[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 119 (Friday, June 20, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33601-33603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-16247]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-831]
Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China; Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In response to requests by the petitioner, the Fresh Garlic
Producers Association and its individual members, and an importer, the
Department of Commerce is conducting an administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's Republic of
China. The period of review is November 1, 1995, through October 31,
1996. Petitioner requested a review of eight exporters. Haitai America,
Inc., a U.S. importer, requested a review of sales of its exporter/
producer Rizhao Hanxi Fisheries & Comprehensive Development Co., Ltd.
Because we have determined that one named respondent has failed to
submit a complete response to our questionnaire and the remaining named
respondents failed to respond at all to our questionnaires, we have
preliminarily determined to use facts otherwise available for cash
deposit and assessment purposes for all producers/exporters of the
subject merchandise.
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary
results. Parties who submit comments are requested to submit with each
argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary of the
argument.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 20, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Chu or Thomas O. Barlow, Office
of AD/CVD Enforcement, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone (202) 482-
4733.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Applicable Statute
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are
references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective
date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise
indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are to the
current regulations, as amended by the interim regulations published in
the Federal Register on May 11, 1995 (60 FR 25130).
Background
On November 4, 1996, the Department published in the Federal
Register (61 FR 56663) a notice of ``Opportunity to Request an
Administrative Review'' of the antidumping duty order (59 FR 59209,
November 16, 1994) on fresh garlic from the PRC. On November 27, 1996,
petitioner requested an administrative review of eight producers/
exporters of this merchandise
[[Page 33602]]
to the United States. On December 2, 1996, Haitai America, a U.S.
importer of the merchandise, requested a review of its exporter/
producer, Rizhao Hanxi Fisheries & Comprehensive Development Co., Ltd.
(Rizhao). We published a notice of initiation of this review on
December 16, 1996 (61 FR 66017), and on January 17, 1997, we sent
questionnaires to the Embassy of the PRC, the Ministry of Foreign Trade
and Economic Cooperation (MOFTEC) and the nine respondent firms named
in the initiation notice.
Scope of the Review
The products covered by this review 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 the antidumping duty 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 the Customs Service to that effect.
Use of Facts Otherwise Available
On January 17, 1997, we sent questionnaires to the Embassy of the
PRC, MOFTEC and the nine respondent firms named in the initiation
notice. We did not receive a response from either the PRC embassy or
MOFTEC. Only one respondent, Rizhao, has responded to any part of our
antidumping questionnaire. However, Rizhao did not provide factors-of-
production data and therefore has not provided a response with
sufficient information to enable us to proceed with our dumping
analysis. We also do not have any information on the record with regard
to the other eight named respondents. Therefore, we must rely on facts
otherwise available in accordance with section 776(a) of the Act for
these preliminary results of review.
Because necessary information is not available on the record with
regard to sales by the named respondent firms, as a result of their
withholding the requested information, we are preliminarily determining
to apply antidumping duties based on facts otherwise available pursuant
to section 776(a) of the Act. In addition, the Department finds that,
in not responding completely or at all to our antidumping
questionnaire, the firms failed to cooperate by not acting to the best
of their ability to comply with requests for information from the
Department.
Where the Department must resort to the facts otherwise available,
section 776(b) of the Act authorizes the Department to use an inference
adverse to the interests of that respondent in choosing facts
available. Section 776(b) of the Act also authorizes the Department to
use, as adverse facts available, information derived from the petition,
the final determination, a previous administrative review, or other
information placed on the record. Because information from the petition
and prior segments of the proceeding constitutes secondary information,
section 776(c) of the Act provides that the Department shall, to the
extent practicable, corroborate that secondary information from
independent sources reasonably at its disposal. The Statement of
Administrative Action (SAA) provides that ``corroborate'' means simply
that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information
to be used has probative value.
In this case, we are using as facts available the PRC-wide rate
determined for companies involved in the less-than-fair-value
investigation (376.67 percent). Although that rate constitutes
secondary information, the information has already been corroborated in
a prior review. See Final Results of Administrative Review: Fresh
Garlic from the People's Republic of China, 61 FR 68229 (December 27,
1996). There is no evidence that would warrant revisiting that issue in
this review. Moreover, we have preliminarily determined that the non-
responsive companies do not merit separate rates. See, e.g., Natural
Bristle Paint Brushes and Brush Heads From the People's Republic of
China; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,
61 FR 57390 (November 6, 1996). Although Rizhao answered the separate-
rates and sales portions of the questionnaire, it failed to provide
factors of production data and therefore we do not have sufficient
data. Accordingly, Rizhao will receive the PRC-wide rate of 376.67
percent.
Preliminary Results of the Review
As a result of our review, we preliminarily determine that a margin
of 376.67 percent exists for all producers/exporters of the subject
merchandise for the period November 1, 1995, through October 31, 1996.
Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure within 5 days of
the date of publication of this notice. Any interested party may
request a hearing within 10 days of publication. Any hearing, if
requested, will be held 44 days after the publication of this notice or
the first workday thereafter. Interested parties may submit case briefs
within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal
briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may
be filed not later than 37 days after the date of publication. The
Department will issue a notice of final results of this administrative
review, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised
in any such comments, within 120 days of publication of these
preliminary results.
The Department will determine, and the Customs Service will assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Upon completion of this
review, the Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to
the Customs Service.
Furthermore, the following deposit rates will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all
shipments of fresh garlic from the PRC 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: for all PRC exporters
and for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise from the PRC, the
cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate established in the final
results of this review.
These deposit rates, when imposed, shall remain in effect until
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.
This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties
[[Page 33603]]
prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period.
Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's
presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the
subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.
This administrative review and notice are in accordance with
section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR 353.22.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Dated: June 16, 1997.
[FR Doc. 97-16247 Filed 6-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
