[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 110 (Thursday, June 8, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30270-30280]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-14074]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-301-602]
Certain Fresh Cut Flowers From Colombia; Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Partial Termination of
Administrative Reviews, and Notice of Intent To Revoke Order (In Part)
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of antidumping duty
administrative reviews, partial termination of administrative reviews,
and notice of intent to revoke in part the antidumping duty order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In response to requests from interested parties, the
Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting three concurrent
administrative reviews of the antidumping duty order on certain fresh
cut flowers from Colombia. These reviews cover a total of 336 producers
and/or exporters of this merchandise to the United States for at least
one of the following periods: March 1, 1991 through February 29, 1992;
March 1, 1992 through February 28, 1993; and March 1, 1993 through
February 28, 1994. The reviews indicate the existence of dumping
margins for certain firms during the relevant periods.
We are terminating the administrative reviews with respect to 18
producers/exporters, because the Department either received timely
withdrawal of review requests from these firms, or the firms were no
longer subject to the order due to exclusion or revocation actions
taken by the Department. We are also announcing our intent to revoke
the antidumping duty order for the following exporters/growers:
Cultivos Miramonte, Flores Aurora, the Funza Group, and Industrial
Agricola. We determined that these firms have not sold the subject
merchandise at less than foreign market value (FMV) in these reviews
and for at least three consecutive administrative review periods, and
these firms have submitted certifications that they will not sell at
less than FMV in the future.
We have preliminarily determined that sales have been made below
the FMV. If these preliminary results are adopted in our final results
of administrative review, we will instruct U.S. Customs to assess
antidumping duties equal to the difference between the United States
price (USP) and the FMV.
We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary
results and intent to revoke.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 8, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. David Dirstine or Richard
Rimlinger, Office of Antidumping Compliance, 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:
Background
On March 5, 1992, March 12, 1993, and March 4, 1994, the Department
published notices in the Federal Register of ``Opportunity to Request
Administrative Review'' (57 FR 7910, 58 FR 13583, and 59 FR 10368,
respectively) of the antidumping duty order on certain fresh cut
flowers from Colombia. On May 21, 1992, May 28, 1993, and May 2, 1994,
in accordance with 19 CFR 353.22(c), we initiated administrative
reviews of this order for over 500 Colombian firms covering the periods
March 1, 1991 through February 29, 1992 (the 5th review), March 1, 1992
through February 28, 1993 (the 6th review), and March 1, 1993 through
February 28, 1994 (the 7th review), respectively (see 57 FR 21643, 58
FR 31010, and 59 FR 22579, respectively).
On May 9, 1994, the Department notified interested parties of its
decision to collapse these three reviews for the record, and to conduct
the three reviews concurrently. See Memorandum To File dated May 9,
1994.
We have preliminarily determined to revoke the antidumping duty
order for the following exporters/growers: Cultivos Miramonte, Flores
Aurora, the Funza Group, and Industrial Agricola. These firms have
submitted requests in accordance with 19 CFR 353.25(b) to revoke the
order with respect to their sales of flowers to the United States.
Their requests were accompanied by certifications that they have not
sold flowers to the United States at less than FMV for at least a
three-year period, including the subject review periods, and will not
do so in the future. Since we preliminarily determine that these firms
have not sold the subject merchandise at less than FMV in these
reviews, and have not sold the subject merchandise at less than FMV for
at least the required three-year period, we intend to revoke the order
with respect to these companies.
The Department has now conducted the administrative reviews in
accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Tariff Act).
Scope of Review
Imports covered by these reviews are shipments of certain fresh cut
flowers from Colombia (standard carnations, miniature (spray)
carnations, standard chrysanthemums and pompon chrysanthemums). These
products are currently classifiable under item numbers 0603.10.30.00,
0603.10.70.10, 0603.10.70.20, and 0603.10.70.30 of the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule (HTS). The HTS item numbers are provided for
convenience and Customs purposes. The written description remains
dispositive.
Although we initiated reviews on over 500 firms, we have actually
reviewed a total of 336 firms for at least one of the three review
periods.
There was one firm, Agroteusa, which was not included in our
initiation notices but was included in these reviews because of its
close relationship to another firm for which reviews were initiated.
Subsequent to the publication of our initiation notices, we
received timely withdrawals of requests for Agricola Sagasuca (6th and
7th reviews), Daflor Ltda. (7th review), Flores el Tandil Ltda. (7th
review), Industrial Agricola (7th review), the Santana Flowers Group
[[Page 30271]] (consisting of Hacienda Curubital, Inversiones Istra,
and Santana Flowers) (7th review), and Velez de Monchaux e Hijos y Cia
(6th review). Because there were no other requests for review for the
companies and administrative review periods indicated above from any
other interested parties, we are terminating these particular reviews
with respect to these companies in accordance with 19 CFR 353.22(a)(5).
We are also terminating the 5th and 6th administrative reviews
initiated for the Flores Colombianas Group (including Agrosuba Ltda.,
Flores Colombianas, Jardines de los Andes S.A., and Productos de
Cartucho S.A.) and Flores Condor, because these firms were subsequently
revoked from the antidumping order in an earlier review. Moreover, we
are terminating the 5th and 6th administrative reviews with respect to
Flores Timana Ltda., because this firm was originally excluded from the
order, and these reviews should not have been initiated.
In addition, at the request of the petitioner, we initiated reviews
for Agriflora (5th, 6th, and 7th reviews), Elite Farms (7th review),
Emerald Farms (7th review), and Comercializadora Caribbean (7th
review). The first three firms have informed us that they are flower
importers, and the last firm informed us that it is a freight
facilitator. Consequently, we are preliminarily terminating the reviews
with respect to these four firms.
