29174 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 117 / Friday, June 19, 2009 / Notices

make an adverse inference.’’ See Suspension of Liquidation and Cash in the United States at prices below Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Deposit Requirement normal value (NV) with respect to Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27340 In accordance with section 19 CFR certain exporters who participated fully (May 19, 1997). See also Nippon Steel 351.225(l), the Department will direct and are entitled to a separate rate in the Corp. v. United States, 337 F.3d 1373, CBP to continue to suspend liquidation AR or NSRs. In addition, we are 1382 (Fed. Cir. 2003). and to require a cash deposit of rescinding the NSRs for two companies. Finally, the Department is rescinding As discussed in detail in the estimated duties, at the rate of 112.64 percent, on all unliquidated entries of the antidumping duty AR of companies Preliminary Determination, 74 FR at that timely certified that they had no 20916–20918, Sunlake refused to certain tissue paper products produced in and exported from Thailand by shipments of subject merchandise to the respond to the Department’s United States during the POR. We questionnaire despite being given ample Sunlake that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for intend to instruct U.S. Customs and opportunity to do so by the Department. Border Protection (CBP) to assess Thus, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A), consumption on or after October 21, 2008, the date of initiation of the antidumping duties on entries of subject (B), and (C) of the Act, the Department circumvention inquiry. merchandise during the POR for which found that the use of facts available was importer-specific assessment rates are appropriate for Sunlake in this Notification to Interested Parties above de minimis. circumvention proceeding. This notice also serves as the only DATES: Effective Date: June 19, 2009. Furthermore, the Department found that reminder to parties subject to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sunlake had not acted to the best of its administrative protective order (APO) of Scott Lindsay, Nicholas Czajkowski, or ability in this circumvention proceeding their responsibility concerning the Summer Avery, AD/CVD Operations, within the meaning of section 776(b) of return or destruction of proprietary Office 6, Import Administration, the Act. Accordingly, we preliminarily information disclosed under APO in International Trade Administration, applied adverse facts available (AFA) to accordance with section 351.305 of the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Sunlake. Specifically, we preliminarily Department’s regulations. Timely Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., considered all of Sunlake’s exports of written notification of the return/ Washington DC 20230; telephone: (202) tissue paper products from Thailand to destruction of APO materials or 482–0780, (202) 482–1395, and (202) be of PRC origin and concluded that conversion to judicial protective order is 482–4052, respectively. Sunlake is circumventing the Order. We hereby requested. Failure to comply SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: also assigned Sunlake a margin of with the regulation and terms of an APO Background 112.64 percent, which is the highest is a violation which is subject to corroborated rate on the record in any sanction. On December 8, 2008, the Department This affirmative final circumvention completed segment of the tissue paper published in the Federal Register the determination is published in proceeding. preliminary results of the AR and NSRs accordance with section 781(b) of the of the antidumping duty order on fresh No party filed comments objecting to Act and 19 CFR 351.225. garlic from the PRC. See Fresh Garlic the Department’s Preliminary Dated: June 12, 2009. from the People’s Republic of : Determination and no further Ronald K. Lorentzen, Preliminary Results of the Antidumping information has come to the Duty Administrative and New Shipper Department’s attention warranting Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Reviews and Intent to Rescind, in Part, reconsideration of that determination. [FR Doc. E9–14359 Filed 6–18–09; 8:45 am] the Antidumping Duty Administrative Therefore, we continue to find that the and New Shipper Reviews, 73 FR 74462 BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S application of facts available is (December 8, 2008) (Preliminary necessary pursuant to section 776(a) of Results). Since the Preliminary Results, the Act, and that Sunlake has failed to DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE the following events have occurred. act to the best of its ability in this Chenhe International circumvention proceeding, warranting International Trade Administration Trading Co., Ltd. (Chenhe) filed letters on December 12 and December 31, the use of an adverse inference under [A–570–831] section 776(b) of the Act. Thus, as