christopher Ranch
L.L.C.; The Garlic Company; and Valley Garlic.
\4\ See FGPA's Letter, ``25th Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of
China--Petitioners' Letter in Lieu of Case Brief,'' dated April 26,
2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The products subject to 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: 0703.20.0000, 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,
and 2005.99.9700, 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 (CBP) to that
effect.
Partial Rescission of Administrative Review
Commerce has determined that the review request from Roots Farm was
invalid ab initio, and is rescinding the administrative review with
respect to mandatory respondent, Harmoni.
Analysis of Comments Received
The FGPA was the only party to file comments on the Preliminary
Results. The FGPA noted that the preliminary rate applied to Shandong
Happy Foods Co., Ltd and Jining Alpha Food Co., Ltd should be $4.37 per
kilogram (kg) rather than the rate of $4.34 per kg stated in the
Preliminary Results. Commerce stated in the Preliminary Results that
the margin assigned to the separate rate recipients would be the ``rate
for the separate rate companies in the previous administrative review
of this order.'' \5\ The separate rate in the previous administrative
review was $4.37 per kg.\6\ Therefore, we have made the
[[Page 38273]]
change proposed by FGPA for these final results. See Final Results of
Administrative Review section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Preliminary Results PDM at 9.
\6\ See Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Final
Results and Partial Rescission, of the 24th Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2017-2018, 85 FR 71049, 71050-51 (November 6,
2020) (Garlic from China 2017-2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Determination of Separate Rates for Non-Selected Companies
In the Preliminary Results, in accordance with section
777A(c)(2)(B) of Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (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.\7\ There were two exporters of subject
merchandise from China that have demonstrated their eligibility for a
separate rate but were not selected for individual examination in this
review. These two exporters are listed in the Final Results of
Administrative Review section of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Memorandum, ``2018-19 Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China:
Selection of Respondents for Individual Examination,'' dated
February 20, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 use 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 this administrative review, Goodman, the only individually
reviewed respondent, did not receive a weighted-average dumping margin.
Therefore, for these final results, Commerce has determined to assign
the separate-rate from the prior review,\8\ which was Goodman's
calculated rate, to the non-selected separate-rate companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Garlic from China 2017-2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of Administrative Review
Commerce determines that the following weighted-average dumping
margins exist for the administrative review covering the period
November 1, 2018, through October 31, 2019:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average margin
Exporter (dollars per
kg)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shandong Happy Foods Co., Ltd........................... 4.37
Jining Alpha Food Co., Ltd.............................. 4.37
China-Wide Rate \9\..................................... 4.71
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The companies that are part of the China-wide entity in this
review include Shijiazhuang Goodman Trading Co., Ltd.; Qingdao
Maycarrier Import & Export Co., Ltd.; and Weifang Hongqiao
International Logistics Co., Ltd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) 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 direct CBP to assess rates
based on the per-unit (i.e., per kg) amount on each entry of the
subject merchandise during the POR. Commerce also intends to issue
assessment instructions no earlier than 35 days after the publication
date of the final results of this review in the Federal Register. If a
timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the
assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant
entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory
injunction has expired (i.e., within 90 days of publication).
Pursuant to Commerce's assessment practice in non-market economy
cases, for merchandise entered under Goodman's case number (i.e., at
its individually-examined exporter's cash deposit rate), Commerce
intends to instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the China-wide
rate.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 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
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the 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 in the Federal Register, as provided by sections 751(a)(2)
of the Act: (1) For the companies listed above, the cash deposit rate
will be the rate established in these final results of 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 recent
period; (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 China-wide rate of 4.71 U.S. dollars per kg; and (4) for
all non-Chinese exporters of subject merchandise which 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 requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect
until further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a 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 this period of review. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties 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 return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written
notification of return or 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.
Notification to Interested Parties
We are issuing and publishing these final results of administrative
review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act,
and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).
Dated: July 13, 2021.
Christian Marsh,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2021-15413 Filed 7-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on July 20, 2021.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.