During the course of these reviews, we learned that several
respondents were sufficiently related for us to collapse these firms,
or group of firms, into one entity for purposes of calculating a
dumping rate. The firms we considered one entity are: (1) Agricola las
Cuadras and Flores de Hacaritama; (2) Agricola de la Fontana, Flores de
Hunza, Flores Tibati, and Inversiones Cubivan; (3) Cultivos Miramonte
S.A. and Flores Mocari S.A.; (4) Agricola Guacari S.A., Flores Altamira
S.A., Flores de Exportacion S.A., Flores de Salitre, Four Farmers Inc,
S.B. Talee, and Santa Helena S.A.; (5) MG Consultores, Flores Canelon,
Flores la Valvanera, Flores del Hato, Agroindustrial del Riofrio,
Jardines de Chia, Queen's Flowers de Colombia, and Jardines Fredonia
(this group is hereinafter referred to as the ``Queen's Flowers
Group''). See Memorandum to File ``Collapsing Related Parties'': Farm
Fresh Flowers Group, dated November 14, 1994; Florex Group, dated
November 15, 1994, and November 21, 1994; Miramonte Group, dated
November 15, 1994; and Queen's Flowers Group, dated November 17, 1994,
and January 10, 1995 1. In the previous review covering the period
March 1, 1990 through February 28, 1991, we also collapsed (1) Agricola
Las Cuadras and Flores Hacaritama (2) Agricola Guacari S.A., Flores
Altamira S.A., Flores de Exportacion S.A., Four Farmers Inc, and Santa
Helena S.A., and (3) Jardines de Chia, Queen's Flowers de Colombia, and
Jardines Fredonia.
\1\ In these memos, we collapsed an additional 12 companies into
the Queen's Flowers Group. However, for purposes of these
preliminary results, we are considering only these eight companies
as one entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, we initiated reviews for a large number of firms which
could not be located in spite of our requests for assistance from such
diverse sources as the Floral Trade Council (the FTC), Asocolflores,
the American Embassy in Bogota, and the U.S. Customs Service.
Therefore, we were unable to conduct administrative reviews for these
firms, and any entries into the United States on the part of these
firms will continue to be assessed duties equal to the ``all others''
rate of 3.10 percent from the less-than-fair-value (LTFV)
investigation. The firms in question are:
Achalay
Agricola Altiplano
Agricola de Los Alisos Ltda.
Agricola de Occidente
Agricola del Monte
Agricola Megaflor Ltda.
Agrocaribu Ltd.
Agro de Narino
Agroindustrial Madonna, S.A.
Agroindustrias de Narino Ltda.
Agropecuaria la Marcela
Agropecuaria Mauricio
Agrocosas
Agrotabio Kent
Aguacarga
Alcala
Alstroflores Ltda.
Amoret
Andalucia
Ancas Ltda.
A.Q.
Arboles Azules Ltda.
Caico
Carcol Ltda.
Classic
Clavelez
Coexflor
Color Explosion
Consorcio Agroindustrial
Columbiano S.A. ``CAICO''
Cota
Crest D'or
Crop S.A.
Cultivos Guameru
Cypress Valley
Degaflor
Del Monte
Del Tropico Ltda.
Disagro Ltda.
Diveragricola
El Dorado
Elite Flowers
El Milaro
El Tambo
El Timbul Ltda.
Euroflora
Exoticas
Exotic Flowers
Exotico
Exportadora
F. Salazar
Ferson Trading
Flamingo Flowers
Flor y Color
Flores Abaco, S.A.
Flores Agromonte
Flores Ainsus
Flores Alcala Ltda.
Flores Calichana
Flores Cerezangos
Flores Corola
Flores de Guasca
Flores de Iztari
Flores de Memecon/Corinto
Flores de la Cuesta
Flores de la Hacienda
Flores de la Maria
Flores del Cielo Ltda.
Flores del Cortijo
Flores del Tambo
Flores el Talle Ltda.
Flores Flamingo Ltda.
Flores Fusu
Flores Gloria
Flores la Cabanuela
Flores la Pampa
Flores la Union/Santana
Flores Montecarlo
Flores Palimana
Flores Saint Valentine
Flores San Andres
Flores Santana
Flores Sausalito
Flores Sindamanoi
Flores Suasuque
Flores Tenerife Ltda.
Flores Urimaco
Flores Violette
Florexpo
Floricola
Floricola la Ramada Ltda.
Florisol
Florpacifico
Flower Factory
Flowers of the World/Rosa
Four Seasons
Fracolsa
Fresh Flowers
Garden and Flowers, Ltda.
German Ocampo
Granja
Gypso Flowers
Hacienda La Embarrada
Hacienda Matute
Hana/Hisa Group
Flores Hana Ichi de Colombia Ltda.
Flores Tokai Hisa [[Page 30272]]
Hernando Monroy
Hill Crest Gardens
Horticultura de la Sasan
Horticultura Montecarlo
Illusion Flowers
Indigo S.A.
Industria Santa Clara
Industrial Terwengel, Ltda.
Innovacion Andina, S.A.
Inversiones Bucarelia
Inversiones Maya, Ltda.
Inversiones Playa
Inversiones & Producciones Tecnicas
Inversiones Silma
Inversiones Sima
Jardin de Carolina
Jardines Choconta
Jardines Darpu
Jardines de Los Andes
Jardines de Timana
Jardines Natalia Ltda.
Jardines Tocarema
J.M. Torres
Karla Flowers
Kingdom S.A.
La Colina
La Embairada
La Flores Ltda.
La Floresta
Laura Flowers
L.H.