AFA, requesting that the Department rescind we continue to determine that all of Fresh Garlic From the People’s this AR with respect to Chenhe and Sunlake’s exports of tissue paper Republic of China: Final Results and remove it from the list of companies products from Thailand to the United Partial Rescission of the 13th subject to the PRC-wide rate, as States are, in fact, of PRC origin, and Antidumping Duty Administrative determined in the Preliminary Results. that Sunlake is circumventing the Review and New Shipper Reviews On December 15, Greening Order. Trading Co., Ltd. (Greening) also filed a AGENCY: Import Administration, letter seeking removal from the list of Accordingly, for this final International Trade Administration, companies subject to the PRC-wide rate determination, we are applying to Department of Commerce. and revised publication of the Sunlake a margin of 112.64 percent, as SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce Preliminary Results. On December 18, AFA. This margin is the highest rate on (Department) is conducting the the Department notified parties that case the record in any completed segment of administrative review (AR) and new briefs would be due seven days after the this proceeding (i.e., the LTFV shipper reviews (NSRs) of the last verification report was issued. On investigation, and the first and second antidumping duty order on fresh garlic December 19 and 23, the Fresh Garlic administrative reviews) and it has been from the People’s Republic of China Producers Association (FGPA) and its corroborated in accordance with section (PRC) covering the period of review individual members (Christopher Ranch 776(c) of the Act, as discussed in detail (POR) of November 1, 2006 through LLC, the Garlic Company, Valley Garlic, in the Preliminary Determination, 74 FR October 31, 2007. As discussed below, and Vessey and Company, Inc.) at 20918. we determine that sales have been made (collectively, Petitioners), filed letters in

VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 117 / Friday, June 19, 2009 / Notices 29175

response to those filed by Chenhe and whether or not peeled, fresh, chilled, In addition, a copy of the Issues and Greening. On January 14, 2009, frozen, provisionally preserved, or Decision Memorandum can be accessed Petitioners filed additional surrogate packed in water or other neutral directly on our Web site at http:// value information. substance, but not prepared or ia.ita.doc.gov/. The paper copy and On February 26, the Department preserved by the addition of other electronic version of the Issues and extended the time limit for completion ingredients or heat processing. The Decision Memorandum are identical in of the final results of this administrative differences between grades are based on content. review by 60 days. See Fresh Garlic color, size, sheathing, and level of Final Partial Rescission of from the People’s Republic of China: decay. The scope of this order does not Administrative Review Extension of Time Limits for Final include the following: (a) Garlic that has Results of the Antidumping Duty been mechanically harvested and that is In the Preliminary Results, the Administrative Review and New primarily, but not exclusively, destined Department preliminarily rescinded the Shipper Reviews, 74 FR 8774 (February for non-fresh use; or (b) garlic that has administrative review with respect to 26, 2009). been specially prepared and cultivated the following three companies: On March 18, the Department issued prior to planting and then harvested and Farmlady Trading Co., Ltd. (Jinan a memorandum proposing, and inviting otherwise prepared for use as seed. The Farmlady), Tiantaixing Foods interested parties to comment in their subject merchandise is used principally Co., Ltd. (Qingdao Tiantaixing), and case briefs on, revised assessment and as a food product and for seasoning. The Qingdao Xintianfeng Foods Co., Ltd. cash deposit methodologies with respect subject garlic is currently classifiable (Qingdao Xintianfeng). Jinan Farmlady, to the separate rate companies and PRC- under subheadings 0703.20.0010, Qingdao Tiantaixing, and Qingdao wide entity in these reviews. See Letter 0703.20.0020, 0703.20.0090, Xintianfeng reported that they had no to All Interested Parties Re: The 2006/ 0710.80.7060, 0710.80.9750, shipments of subject merchandise to the 2007 Administrative Review of Garlic 0711.90.6000, and 2005.90.9700 of the United States during the POR. See from the People’s Republic of China Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 74465. As (March 18, 2009) (Per Unit United States (HTSUS). Although the we stated in the Preliminary Results, our Memorandum). HTSUS subheadings are provided for examination of shipment data from CBP The Department conducted convenience and customs purposes, our for the three no-shipment companies verification of the AR and NSR written description of the scope of this confirmed that there were no entries of respondents from March 2 through order is dispositive. In order to be subject merchandise which they March 14. On April 20 and 21, the excluded from the Order, garlic entered exported during the POR. Id. We also Department issued its verification under the HTSUS subheadings listed received no comments or information to reports. On April 21, the Department above that is (1) mechanically harvested change our preliminary rescission. notified parties that case briefs were due and primarily, but not exclusively, Therefore, we are rescinding this April 28. In response to requests filed by destined for non-fresh use or (2) administrative review with respect to all the AR and NSR respondents and specially prepared and cultivated prior three aforementioned companies. Petitioners on April 23 and 24, to planting and then harvested and respectively, the Department extended Final Rescission of New Shipper otherwise prepared for use as seed must Review With Respect to Anqiu Haoshun the deadlines for case briefs to May 1. be accompanied by declarations to CBP On April 29, Chenhe submitted a case to that effect. In the Preliminary Results, the brief. On May 1, 2009, Petitioners, Department preliminarily rescinded Yuanli Trading Co. Ltd. Analysis of Comments Received Haoshun’s new shipper review. See (Yuanli), Ningjin Ruifeng Foodstuff Co., Issues raised in the case and rebuttal Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 74465. Ltd. (Ningjin Ruifeng), as well as briefs by parties to this proceeding and Based on our analysis of arguments Shennong Foodstuff Co., Ltd. to which we have responded are listed made by the parties, the Department (Weifang Shennong), Anqiu Friend in Appendix 1 to this notice and will not change its preliminary Food Co. Ltd. (Anqiu Friend), and addressed in the Issues and Decision rescission. Therefore, we are rescinding Anqiu Haoshun Trade Co., Ltd. Memorandum (Issues and Decision this new shipper review with respect to (Haoshun) (collectively, WAA), Memorandum), which is hereby Haoshun. (See ‘‘Bona Fides Analysis’’ submitted case briefs. After reviewing adopted by this notice.1 Parties can find section below; Comment 10 of the the case briefs, the Department a complete discussion of the issues accompanying Issues and Decision instructed WAA to re-file their case raised in these AR and NSRs and the Memorandum; and the memorandum briefs because they contained untimely corresponding recommendations in this from Scott Lindsay to Barbara Tillman, new factual information. WAA filed the public memorandum, which is on file in Final Results of Antidumping Duty New final versions of their redacted case the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room Shipper Review of Fresh Garlic from the briefs on May 7. On May 6 and May 8, 1117 of the main Department building. People’s Republic of China: Bona Fide Yuanli, Petitioners, and WAA submitted Analysis of Anqiu Haoshun Trade Co., rebuttal briefs. On May 28, the 1 In addition, due to the proprietary nature of Ltd.’s Sale (June 8, 2009) (Haoshun Department instructed Yuanli to re-file much of the information involved in company- Final Bona Fide Memorandum), and specific discussions, the Department has found it its case brief and Petitioners to re-file necessary to address certain issues in separate Haoshun Comments Memorandum.) their rebuttal brief because they memoranda. See Antidumping Duty New Shipper Bona Fides Analysis contained untimely new factual Review of Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China (PRC): Bona Fides Comments As noted in the Preliminary Results, information. Yuanli and Petitioners re- Memorandum for Ningjin Ruifeng Foodstuff Co., filed their case and rebuttal briefs, Ltd. (Ningjin Ruifeng Comments Memorandum), while conducting a review, particularly respectively, on May 29. Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Fresh a review where a company’s margin Garlic from the People’s Republic of China (PRC): would be based on a single sale, the Scope of the Order Bona Fides Comments Memorandum for Anqiu Department examines price, quantity, Haoshun Foodstuff Co., Ltd. (Haoshun Comments The products covered by this Order Memorandum), and the three company-specific and other circumstances associated with are all grades of garlic, whole or memoranda referenced in the ‘‘Bona Fides the sale under review, and must separated into constituent cloves, Analysis’’ section below. determine if the sale was based on

VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES 29176 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 117 / Friday, June 19, 2009 / Notices