Loma Linda
Loreana Flowers
M. Alejandra
Mauricio Uribe
Merastec
Morcoto
Nasino
Olga Rincon
Otono
Pinar Guameru
Piracania
Prismaflor
Reme Salamanca
Rosa Bella
Rosales de Suba Ltda.
Rosas y Jardines
Rose
San Ernesto
San Valentine
Sarena
Select Pro
Shila
Solor Flores Ltda.
Starlight
Sunbelt Florals
Susca
The Rose
Tomino
Tropical Garden
Villa Diana
Zipa Flowers
Best Information Available
In accordance with section 776(c) of the Tariff Act, we have
preliminarily determined that the use of best information otherwise
available (BIA) is appropriate for certain firms. In determining what
is BIA, our regulations provide that we may take into account whether a
party refuses to provide information (19 CFR 353.37(b)). For purposes
of these reviews, we have used the most adverse BIA--generally, the
highest rate for any company for this same class or kind of merchandise
from this or any prior segment of the proceeding--whenever a company
refused to cooperate with the Department or otherwise significantly
impeded the proceeding. When a company substantially cooperated with
our requests for information, but failed to provide all the information
requested in a timely manner or in the form requested, we used as BIA
the higher of (1) the highest rate (including the ``all others'' rate)
ever applicable to the firm for the same class or kind of merchandise
from the same country from either the LTFV investigation or a prior
administrative review; or (2) the highest calculated rate in this
review for any firm for the same class or kind of merchandise from the
same country. See Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller
Bearings) and Parts Thereof From the Federal Republic of Germany, et
al.; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 56 FR
31692, 31704 (July 11, 1991); see also Allied-Signal Aerospace Co. v.
United States, 996 F.2d 1185 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Because a number of firms failed to respond to our requests for
information, we have used the highest rate ever found in this
proceeding to establish their margins. This rate is 75.92 percent for
the 5th administrative review and 83.61 percent for the 6th and 7th
administrative reviews. The firms that have received adverse BIA rates
and the review periods for which these firms are receiving a BIA rate
(as indicated in parentheses) are:
Agricola Jicabal (5,6,7)
Agricola Malqui (5,6,7)
Agricola Monteflor Ltda. (7)
Agrobloom Ltda. (7)
Agrokoralia (5,6,7)
Bali Flowers (7)
Bloomshares (7)
Bogota Flowers (5,6,7)
Ciba Geigy (5,6,7)
Claveles Tropicales (7)
Colony International Farm (5,6,7)
Conflores Ltda. (5,6,7)
Cultivos el Lago (5,6,7)
Fernando de Mier (7)
Flora Bellisima (5,6,7)
Flores Alfaya (5,6,7)
Flores Arco Iris (5,6,7)
Flores Balu (7)
Flores Catalina (7)
Flores de Fragua (7)
Flores de la Pradera Ltda. (5,6,7)
Flores del Pradro (7)
Flores el Majui (7)
Flores Guaicata Ltda. (5,6,7)
Flores Magara
Flores Naturales (7)
Flores Petaluma Ltda.(5,6,7)
Flores Rio Grande (7)
Flores Santa Lucia (5,6,7)
Flores Suesca (5,6)
Flores Tejas Verdes (5,6,7)
Fribir Ltda. (7)
Groex S.A. (5,6)
Hacienda Susata (7)
Inpar (5,6,7)
Inter Flores (7)
Interflora Ltda. (5,6,7)
Internacional Flowers (7)
Invernavas (5,6,7)
Inversiones del Alto (7)
Inversiones Nativa Ltda. (5,6,7)
Jardin (5,6,7)
Jardines del Muna (5,6,7)
La Florida (5,6,7)
My Flowers Ltda. (7)
Naranjo Exportaciones e Importaciones (7)
Plantas Ornamentales de Colombia S.A. (7)
Rosas y Flores (5,6,7)
Rosicler Ltda. (5,6,7)
Sabana Flowers (5,6,7)
Sunset Farms (5,6,7)
Tempest Flowers (5,6,7)
As previously discussed under the Scope of Review section of this
notice, we have preliminarily determined that eight flower companies
are significantly related to each other to warrant collapsing their
sales and production information into the Queen's Flowers Group.
Although these companies provided responses to our questionnaire and
supplemental questionnaires, we did not receive complete information
regarding the interrelationships between these companies. In addition,
one firm had purchased major inputs from other members of the group but
failed to provide requested information establishing the arm's-length
nature of these transactions. Other members of the group failed to
identify their suppliers of inputs when requested to do so. Another
firm claimed it had no transactions with two particular customers, both
members of the group; however, there is information on the record from
these customers indicating that they had purchased subject merchandise
from this firm during the POR. Moreover, several companies failed to
notify the Department that they had included shared administrative
expenses in their constructed value response. Finally, one company
improperly amortized certain production expenses in an optional crop
adjustment methodology and failed to [[Page 30273]] correct the problem
in response to a supplemental questionnaire. These problems precluded
the Department from merging sales and constructed value data to form
one consolidated response for these related entities. Therefore, we
preliminarily determine that the members of the Queen's Flowers Group
have significantly impeded our reviews and we have used as
uncooperative, or first-tier, BIA, the highest rate for any company for
this same class or kind of merchandise from this or any prior segment
of the proceeding.
Based on the responses provided by these eight respondents, we
believe that there are an additional 12 companies with strong ties to
the Queen's Flowers Group. We are giving these 12 companies an
opportunity to respond to our questionnaire. Since these companies were
not included in our ``Notice of Initiation,'' there will not be a
preliminary margin applicable to these companies. If, however, in our
final results of review, we conclude that any or all of these companies
are significantly related to the Queen's Flowers Group to be considered
to be one entity, the rates for the group will apply to these companies
as well.