normal commercial considerations and determinations, see the Issues and With respect to the surrogate value for presents an accurate representation of Decision Memorandum at Comment 10, paper labels, information on the record the company’s normal business Haoshun Final Bona Fide indicates that the paper labels used by practices. If the Department determines Memorandum, Haoshun Comments respondents appear to be a self-adhesive that the price was not based on normal Memorandum, Final Results of rectangular sheet, similar to the commercial considerations or is atypical Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review description of the Indian HTS of the respondent’s normal business of Fresh Garlic from the People’s #4811.41.00. Thus, in accordance with practices, including other sales of Republic of China: Bona Fide Analysis our surrogate value selection criteria, comparable merchandise, the sale may of Ningjin Ruifeng Foodstuff Co., Ltd.’s the Department finds that in this case be considered non-bona fide. Sale (June 8, 2009), Ningjin Ruifeng the Indian HTS #4811.41.00 represents In the Preliminary Results, the Comments Memorandum, and Yuanli the best surrogate value based on the Department preliminarily concluded Final Bona Fide Memorandum, for that the single sale made by Haoshun details of the proprietary data that available information on the record and during the POR was a not a bona fide support the decisions contained herein. we have changed our surrogate value commercial transaction and calculations accordingly. See Issues and preliminarily rescinded the NSR with Changes Since the Preliminary Results Decision Memorandum at Comment 6. respect to Haoshun. In addition, the Based on a review of the record as See also Final Surrogate Values Department preliminarily found the well as comments received from parties Memorandum. sales made by Yuanli and Ningjin regarding our Preliminary Results, we Lastly, following the methodologies Ruifeng to be bona fide commercial have made revisions to the margin established in the aforementioned Per- transactions. Petitioners, Respondents, calculations for Anqiu Friend, Weifang Unit Memorandum and consistent with Shennong, and Yuanli. Specifically, the Yuanli, and Ningjin Ruifeng have the Department’s practice, we are Department will use an average of the submitted extensive arguments calculating per-unit cash deposit and regarding the Department’s preliminary financial ratios of ADF Foods Ltd. assessment rates for the separate rate bona fides analyses of Haoshun’s, (ADF); Tata Tea Ltd. (Tata Tea); and companies and companies that are part Yuanli’s and Ningjin Ruifeng’s new Limtex to value the factory overhead shipper sales. In addition, these parties (FOH), selling, general & administrative of the PRC-wide entity. See Per-Unit have submitted arguments as to whether (SG&A) expenses, and profit used to Memorandum, Final Results of the the Department should rescind each calculate NV. (See 19 CFR Administrative Review of Fresh Garlic company’s NSR in these final results. 351.408(c)(4).) We note that using an from the People’s Republic of China: Most of the parties’ arguments are based average of three Indian processors’ data Separate Rate Companies and PRC- on information which is business will allow us to calculate financial Wide Entity—Per-Unit Assessment Rates proprietary. Thus, the parties’ ratios that better reflect the broader (June 8, 2009), and Issues and Decision comments are fully discussed in the experience of the surrogate industry. Memorandum at Comment 8. See also Haoshun Comments Memorandum, Moreover, as ADF’s and Tata Tea’s Honey from the People’s Republic of Ningjin Ruifeng Comments production processes are more China: Final Results and Rescission, In Memorandum, and Final Results of comparable to that of peeled garlic, Part, of Aligned Antidumping Duty Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review which comprises an increasing share of Administrative Review and New of Fresh Garlic from the People’s all PRC garlic imports, and Limtex’s Shipper Review, 73 FR 42321 (July 21, Republic of China: Bona Fide Analysis production process is comparable to 2008). of Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading Co. Ltd’s that of non-processed whole garlic Sale (June 8, 2009) (Yuanli Final Bona bulbs, which continue to comprise a Final Results of Reviews Fide Memorandum). large share of PRC garlic imports Based on the totality of the nonetheless, the resulting financial As a result of our reviews, we circumstances as discussed in the ratios will be a better surrogate for the determine that the following margins memoranda addressing bona fides garlic industry in the PRC as a whole. exist for the period November 1, 2006 issues, for these final results, the See Issues and Decision Memorandum through October 31, 2007: Department continues to find the price at Comment 3. See also Administrative and quantity of Haoshun’s single POR Review and New Shipper Review of Weight- Manufacturer/Exporter Averaged mar- sale to be unreasonable and atypical, Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic gin (percent) and therefore find the sale to be not of China: Surrogate Values for the Final bona fide. Thus, the Department has Results (Final Surrogate Values Fresh Garlic from the PRC 2006–2007 rescinded the NSR with respect to Memorandum). Administrative Review Haoshun. In addition, we determine that As a result of the revisions made to the new shipper sale made by Ningjin Anqiu Friend’s and Weifang Shennong’s Anqiu Friend Food Co., Ltd. 64.78 was not a bona fide commercial company-specific margins, the margin Weifang Shennong Foodstuff transaction because Ningjin failed to calculated for the four separate rate Co., Ltd ...... 80.69 establish payment terms while companies, Jinxiang Dongyun Freezing Jinxiang Dongyun Freezing negotiating its U.S. sale, the quantity of Storage Co., Ltd. (Jinxiang Dongyun), Storage Co., Ltd ...... 72.74 garlic sold was unreasonably low, and Qingdao Saturn International Trade Co., Qingdao Saturn International there is other evidence that this Ltd. (Qingdao Saturn), Dongbao Trade Co., Ltd ...... 72.74 transaction may not have been made on Import & Export Trade Co., Ltd. (Qufu Qufu Dongbao Import & Ex- an arm’s-length basis. Thus, the Dongbao), and LJ International port Trade Co., Ltd ...... 72.74 Department has also rescinded the NSR Trading Co., Ltd. (Shanghai LJ), has also Shanghai LJ International Trading Co., Ltd ...... 72.74 changed. For all changes to the with respect to Ningjin. Finally, we PRC-wide Rate ...... continue to find that Yuanli’s sales was calculations for Anqiu Friend, Weifang (see Appendix 2) ...... 376.67 bona fide. Given the proprietary nature Shennong, and Yuanli, see the Issues of the underlying data used to formulate and Decision Memorandum and the the Department’s analysis and company-specific analysis memoranda.

VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 117 / Friday, June 19, 2009 / Notices 29177

Weight- determined to be part of the PRC-wide Notification to Importers Manufacturer/Exporter Averaged mar- entity, the Department employed the gin (percent) This notice serves as a final reminder methodology discussed above, except to importers of their responsibility Fresh Garlic from the PRC 2006–2007 New we calculated an AUV exclusive of under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a Shipper Review entries from the two mandatory certificate regarding the reimbursement respondents and the four separate rate of antidumping duties prior to Exported and Produced by companies, and then multiplied the liquidation of the relevant entries Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading AUV by the PRC-wide rate. during this review period. Failure to Co., Ltd ...... 120.18 comply with this requirement could Cash Deposit Requirements result in the Secretary’s presumption Disclosure Consistent with the final results of the that reimbursement of antidumping We will disclose the calculations used 12th NSR of Fresh Garlic from the PRC, duties occurred and the subsequent in our analysis to parties to these we have established and will collect a assessment of double antidumping proceedings within five days of the date per kilogram cash-deposit amount duties. of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR which will be the per-unit equivalent of Administrative Protective Orders 351.224(b). the company-specific dumping margin This notice also serves as a reminder published in the final results of these Assessment Rates to parties subject to administrative reviews. The following cash deposit Consistent with the final results of the protective orders (APO) of their requirements will be effective upon 12th NSR review of Fresh Garlic from responsibility concerning the return or the PRC, we will direct CBP to assess publication of the final results of these destruction of proprietary information importer-specific assessment rates based reviews for all shipments of the subject disclosed under APO in accordance on the resulting per-unit (i.e., per merchandise entered, or withdrawn with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues kilogram) amount on each entry of the from warehouse, for consumption on or to govern business proprietary subject merchandise during the POR. after the publication date of the final information in this segment of the See Fresh Garlic from the People’s results, as provided by section 751(a)(1) proceeding. Timely written notification Republic of China: Final Results and of the Act: (1) For subject merchandise of the return/destruction of APO Rescission, in Part, of Twelfth New exported by Anqiu Friend and exported materials or conversion to judicial Shipper Reviews, 73 FR 56550, 56552 by Weifang Shennong the cash deposit protective order is hereby requested. (September 29, 2008) (12th NSR of rates will be the per unit rates Failure to comply with the regulations Fresh Garlic from the PRC). Therefore, determined in the final results of the and terms of an APO is a violation the Department will determine, and CBP administrative review; (2) for subject which is subject to sanction. shall assess, antidumping duties on all merchandise produced and exported by These administrative and new shipper appropriate entries pursuant to section Yuanli, the cash deposit rates will be reviews and notice are issued and 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR the per unit rate determined in the final published in accordance with sections 351.212(b)(1). The Department will results of the new shipper review; (3) for 