Two firms, Agricola Uzatama and Proflores Ltda., responded to our
original questionnaire, but failed to respond to our requests for
supplemental information. We preliminarily determine that these
companies have not cooperated with our requests for information.
Therefore, we have preliminarily applied a first-tier BIA rate to these
firms for the seventh review, which is 83.61 percent, the highest rate
for any firm in any segment of this proceeding.
Although Iturrama and Santa Helena submitted responses to our
supplemental questionnaires, these firms failed to provide information
allowing us to correct serious deficiencies in their cost responses.
Therefore we were unable to use their cost data for comparison
purposes. However, because these firms substantially cooperated with
our requests for information, we have preliminarily applied a
cooperative, or second-tier, BIA rates to sales made by these
companies.
Flores el Zorro, Ltda., substantially cooperated with our requests
for information and provided complete sales and cost data for its U.S.
sales. However, the data provided by Flores el Zorro contained numerous
problems and deficiencies (specifically in the areas of indirect
selling expenses incurred in the United States, indirect selling
expenses incurred in the home market, financial expenses, and financial
income). Since insufficient information was placed on the record by
Flores el Zorro to correct these problems and we were unable to use the
firm's response to make comparisons because of the existing
deficiencies, we have preliminarily applied second-tier BIA rates to
sales made by Flores el Zorro for all three reviews.
We conducted verification of responses submitted by the Agrodex
Group, Cultivos Miramonte, Floralex, Flores Aurora, Flores Depina, the
Funza Group, Flores de la Vereda, Flores Juanambu, the Florex Group,
the Guacatay Group, the HOSA Group, Industrial Agricola, the Santana
Group, Senda Brava, and the Tinzuque Group. We encountered serious
verification problems with respect to Flores de la Vereda and Floralex.
During the verification of Flores de la Vereda, we could not
successfully verify completeness and accuracy of the company's sales
data. Also, during the verification of Floralex, we were unable to
verify the accuracy of the constructed value information submitted by
this firm. Because Flores de la Vereda and Floralex have substantially
cooperated with our requests for information, we have preliminarily
applied a second-tier BIA rate to these firms for all three reviews.
Also, we are applying a second-tier BIA rate to sales made by
Colflores, Flores Estrella, Flores Mountgar, and Flor Colombia S.A.
These firms are no longer in business, and we have preliminarily
determined, in accordance with the standards enunciated in Certain
Fresh Cut Flowers From Colombia; Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, and Notice of Revocation of Order (in Part), 59
FR 15159 (March 31, 1994), that they are unable to respond to the
Department's questionnaire.
In certain situations, we found it necessary to use partial BIA for
a number of firms to correct for more limited response deficiencies. In
a supplemental questionnaire, Flores de Aposentos reported aggregate
carnation sales totals made through resellers which it knew were
destined for sale in the United States. Since these sales were not
broken down in the company's response as required by the Department's
questionnaire, we applied the BIA rate for cooperative firms and
limited its application to the particular sales involved.
In the case of Las Amalias, we found that the firm had reported its
sales prices to a related importer for certain U.S. sales transactions
instead of its sales prices to the first unrelated U.S. customer as
required by our questionnaire. We applied the BIA rate for cooperative
firms to these particular transactions.
United States Price
Pursuant to section 777A of the Tariff Act, we determined that it
was appropriate to average U.S. prices on a monthly basis in order (1)
to use actual price information that is often available only on a
monthly basis, (2) to account for large sales volumes, and (3) to
account for perishable product pricing practices (see Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Certain Fresh Cut Flowers from
Colombia (56 FR 50554, October 7, 1991)).
In calculating USP, we used purchase price when sales were made to
unrelated purchasers in the United States prior to the date of
importation, or exporter's sales price (ESP) when sales were made to
unrelated purchasers in the United States after the date of
importation, both pursuant to section 772 of the Tariff Act.
We calculated purchase price based on the packed price to the first
unrelated purchaser in the United States. The terms of purchase price
sales were either f.o.b. Bogota or c.i.f. Miami. We made deductions,
where appropriate, for foreign inland freight, air freight, brokerage
and handling, U.S. customs duties, and return credits.
ESP, for sales made on consignment or through a related affiliate,
was calculated based on the packed price to the first unrelated
customer in the United States. We made adjustments, where appropriate,
for foreign inland freight, brokerage and handling, air freight, box
charges, credit expenses, returned merchandise credits, royalties, U.S.
duty, and either commissions paid to unrelated U.S. consignees or
indirect U.S. selling expenses of related consignees.
Foreign Market Value
Section 733(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act requires the Department to
compare sales in the United States with viable home market sales of
such or similar merchandise sold in the home market or a third-country
market in the ordinary course of trade. Although some companies
reported either viable home or third-country markets for sales of
particular flower types, consistent with our discussion in Certain
Fresh Cut Flowers from Colombia; Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Review, and Notice of Revocation of Order (in Part) (59 FR 15159, March
31, 1994), we have concluded that home market and third-
[[Page 30274]] country sales are not an appropriate basis for FMV.
The FTC, representing domestic parties in this proceeding, argues
that most of the conditions on which the above decision was based have
changed with respect to third-country sales for these reviews. The FTC
claims that sales by Colombian growers to third countries have
increased, and the FTC argues that Colombian growers now have greater,
unrestricted access to third-country markets, resulting in more stable
annual sales to those countries. Also, the FTC argues, this increase in
third-country demand for Colombian-grown flowers has affected the
production decisions of the Colombian growers and has helped to lessen
the seasonal disparities in market demand.
Based on our review of the questionnaire responses and other data
on the record, we have preliminarily concluded that the conditions
which governed sales in third countries have not changed significantly
between our last review and the current reviews. While we have found
that Colombian flower producers enjoy greater access and sales to
third-country markets, we find that the other conditions on which we
based our original decision to disregard third-country sales as a basis
for FMV still apply.
Although the petitioner argues that holidays in third countries
coincide with holidays in the United States, we find that, with a few
exceptions, such as Christmas, this is not the case. For example, there
are no flower-giving holidays in third countries that coincide with
Valentine's Day or Mother's Day, and there are no United States flower-
giving holidays that coincide with All Souls Day.
We find that the market patterns differ greatly between third
countries and the United States. The United States market is extremely
volatile, and can experience great price swings depending on the season
and whether there is a holiday. For example, flower prices on
Valentine's Day can increase by more than one hundred percent. This is
because United States consumers tend to purchase flowers only on
special occasions. On the other hand, third-country customers,
particularly those in Europe, tend to purchase flowers more for
everyday use. Therefore, demand and prices are much more stable in
Europe than in the United States. While price swings do exist, they do
not occur on the same order of magnitude as in the United States.
We find the FTC's argument that the correlation between flower
prices in the United States and in Europe justify the use of third-
country prices as FMV to be unconvincing. While the charts submitted by
the FTC in support of its argument indicate that there is a correlation
between flower prices in Miami, Florida, and flower prices in Europe,
we find the correlation to be weak, and we observed that prices in the
two markets moved in the opposite direction in approximately half of
the months of the year. The FTC also alleges that the prices of flowers
in California more closely correlate with the prices in Europe. While
the charts petitioner submitted indicate a moderate correlation, we
again observed that Californian and European prices moved in opposite
directions in nearly half of the months out of the year. Also, the vast
majority of Colombian flowers enter the United States in Miami,
Florida, and are sold there. In addition, we noted that the information
submitted by the FTC is for only one flower type and only covered part
of the 5th review period.
For these reasons, we have not used third-country sales as the
basis for FMV. Instead, we used constructed value as defined in section
773(e) of the Tariff Act for all companies. The constructed value
represents the average per-flower cost for each type of flower, based
on the costs incurred to produce that type of flower over each review
period.
The Department used the materials, fabrication, and general
expenses reported by respondents. The per-unit average constructed
value was based on the quantity of export quality flowers sold by the
grower/exporter to the United States. We consider non-export quality
flowers (culls) which are produced in conjunction with export quality
flowers to be by-products. Therefore, revenue from the sales of culls
was used as an offset against the cost of producing the export quality
flowers.
For cases in which actual general expenses exceeded the statutory
minimum of 10 percent of the cost of materials and fabrication, we used
the actual general expenses to calculate constructed value. For cases
in which actual general expenses were less than the statutory minimum
of 10 percent of the cost of materials and fabrication, we used the
statutory minimum of 10 percent. Because imputed credit was included in
constructed value, we reduced the actual interest expense reported in
the companies' financial statements to prevent double-counting.
When respondents indicated that the actual profit for merchandise
of the same general class or kind could not be calculated or was less
than eight percent of the sum of the cost of production and general
expenses, the Department used the eight percent statutory minimum for
profit. We added U.S. packing to constructed value. Adjustments to
constructed value were made for credit and indirect selling expenses.
Finally, according to the 1993 edition of Doing Business in
Colombia, published by Price Waterhouse, there has been a change in the
Colombian generally accepted accounting practices effective January 1,
1992. Firms are now required to revalue certain financial statement
accounts in order to reflect the effects of inflation experienced
during each financial reporting period. As part of this revaluation,
firms must restate their fixed asset accounts and their corresponding
depreciation expense. Respondents' restated depreciation expenses are
not reflected in the constructed value calculations used in our
preliminary results. We intend, however, to ask respondents to provide
additional data to allow us to make this adjustment for our final
results. We invite comments from interested parties on this matter.
Preliminary Results of Review
As a result of our comparison of USP with FMV, we preliminarily
determine the margins for the 5th, 6th, and 7th administrative reviews
to be:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Producer/exporter 5th 6th 7th
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abaco Tulipanex de Colombia.................. (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Agrex de Oriente............................. (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
AGA Group.................................... (\2\) (\2\) 9.03
Agricola la Celestina
Agricola la Maria
Agricola Benilda Ltda
Agricola Acevedo Ltda........................ 0.96 4.38 1.89
Agricola Arenales Ltda....................... 2.98 2.67 2.10
Agricola Benilda............................. (\1\) (\1\) 8.78
Agricola Bonanza Ltda........................ (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
[[Page 30275]]
Agricola Circasia Ltda....................... 14.21 0.41 1.29
Agricola el Cactus........................... 2.21 1.70 1.16
Agricola el Redil............................ 0.46 0.37 0.42
Agricola Guali S.A........................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Agricola Jicabal............................. 75.92 83.61 83.61
Agricola la Corsaria......................... 4.85 2.89 1.78
Agricola las Cuadras Group................... 1.71 3.87 1.44
Agricola Las Cuadras Ltda
Flores de Hacaritama
Agricola La Siberia.......................... (\2\) (\2\) 26.94
Agricola Malqui.............................. 75.92 83.61 83.61
Agricola Monteflor Ltda...................... (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Agricola Uzatama............................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Agricola Yuldama............................. (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Agrobloom Ltda............................... (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Agrodex Group................................ 0.90 0.17 1.00
Agricola El Retiro Ltda
Agricola Los Gaques Ltda
Agrodex Ltda
Degaflores Ltda
Flores Camino Real Ltda
Flores de la Comuna Ltda
Flores De Las Mercedes Ltda
Flores De Los Amigos Ltda
Flores De Los Arrayanes Ltda
Flores De Mayo Ltda
Flores Del Gallinero Ltda
Flores Del Potrero Ltda
Flores Dos Hectareas Ltda
Flores De Pueblo Viejo Ltda
Flores El Puente Ltda
Flores El Trentino Ltda
Flores La Conejera Ltda
Flores Manare Ltda
Florlinda Ltda
Inversiones Santa Rosa ARW Ltda
Horticola El Triunfo
Horticola Montecarlo Ltda
Agroindustrial Don Eusebio Group............. 4.03 1.68 1.30
Agroindustrial Don Eusebio Ltda
Celia Flowers
Passion Flowers
Primo Flowers
Temptation Flowers
Agrokoralia.................................. 75.92 83.61 83.61
Agromonte Ltda............................... 7.51 1.40 2.10
Agropecuria Cuernavaca Ltda.................. 2.59 4.59 1.70
Aspen Gardens Ltda........................... (\2\) (\2\) 12.28
Astro Ltda................................... (\1\) 20.25 20.59
Bali Flowers................................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Becerra Castellanos y Cia.................... 2.86 0.29 64.05
Bloomshare................................... (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Bogota Flowers............................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Bojaca Group................................. 75.92 19.96 0.21
Agricola Bojaca
Universal Flowers
Flores Y Plantas Tropicales
Caicedo Group................................ 0.19 2.53 8.64
Agro Bosque, S.A
Aranjuez S.A
Exportaciones Bochica S.A
Floral Ltda
Flores Del Cauca
Inversiones Targa Ltda
Productos El Zorro
Cantarrana Group............................. 1.74 4.89 1.07
Cantarrana Ltda
Agricola Los Venados Ltda
Ciba Geigy................................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Cienfuegos Group............................. 5.14 2.75 6.15
Cienfuegos Ltda
Flores La Conchita
Cigarral Group............................... 4.97 36.16 45.90
[[Page 30276]]
Flores Cigarral
Flores Tayrona
Claveles Colombianas Group................... 5.74 3.80 4.42
Claveles Colombianos Ltda
Fantasia Flowers Ltda
Splendid Flowers Ltda
Sun Flowers Ltda
Claveles De Los Alpes Ltda................... 0.96 6.38 3.77
Claveles Tropicales de Colombia.............. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Colflores.................................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Colibri Flowers Ltda......................... 3.19 2.05 2.93
Colony International Farm.................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Combiflor.................................... (\2\) (\2\) 0.37
Conflores Ltda............................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Cultiflores Ltda............................. (\2\) 0.00 5.51
Cultivos el Lago............................. 75.92 83.61 83.61
Cultivos Medellin Ltda....................... 4.51 0.02 3.47
Cultivos Miramonte Group..................... 0.27 0.10 0.11
Cultivos Miramonte S.A
Flores Mocari S.A
Cultivos Tahami Ltda......................... 3.90 0.06 1.08
Daflor Ltda.................................. 0.16 0.31 (\2\)
De la Pava Guevara e Hijos Ltda.............. (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Dianticola Colombiana Ltda................... 2.59 22.23 8.16
Dynastry Roses Ltda.......................... (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
El Antelio S.A............................... (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Envy Farms Group............................. (\2\) (\2\) 0.00
Envy Farms
Flores Marandua Ltda
Expoflora Ltda............................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Exporosas.................................... (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Falcon Farms De Colombia S.A................. 0.00 0.00 0.13
(formerly Flores de Cajibio Ltda.)...........
Farm Fresh Flowers Group..................... 1.30 0.72 1.49
Agricola de la Fontana
Flores de Hunza
Flores Tibati
Inversiones Cubivan
Fernando de Mier............................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Flor Colombiana S.A.......................... (\2\) (\2\) 64.05
Flora Bellisima Ltda......................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Flora Intercontinental....................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Floralex Ltda................................ 75.92 83.61 83.61
Florandia Herrera Camacho y Cia.............. (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Floraterra Group............................. 17.31 5.37 9.04
Flores Casablanca S.A
Flores San Mateo S.A
Siete Flores S.A
Floreales Group.............................. (\1\) 8.93 4.56
Floreales
Kimbaya
Florenal (Flores el Arenal) Ltda............. 0.62 13.89 7.70
Flores Acuarela S.A.......................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores Aguila................................ 0.02 (\1\) (\1\)
Flores Ainsuca Ltda.......................... (\2\) (\2\) 2.74
Flores Alfaya Ltda........................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Flores Andinas............................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores Arco Iris............................. 75.92 83.61 83.61
Flores Aurora Ltda........................... 0.03 0.31 0.01
Flores Bachue................................ (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores Balu.................................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Flores Carmel S.A............................ (\2\) (\2\) 2.24
Flores Catalina.............................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Flores Colon Ltda............................ 0.90 1.96 1.08
Flores Comercial Bellavista Ltda............. 2.40 0.20 1.75
Flores de Aposentos Ltda..................... (\2\) (\2\) 2.83
Flores de Fragua............................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Flores de la Montana......................... 6.27 0.14 4.51
Flores de la Parcelita....................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores de la Pradera......................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Flores de la Sabana S.A...................... 7.43 1.10 1.54
Flores de la Vega Ltda....................... 3.09 0.18 1.50
Flores de la Vereda.......................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Flores del Campo Ltda........................ 4.95 3.85 4.51
[[Page 30277]]
Flores del Lago Ltda......................... 3.74 0.14 1.55
Flores del Pradro............................ (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Flores del Rio Group......................... 0.15 5.03 4.16
Agricola Cardenal S.A
Flores Del Rio S.A
Indigo S.A
Flores de Oriente............................ (\2\) (\2\) 3.31
Flores Depina Ltda........................... 8.95 0.00 7.65
Flores de Serrezuela Ltda.................... 1.23 0.26 0.13
Flores de Suba............................... 8.63 3.10 5.37
Flores de Tenjo Ltda......................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores el Lobo............................... (\2\) 14.75 1.59
Flores el Majui.............................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Flores el Molino S.A......................... 0.26 0.94 4.66
Flores el Rosal Ltda......................... 23.77 6.51 2.24
Flores el Zorro Ltda......................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Flores Estrella.............................. 75.92 83.61 (\2\)
Flores Galia Ltda............................ (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores Gicro Group........................... 5.82 5.78 5.09
Flores Gicro Ltda
Flores de Colombia
Flores Guaicata Ltda......................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Flores Hacienda Bejucol...................... (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Flores Juanambu Ltda......................... 0.69 1.08 1.62
Flores Juncalito Ltda........................ (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores la Fragrancia......................... 11.03 23.93 11.05
Flores la Gioconda........................... (\2\) (\2\) 1.99
Flores la Lucerna............................ (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores la Macarena........................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores la Union/Gomez Arango & Cia........... 0.37 0.00 0.00
Flores las Caicas............................ 34.46 83.61 42.77
Flores las Mesitas........................... (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Flores los Sauces............................ (\2\) (\2\) 1.35
Flores Magara................................ (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Flores Monserrate Ltda....................... 1.49 3.32 1.09
Flores Monteverde Ltda....................... 5.03 3.20 3.42
Flores Mountgar.............................. 43.02 83.61 (\2\)
Flores Naturales............................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Flores Petaluma Ltda......................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Flores Ramo Ltda............................. (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores Rio Grande............................ (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Flores S.A................................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores Sagaro................................ 0.17 1.12 2.59
Flores Sairam Ltda........................... (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Flores San Carlos............................ (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Flores San Juan S.A.......................... (\2\) (\2\) 3.50
Flores Santa Fe Ltda......................... 2.50 3.78 4.07
Flores Santa Lucia........................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Flores Selectas.............................. (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Flores Silvestres............................ 2.10 0.09 1.57
Flores (de) Suesca........................... 75.92 83.61 (\2\)
Flores Tejas Verdes Ltda..................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Flores Tiba S.A.............................. 1.06 2.20 0.09
Flores Tocarinda............................. 0.00 0.25 0.52
Flores Tomine Ltda........................... 1.17 0.00 1.17
Flores Tropicales (Happy Candy) Group........ 1.25 4.77 6.14
Flores Tropicales Ltda
Happy Candy Ltda
Mercedes Ltda
Rosas Colombianas Ltda
Florex Group................................. 6.47 6.85 5.47
Agricola Guacari
Flores Altamira S.A
Flores de Exportacion S.A
Santa Helena S.A
Flores del Salitre Ltda
S.B. Talee de Colombia
Floricola La Gaitana S.A..................... 0.02 0.17 0.01
Florimex Colombia Ltda....................... (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Floval....................................... (\2\) (\2\) 7.22
Fribir Ltda.................................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Funza Group.................................. 0.04 0.25 0.47
[[Page 30278]]
Flores Alborada
Flores de Funza S.A
Flores del Bosque Ltda
Green Flowers................................ (\2\) (\2\) 12.57
Groex S.A.................................... 75.92 83.61 (\1\)
Grupo Andes.................................. 3.43 0.35 0.22
Cultivos Buenavista Ltda
Flores De Los Andes Ltda
Flores Horizante Ltda
Inversiones Penas Blancas Ltda
Grupo el Jardin.............................. (\2\) (\2\) 0.40
Agricola el Jardin Ltda
La Marotte S.A
Orquideas Acatayma Ltda
Guacatay Group............................... 3.00 2.70 3.32
Agricola Guacatay S.A
Jardines Bacata Ltda
Hacienda Susata.............................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Horticultura El Molino....................... (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Hosa Group................................... 0.65 0.18 1.26
Horticultura De La Sabana S.A
Innovacion Andina S.A
Minispray S.A
HOSA Ltda
Prohosa Ltda
Industrial Agricola Ltda..................... 0.39 0.43 (\2\)
Ingro Ltda................................... 8.23 0.02 1.20
Inpar........................................ 75.92 83.61 83.61
Interflora Ltda.............................. 75.92 83.61 83.61
Inter Flores Ltda............................ (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Internacional Flowers........................ (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Invernavas................................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Inverpalmas.................................. 0.90 10.93 3.78
Inversiones Almer Ltda....................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Inversiones Cota............................. (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Inversiones el Bambu Ltda.................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Inversiones Flores del Alto.................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Inversiones Morcote.......................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Inversiones Morrosquillo..................... (\2\) (\2\) 4.73
Inversiones Nativa Ltda...................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Inversiones Santa Rita Ltda.................. 15.41 17.85 19.05
Inversiones Supala S.A....................... (\2\) 3.36 3.23
Inversiones Valley Flowers Ltda.............. (\2\) (\2\) 29.38
Iturrama S.A................................. 75.92 83.61 83.61
Las Amalias Group............................ 8.89 4.05 2.80
Las Amalias S.A
Pompones Ltda
La Fleurette de Colombia Ltda
Ramiflora Ltda
Jardin....................................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Jardines de America.......................... (\2\) (\2\) 0.85
Jardines del Muna............................ 75.92 83.61 83.61
La Florida................................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
La Plazoleta Ltda............................ (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Linda Colombiana Ltda........................ 1.11 2.11 1.32
Las Flores................................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Los Geranios Ltda............................ 6.69 0.29 1.19
Luisa Flowers................................ (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Manjui Ltda.................................. (\2\) 0.01 0.06
Maxima Farms Group........................... 0.33 0.64 0.10
Agricola los Arboles S.A
Polo Flowers
Rainbow Flowers
Maxima Farms Inc
Monteverde Ltda.............................. 5.03 3.20 3.42
My Flowers Ltda.............................. (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Naranjo Exportaciones e Importaciones........ (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Natuflora Ltda./San Martin Bloque B.......... 2.12 1.12 1.49
Oro Verde Group.............................. 2.10 1.05 0.19
Inversiones Miraflores S.A
Inversiones Oro Verde S.A
Papagayo Group............................... 3.23 9.52 2.11
Agricola Papagayo Ltda.
Inversiones Calypso S.A
Petalos De Colombia Ltda..................... 13.63 3.28 2.82
[[Page 30279]]
Pisochago Ltda............................... (\2\) (\2\) 8.77
Plantaciones Delta Ltda...................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Plantas Ornamentales De Colombia S.A......... 0.02 3.85 83.61
Plantas S.A.................................. (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Proflores Ltda............................... (\2\) (\2\) 83.61
Propagar Plantas............................. (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Queen's Flowers Group........................ 75.92 83.61 83.61
Queen's Flowers De Colombia Ltda
Jardines De Chia Ltda
Jardines Fredonia Ltda
Agrodindustrial del Rio Frio
Flores Canelon
Flores del Hato
Flores La Valvanera Ltda
M.G. Consultores Ltda
Rosaflor..................................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Rosales de Colombia Ltda..................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Rosalinda Ltda............................... (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Rosas de Colombia............................ (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Rosas Sabanilla Group........................ 0.22 0.49 0.17
Flores La Colmena Ltda
Rosas Sabanilla Ltda
Inversiones La Serena
Agricola La Capilla
Rosas y Flores Ltda.......................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Roselandia................................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Rosex Ltda................................... (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Rosicler Ltda................................ 75.92 83.61 83.61
Sabana Flowers............................... 75.92 83.61 83.61
Sansa Flowers................................ (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Santa Rosa Group............................. 9.27 7.53 2.38
Flores Santa Rosa Ltda
Floricola la Ramada Ltda
Santana Flowers Group........................ 0.26 1.76 (\2\)
Hacienda Curubital
Inversiones Istra
Santana Flowers
Senda Brava Ltda............................. 13.12 0.00 1.53
Shasta Flowers y Compania Ltda............... 3.61 0.19 0.00
Siempreviva.................................. (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Soagro Group................................. 8.66 10.01 3.71
Agricola el Mortino Ltda
Flores Aguaclara Ltda
Flores del Monte Ltda
Flores la Estancia
Jaramillo y Daza
Sunset Farms................................. 75.92 83.61 83.61
Superflora Ltda.............................. (\2\) (\2\) 5.58
Sweet Farms.................................. (\2\) (\2\) (\1\)
Tag Ltda..................................... 0.20 0.56 2.68
Tempest Flowers.............................. 75.92 83.61 83.61
The Beall Company............................ (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Tinzuque Group............................... 5.26 0.02 0.00
Tinzuque Ltda
Catu S.A
Toto Flowers Group........................... 1.19 1.93 0.06
Flores De Suesca S.A
Toto Flowers
The Tuchany Group............................ 0.52 0.43 0.55
Tuchany S.A
Flores Sibate S.A
Flores Munya S.A
Flores Tikaya Ltda
Uniflor Ltda................................. 5.54 0.68 2.75
Velez de Monchaux Group...................... 3.78 4.76 4.51
Velez De Monchaux e Hijos Y
Cia. S. en C
Agroteusa
Victoria Flowers............................. 0.62 2.13 1.61
Villa Cultivos Ltda.......................... (\2\) (\2\) 2.43
Vuelven Ltda................................. (\2\) 3.16 2.33
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No U.S. sales during this review period.
\2\ No review requested for this period.
[[Page 30280]]
Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure within 5 days and
interested parties may request a hearing not later than 10 days after
publication of this notice. Interested parties may submit written
arguments in case briefs on these preliminary results within 30 days of
the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to
issues raised in case briefs, may be filed no later than 7 days after
the time limit for filing case briefs. Any hearing, if requested, will
be held 7 days after the scheduled date for submission of rebuttal
briefs. Copies of case briefs and rebuttal briefs must be served on
interested parties in accordance with 19 CFR 353.38(e). Representatives
of parties to the proceeding may request disclosure of proprietary
information under administrative protective order no later than 10 days
after the representative's client or employer becomes a party to the
proceeding, but in any event not later than the date the case briefs,
under 19 CFR 353.38(c), are due. The Department will publish the final
results of this administrative review including the results of its
analysis of issues raised in any case or rebuttal brief or at a
hearing.
Upon completion of the final results in this review, the Department
shall determine, and the Customs Service shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries. Individual differences between USP
and FMV may vary from the percentages stated above. The Department will
issue appraisement instructions on each exporter directly to the
Customs Service.
Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective
for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the
final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section
751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the
reviewed companies will be those rates established for the last covered
period in the final results of these reviews; (2) for previously
reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit
rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the
most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this
review, a prior review, or the original LTFV investigation, but the
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for
the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4)
for all other producers and/or exporters of this merchandise, the cash
deposit rate shall be 3.10 percent, the adjusted ``all others'' rate
from the fair value investigation. These deposit requirements, when
imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results
of the next administrative reviews.
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 prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during these review periods. 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.
These administrative reviews and notice are in accordance with
section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and section
353.22 of the Department's regulations (19 CFR 353.22(c)(5)).
Dated: May 26, 1995.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 95-14074 Filed 6-7-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