751(a)(1), 751(a)(2)(B), and 777(i) of the issue appropriate assessment subject merchandise exported by but not Act and 19 CFR 351.213 and 351.214. instructions directly to CBP 15 days produced by Yuanli, the cash deposit Dated: June 8, 2009. after publication of the final results of rate will be the PRC-wide rate; (4) for Carole Showers, this review. For assessment purposes, subject merchandise exported by we calculated importer-specific Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy Jinxiang Dongyun, Qingdao Saturn, and Negotiations. assessment rates for fresh garlic from the Qufu Dongbao, and Shanghai LJ, the PRC. Specifically, we divided the total cash deposit rates will be the per unit Appendix 1 dumping margins for each importer by rates determined in the final results of Comment 1: Intermediate Input the total quantity of subject the administrative review; (5) for Methodology. merchandise sold to that importer previously-investigated or previously- Comment 2: Garlic Bulb Surrogate during the POR to calculate a per-unit reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters Value. assessment amount. We will direct CBP who received a separate rate in a prior Comment 3: Surrogate Financial Ratios. to assess importer-specific assessment segment of the proceeding (which were Comment 4: Timing of Petitioners’ rates based on the resulting per-unit not reviewed in this segment of the Surrogate Value Submission. (i.e., per kilogram) amount on each proceeding), the cash deposit rate will Comment 5: Water Valuation. entry of the subject merchandise during continue to be the rate assigned in that Comment 6: Paper Label Valuation. the POR if any importer-specific Comment 7: Yield Factor Valuation. assessment rate calculated in the final segment of the proceeding; (6) for subject merchandise exported by Comment 8: Per Unit Assessment. results of this review is above de Comment 9: Anqiu Friend’s Affiliations. Haoshun, Ningjin, Chenhe, Greening minimis. Comment 10: Bona Fides of New and all other PRC exporters of subject Moreover, as noted above, the Shipper Companies. Department is calculating per-unit cash merchandise that have not been found Comment 11: Rescission of Chenhe and deposit and assessment rates for to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash Greening. separate rate companies and companies deposit rate will be the per-unit PRC- that are part of the PRC-wide entity. wide rate; and (7) the cash deposit rate Appendix 2 Using CBP data, we totaled the quantity for non-PRC exporters of subject The following companies subject to and value of the entries made by the merchandise which have not received this antidumping duty administrative four separate rate companies to derive a their own rate will be the rate applicable review did not apply for a separate rate weighted average unit value (AUV), to the PRC exporter that supplied that and thus have been assigned the PRC- which we then multiplied by the non-PRC exporter. These requirements, wide rate for their imports of subject separate rate to calculate a per-unit when imposed, shall remain in effect merchandise during the POR. assessment amount. For companies until further notice. 1. APS Qingdao.

VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES 29178 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 117 / Friday, June 19, 2009 / Notices

2. American Pioneer Shipping. rescinding this administrative review day deadline for submission of such 3. Jim International Food Co., with respect to two companies and certifications as detailed in the Ltd. intends to rescind the review with Initiation Notice. On March 16, 2009, 4. Burgeon International Inc. respect to a third company. the Department determined that it was 5. Fujian Meitan Import & Export EFFECTIVE DATES: June 19, 2009. not practicable to examine individually Corporation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: all of the companies covered by the 6. Meiya Foods Co., Ltd. David Cordell or Robert James, AD/CVD 2007–2008 administrative review. The 7. Jining Trans-High Trading Co., Ltd. Operations, Office 7, Import Department stated it was limiting its 8. Jinxian County Huaguang Food Administration, International Trade examination to the largest producers/ Import & Export Co., Ltd. Administration, U.S. Department of exporters that could reasonably be 9. Junan Auto Imp and Exp Co., Ltd. Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution reviewed, pursuant to section 10. Futai Foodstuff Co., Ltd. Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; 777A(c)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 11. Marnex (HongKong) Company. telephone: (202) 482–0408 or (202) 482– as amended (the Tariff Act). The 12. New Future International Trading 0649 respectively. Department selected Huatian and True Co. Potential as the two respondents SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 13. Omni Decor China Ltd. required to submit a full questionnaire 14. Qingdao Rock-It Sports Inc. Background response in the administrative review. See memorandum titled ‘‘Respondent 15. Sea Trade International On December 1, 2008, the Department Selection Memorandum: Antidumping Incorporated. published in the Federal Register its Duty Administrative Review of Hand 16. Shandong Chengshun Farm Produce notice of opportunity to request an Trucks and Parts Thereof from the Trading Co., Ltd. administrative review of the People’s Republic of China’’ dated 17. Shandong Chenhe Int’l Trading Co., antidumping duty order on hand trucks March 16, 2009. Ltd. and certain parts thereof from the 18. Shandong Dongsheng Eastsun Foods Huatian and True Potential filed their People’s Republic of China. See section A responses on April 13, 2009 Co., Ltd. Antidumping or Countervailing Duty 19. Shandong Garlic Company. and their section C and D responses on Order, Finding, or Suspended April 28, 2009. On May 1, 2009, 20. Shanghai New Long March Investigation; Opportunity to Request International Trade Co., Ltd. pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Administrative Review, 73 FR 72764 petitioners withdrew their requests for 21. Shenzhen Greening Trading Co., (December 1, 2008). On December 30, Ltd. review of Huatian and True Potential 2008, in accordance with 19 CFR but did not withdraw the request with 22. Shenzhen Imp & Exp. Ltd. 351.213(b)(1), petitioners requested that 23. T&S International, LLC. respect to Since Hardware and New-Tec the Department conduct an On March 4, 2009, New-Tec provided 24. Taiwan Wachine Co., Ltd. administrative review for the following certification that New-Tec did not ship 25. Taizhou Overseas Int’l Ltd. exporters of the subject merchandise: to the United States any subject [FR Doc. E9–14358 Filed 6–18–09; 8:45 am] Qingdao Huatian Hand Truck Co., Ltd. merchandise during the POR and BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P (Huatian); True Potential Co., Ltd. (True requested the Department rescind the Potential); Since Hardware () review with respect to New-Tec. On Co., Ltd. (Since Hardware); and New- April 21, 2009, the Department’s no DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Tec Integration (Xiamen) Co., Ltd. (New- shipments inquiry with respect to New- Tec). Tec was posted by CBP. See message International Trade Administration On February 2, 2009, the Department number 9120201 dated April 21, 2009. (A–570–891) published in the Federal Register a The Department has received no notice of the initiation of the information from that inquiry, and has Notice of Partial Rescission, Intent To antidumping duty administrative review found no evidence of shipments of Rescind and Extension of Preliminary of hand trucks from the PRC for the subject merchandise to the United Results of Antidumping Duty period December 1, 2007, through States by New-Tec of subject Administrative Review: Hand Trucks November 30, 2008, with respect to the merchandise during the POR. and Certain Parts Thereof From the four companies named above. See Rescission of Review People’s Republic of China Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Section 351.213(d)(1) of the AGENCY: Import Administration, Reviews and Request for Revocation in Department’s regulations provide that International Trade Administration, Part, 74 FR 5821 (February 2, 2009) the Department will rescind an Department of Commerce (Initiation Notice). administrative review if the party that SUMMARY: In response to requests from On February 19, 2009, the Department requested the review withdraws its Gleason Industrial Products, Inc., and issued a memorandum indicating its request for review within 90 days of the Precision Products, Inc. (collectively, intention to select mandatory date of publication of the notice of petitioners), the U.S. Department of respondents based upon U.S. Customs initiation of the requested review, or Commerce (the Department) initiated an and Border Protection data for U.S. withdraws at a later date if the administrative review of the imports of hand trucks from the PRC Department determines that it is antidumping duty order on hand trucks during the POR. On February 13, 2009 reasonable to extend the time limit for and certain parts thereof from the petitioners provided comments to the withdrawing the request. The People’s Republic of China for the Department in which they requested Department initiated the administrative companies listed below for the period that the Department select Huatian and review of the antidumping duty order December 1, 2007, through November True Potential as mandatory on February 2, 2009. Petitioners 30, 2008. No other interested party respondents. On March 4, 2009, Huatian withdrew their request for review of requested a review for this period of and True Potential both provided the Huatian and True Potential on May 1, review. For the reasons discussed Department with separate rate 2009. As the party that requested this below, the Department is partially certifications, thereby meeting the 30- review has timely withdrawn the

VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES