Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2022 / Notices 2127 

1See Raw Honey From the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of 

Final Determination, and Extension of Provisional 

Measures, 86 FR 66526 (November 23, 2021) 

(Preliminary Determination). 

2See Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Less-Than-Fair-Value 

Investigation of Raw Honey from the Socialist 

Republic of Vietnam—Petitioners’ Allegation of 

Critical Circumstances,’’ dated December 3, 2021 

(Petitioners’ Allegation). 

3See 19 CFR 351.206(c)(2)(ii). 

4See Notice of Amended Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping 

Duty Order; Honey From the People’s Republic of 

China, 66 FR63670 (December 10, 2001); see also 

Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Honey from 

Argentina, 66 FR 63672 (December 10, 2001); 

Notice of Countervailing Duty Order: Honey from 

Argentina, 66 FR 63673 (December 10, 2001); and 

Honey from the People’s Republic of China: Final 

Results of the Expedited Third Sunset Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order, 83 FR 10432 (March 9, 

2018). 

hard of hearing may also follow the 

proceedings by first calling the Federal 

Relay Service at 1–800–877–8339 and 

providing the Service with the 

conference details found through 

registering at the web link above. To 

request additional accommodations, 

please email ero@usccr.gov at least ten 

(10) days prior to the meeting. 

Members of the public are also 

entitled to submit written comments; 

the comments must be received in the 

regional office within 30 days following 

the meeting. Written comments may be 

emailed to Sarah Villanueva at 

svillanueva@usccr.gov. Persons who 

desire additional information may 

contact the Regional Programs Unit at 

(312) 353–8311. 

Records generated from this meeting 

may be inspected and reproduced at the 

Regional Programs Coordination Unit 

Office, as they become available, both 

before and after the meeting. Records of 

the meeting will be available via 

www.facadatabase.gov under the 

Commission on Civil Rights, South 

Carolina Advisory Committee link. 

Persons interested in the work of this 

Committee are directed to the 

Commission’s website, http://

www.usccr.gov, or may contact the 

Regional Programs Coordination Unit at 

the above email or street address. 

Agenda 

I. Roll Call 

II. Opening Statement 

III. Briefing 

IV. Public Comment 

V. Next Steps 

VI. Adjournment 

Dated: January 7, 2022. 

David Mussatt, 

Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit. 

[FR Doc. 2022–00493 Filed 1–12–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–552–833] 

Raw Honey From the Socialist 

Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary 

Affirmative Determination of Critical 

Circumstances in the Less-Than-FairValue Investigation 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) preliminarily determines 

that critical circumstances exist 

regarding all imports of raw honey from 

the Socialist Republic of Vietnam 

(Vietnam). 

DATES: Applicable January 13, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jonathan Hill or Paola Aleman Ordaz, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3518 or 

(202) 482–4031, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On November 23, 2021, Commerce 

published its preliminary determination 

in the less-than-fair-value investigation 

of raw honey from Vietnam.1 On 

December 3, 2021, the American Honey 

Producers Association and the Sioux 

Honey Association (collectively, the 

petitioners) filed a timely critical 

circumstances allegation, pursuant to 

section 703(e)(1) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended, (the Act) and 19 CFR 

351.206, alleging that critical 

circumstances exist with respect to 

imports of raw honey from Vietnam.2

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.206(c)(1), when a critical 

circumstances allegation is filed 30 days 

or more before the scheduled date of the 

final determination, Commerce will 

issue a preliminary finding whether 

there is a reasonable basis to believe or 

suspect that critical circumstances exist. 

Because the critical circumstances 

allegation in this case was submitted 

after the preliminary determination was 

published, Commerce must issue its 

preliminary findings of critical 

circumstances no later than 30 days 

after the allegation was filed.3

Legal Framework 

Section 733(e)(1) of the Act provides 

that Commerce, upon receipt of a timely 

allegation of critical circumstances, will 

determine whether there is a reasonable 

basis to believe or suspect that: (A)(i) 

There is a history of dumping and 

material injury by reason of dumped 

imports in the United States or 

elsewhere of the subject merchandise, or 

(ii) the person by whom, or for whose 

account, the merchandise was imported 

knew or should have known that the 

exporter was selling the subject 

merchandise at less than its fair value 

and that there was likely to be material 

injury by reason of such sales; and (B) 

there have been massive imports of the 

subject merchandise over a relatively 

short period. 

Further, 19 CFR 351.206(h)(1) 

provides that, in determining whether 

imports of the subject merchandise have 

been ‘‘massive,’’ Commerce normally 

will examine: (i) The volume and value 

of the imports; (ii) seasonal trends; and 

(iii) the share of domestic consumption 

accounted for by the imports. In 

addition, 19 CFR 351.206(h)(2) provides 

that, ‘‘{i}n general, unless the imports 

during the ‘relatively short period’ . . . 

have increased by at least 15 percent 

over the imports during an immediately 

preceding period of comparable 

duration, the Secretary will not consider 

the imports massive.’’ Section 351.206(i) 

of Commerce’s regulations defines 

‘‘relatively short period’’ generally as 

the period starting on the date the 

proceeding begins (i.e., the date the 

petition is filed) and ending at least 

three months later. This section of the 

regulations further provides that, if 

Commerce ‘‘finds that importers, or 

exporters or producers, had reason to 

believe, at some time prior to the 

beginning of the proceeding, that a 

proceeding was likely,’’ then Commerce 

may consider a period of not less than 

three months from that earlier time. 

Critical Circumstances Allegation 

In its allegation, the petitioners claim 

there is a history of dumping and 

material injury based on Commerce’s 

issuance of the antidumping duty orders 

on honey from the People’s Republic of 

China (China) and Argentina, the 

countervailing duty order on honey 

from Argentina, and the final results of 

its expedited third sunset review of the 

antidumping duty order on honey from 

China (which remains in place today).4

Additionally, the petitioners claim that 

although the scope for the previously 

mentioned orders was broader as each 

covered processed honey, the scope of 

the orders did also cover raw honey 

which is subject to the scope of the 

instant investigation. Finally, the 

petitioners contend that although the 

antidumping and countervailing duty 

orders on honey from Argentina were 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
2128 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2022 / Notices 

5See Honey from Argentina; Final Results of 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Changed 

Circumstances reviews; Revocation of Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Orders, 77 FR 77029 

(December 31, 2012). 

6See, e.g., Final Determination of Sales at Less 

Than Fair Value and Affirmative Determination of 

Critical Circumstances: Small Diameter Graphite 

Electrodes from the People’s Republic of China, 74 

FR 2049 (January 14, 2009), and accompanying 

Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM) at 42–44 

(acknowledging that the existence of dumping 

margins in excess of 25 percent can indicate 

importers’ knowledge of dumping and the 

likelihood of resultant material injury); see also 

Certain Uncoated Paper From Australia: 

Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value, Negative Preliminary Determination of 

Critical Circumstances, and Postponement of Final 

Determination, 80 FR 51783 (August 26, 2015), and 

accompanying IDM at 15 (stating that the 

‘‘Department normally considers margins of 25 

percent or more for EP sales and 15 percent or more 

for CEP sales sufficient to impute importer 

knowledge of sales at LTFV.’’); and Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 

Negative Critical Circumstances Determination: 

Bottom Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers 

from the Republic of Korea, 77 FR 17413 (March 26, 

2012), and accompanying IDM at the ‘‘Critical 

Circumstances’’ Section (‘‘The final dumping 

margin calculated for LG exceeds the threshold 

sufficient to impute knowledge of dumping (i.e., 15 

percent for CEP sales, which are the majority of the 

sales on which the calculation is based).’’). 

7See Raw Honey from Argentina, Brazil, India, 

Ukraine, and Vietnam, Investigation Nos. 731–TA– 

1560–1564 (Preliminary), 86 FR 30980 (June 10, 

2021) (ITC Preliminary Determination). 

8See Petitioners’ Allegation at Attachment 1. 

9See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final 

Determination of Critical Circumstances: Circular 

Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People’s 

Republic of China, 73 FR 31970, 31972–73 (June 5, 

2008); and Final Determination of Sales at Less 

Than Fair Value and Affirmative Determination of 

Critical Circumstances: Small Diameter Graphite 

Electrodes from the People’s Republic of China, 74 

FR 2049, 2052–53 (January 14, 2009) (Graphite 

Electrodes). 

10See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final 

Determination of Critical Circumstances: Circular 

Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People’s 

Republic of China, 73 FR 31970, 31972–73 (June 5, 

2008); and Final Determination of Sales at Less 

Than Fair Value and Affirmative Determination of 

Critical Circumstances: Small Diameter Graphite 

Electrodes from the People’s Republic of China, 74 

FR 2049, 2052–53 (January 14, 2009). 

11See, e.g., Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duty Investigations of Corrosion-Resistant Steel 

Products from India, Italy, the People’s Republic of 

China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: 

Preliminary Determinations of Critical 

Circumstances, 80 FR 68504 (November 5, 2015) 

(CORE Critical Circumstances Prelim); Certain 

Corrosion Resistant Steel Products from India: Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 

Final Negative Determination of Critical 

Circumstances, 81 FR 35329 (June 2, 2016) (CORE 

India Final); Certain Corrosion Resistant Steel 

Products from Italy: Final Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value and Final Affirmative 

Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part, 81 

FR 35320 (June 2, 2016) (CORE Italy Final); Certain 

Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the 

Republic of Korea: Final Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value and Final Affirmative 

Determination of Critical Circumstances, 81 FR 

35303 (June 2, 2016) (CORE Korea Final); Certain 

Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the 

People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Affirmative 

Critical Circumstances Determination, in Part, 81 

FR 35316 (June 2, 2016); Certain CorrosionResistant Steel Products from Taiwan: Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 

Final Affirmative Determination of Critical 

Circumstances, in Part, 81 FR 35313 (June 2, 2016) 

(CORE Taiwan Final); Countervailing Duty 

Investigation of Certain Corrosion Resistant Steel 

Products from the People’s Republic of China: Final 

Affirmative Determination, and Final Affirmative 

Critical Circumstances Determination, in Part, 81 

FR 35308 (June 2, 2016) (CORE China CVD Final); 

Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain 

Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan: 

Final Negative Countervailing Duty Determination, 

81 FR 35299 (June 2, 2016) (CORE Taiwan CVD 

Final); Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain 

Corrosion Resistant Steel Products from Italy: Final 

Affirmative Determination and Final Affirmative 

Critical Circumstances, in Part, 81 FR 35326 (June 

2, 2016) (CORE Italy CVD Final); Countervailing 

Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant 

Steel Products from the Republic of Korea: Final 

Affirmative Determination, and Final Affirmative 

Critical Circumstances Determination, in Part, 81 

FR 35310 (June 2, 2016) (CORE Korea CVD Final); 

Notice of Preliminary Determinations of Critical 

Circumstances: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel 

Flat Products from Australia, the People’s Republic 

of China, India, the Republic of Korea, the 

Netherlands, and the Russian Federation, 67 FR 

19157, 19158 (April 18, 2002), unchanged in Notice 

of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 

Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 

Products from Australia, 67 FR 47509 (July 19, 

2002); Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon 

Steel Flat Products from the People’s Republic of 

China, 67 FR 62107 (October 3, 2002); Notice of 

Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 

revoked in December 2021, the fact that 

the orders were in effect for over a 

decade demonstrates a history of 

dumping and material injury.5

Furthermore, the petitioners state that 

based on the dumping margins assigned 

by Commerce upon initiating its 

investigation and the Preliminary 

Determination (i.e., 47.56–138.23 and 

410.93–413.99 percent, respectively), 

importers knew or should have known 

that imports of raw honey from Vietnam 

was being sold at less than fair value 

(LTFV) and there was likely material 

injury. The petitioners further state that 

these margins exceed the 25 and 15 

percent thresholds established for 

export price (EP) and constructed export 

price (CEP), respectively.6 Additionally, 

the petitioners also contend that the 

U.S. International Trade Commission 

affirmative determination that there is a 

reasonable indication that an industry 

in the United States is materially 

injured by reason of imports of raw 

honey from Argentina, Brazil, India, 

Vietnam, and Ukraine is sufficient to 

impute knowledge of the likelihood of 

material injury.7

Finally, as part of their allegation and 

pursuant to 19 CFR 351.206(h)(2), the 

petitioners submitted import statistics 

for the HTS numbers included in the 

scope for the period between December 

2020 and September 2021 as evidence of 

massive imports of raw honey from 

Vietnam during a relatively short 

period.8

Analysis 

Commerce’s normal practice in 

determining whether critical 

circumstances exist pursuant to the 

statutory criteria has been to examine 

evidence available to Commerce, such 

as: (1) The evidence presented in the 

petitioners’ allegation; (2) import 

statistics released by the International 

Trade Commission (ITC); and (3) 

shipment information submitted to 

Commerce by the respondents selected 

for individual examination.9 Therefore, 

as further provided below, in 

determining whether the above statutory 

criteria have been satisfied in this case, 

we have examined: (1) The evidence 

presented in Petitioners’ Allegation; (2) 

information obtained since the initiation 

of this investigation; and (3) the ITC’s 

preliminary injury determination. 

Section 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the Act: 

History of Dumping and Material Injury 

by Reason of Dumped Imports in the 

United States or Elsewhere of the 

Subject Merchandise 

In determining whether there is a 

history of dumping pursuant to section 

733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, Commerce 

generally considers current or previous 

antidumping duty (AD) orders on 

subject merchandise from the country in 

question in the United States and 

current AD orders imposed by another 

country with regard to imports of the 

same merchandise.10 While the 

petitioners identified such proceedings 

with respect to Argentine and Chinese 

honey, the petitioners did not identify, 

nor are is Commerce aware of, an AD 

order in any country on raw honey from 

Vietnam, and there has been no 

previous U.S. AD order on raw honey 

from Vietnam. Therefore, Commerce 

preliminarily finds that there is no 

history of dumping of the subject 

merchandise; thus, this criterion is not 

met. 

Section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii): The Importer 

Knew or Should Have Known That the 

Exporter Was Selling at Less Than Fair 

Value and That There Was Likely To Be 

Material Injury 

In determining whether importers 

knew or should have known that 

exporters were selling the subject 

merchandise at LTFV pursuant section 

733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act, we typically 

consider the magnitude of dumping 

margins, including dumping margins 

alleged in the petition.11 Commerce has 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2022 / Notices 2129 

Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 

Products from India, 67 FR 47518 (July 19, 2002); 

Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 

Products from Korea, 67 FR 62124 (October 3, 

2002); Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value and Critical Circumstances: 

Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products 

from the Netherlands, 67 FR 62112 (October 3, 

2002); and Notice of the Final Determination Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value and Critical Circumstances: 

Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products 

from the Russian Federation, 67 FR 62121 (October 

3, 2002). 

12 Id.; see also Preliminary Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cut-to-Length 

Carbon Steel Plate from the People’s Republic of 

China, 62 FR 31972, 31978 (June 11, 1997), 

unchanged in Final Determination of Sales at Less 

Than Fair Value: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon 

Steel Plate from the People’s Republic of China, 62 

FR 61964 (November 20, 1997); and Notice of 

Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value, Negative Preliminary Determination of 

Critical Circumstances and Postponement of Final 

Determination: Certain Frozen and Canned 

Warmwater Shrimp from the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam, 69 FR 42672 (July 16, 2004), unchanged 

in Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 

Value: Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater 

Shrimp from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 69 

FR 71005 (December 8, 2004). 

13See Preliminary Determination; see also 

Memorandum, ‘‘Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation 

of Raw Honey from the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam: Calculation of the Dumping Margin for 

Respondents Not Selected for Individual 

Examination,’’ dated November 17, 2021. 

14See, e.g., Certain Potassium Phosphate Salts 

from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary 

Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances 

in the Antidumping Duty Investigation, 75 FR 

24572, 24573 (May 5, 2010), unchanged in Certain 

Potassium Phosphate Salts from the People’s 

Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value and Termination of Critical 

Circumstances Inquiry, 75 FR 30377 (June 1, 2010). 

15See ITC Preliminary Determination. 

16See 19 CFR 351.206(i). 

17See, e.g., Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire 

Strand from Indonesia: Preliminary Affirmative 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 

Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Critical 

Circumstances, in Part, Postponement of Final 

Determination, and Extension of Provisional 

Measures, 85 FR 73676 (November 19, 2020). and 

accompanying PDM; and Notice of Preliminary 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 

Postponement of Final Determination, and 

Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Critical 

Circumstances: Certain Frozen and Canned 

Warmwater Shrimp from India, 69 FR 76916 

(December 23, 2004). 

18 Id. 

19See, e.g., Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, 

Whether or Not Assembled into Modules from the 

People’s Republic of China: Preliminary 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 

Postponement of Final Determination, and 

Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Critical 

Circumstances, 77 FR 31309, 31312 (May 25, 2012). 

20See Memorandum, ‘‘Antidumping Duty 

Investigation of Raw Honey from Argentina: 

Preliminary Critical Circumstances Surge 

Analysis,’’ dated November 17, 2021 (Critical 

Circumstances Memo). 

21See CORE Critical Circumstances Prelim; see 

also CORE India Final; CORE Italy Final; CORE 

Korea Final; CORE China Final; CORE Taiwan 

Final; CORE China CVD Final; CORE Taiwan CVD 

Final; CORE Italy CVD Final; and CORE Korea CVD 

Final. Commerce notes that it preliminarily 

determined that the ‘‘Vietnam-wide entity’’ was a 

cooperating entity. See Preliminary Determination. 

found dumping margins of 15 percent or 

more (for CEP sales) to 25 percent or 

more (EP sales) to be sufficient for this 

purpose.12 For purposes of this 

investigation, Commerce preliminarily 

determines that for Ban Me Thuot 

Honey Bee Joint Stock Company (Ban 

Me Thuot), Dak Lak Honey Bee Joint 

Stock Company (DakHoney), eligible 

separate rate respondent companies in 

Vietnam, and ‘‘Vietnam-wide entity,’’ 

the preliminary dumping margins 

exceed the 25 percent threshold for EP 

sales and, therefore, Commerce further 

preliminarily determines that the 

knowledge standard has been met based 

on the magnitude of the dumping 

margins.13

In determining whether an importer 

knew or should have known that there 

was likely to be material injury caused 

by reason of such imports, Commerce 

normally will look to the preliminary 

injury determination of the ITC.14 If the 

ITC finds a reasonable indication of 

present material injury (rather than the 

threat of injury) to the relevant U.S. 

industry, Commerce will determine that 

a reasonable basis exists to impute 

importer knowledge that material injury 

is likely by reason of such imports. 

Here, the ITC found that there is a 

‘‘reasonable indication’’ of material 

injury to the domestic industry because 

of the imported subject merchandise 

from Vietnam.15 Therefore, the ITC’s 

preliminary injury determination is 

sufficient to impute knowledge to 

importers of the likelihood of material 

injury. Thus, Commerce preliminarily 

determines that importers knew, or 

should have known, that there was 

likely to be material injury caused by 

reason of such imports, pursuant to 

section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act. 

Section 733(e)(1)(B): Whether There 

Have Been Massive Imports of the 

Subject Merchandise Over a Relatively 

Short Period 

Pursuant to section 733(e)(1)(B) of the 

Act, as well as 19 CFR 351.206(h), 

Commerce will not consider imports to 

be massive unless imports during a 

relatively short period (comparison 

period) have increased by at least 15 

percent over imports in an immediately 

preceding period of comparable 

duration (base period). As noted above, 

the ‘‘relatively short period’’ that we 

examine to determine whether there 

have been massive imports normally 

begins on the date the petition is filed 

and ends at least three months later. 

Furthermore, Commerce may consider 

the comparison period to begin at an 

earlier time if it finds that importers, 

exporters, or foreign producers had a 

reason to believe that proceedings were 

likely before the petition was filed.16

However, Commerce has previously 

considered a ‘‘relatively short period’’ 

beginning with the filing of the petition 

and ending with the preliminary 

determination.17

We typically compare this period (the 

comparison period) to a period of equal 

duration immediately prior to the filing 

of the petition (the base period) to 

determine whether imports have been 

‘‘massive’’ over a relatively short period 

of time.18 Commerce typically 

determines whether or not to include 

the month in which the petition was 

filed in the base or comparison period 

depending on whether the petition was 

filed in the first half of the month 

(included in the comparison period) or 

the second half of the month (included 

in the base period).19 In the instant 

investigation, since the petition was 

filed on April 21, 2021, we included 

April in the base period. Therefore, we 

compared the quantity of Ban Me 

Thuot’s and DakHoney’s shipments of 

subject merchandise to the United 

States during the period October 2020 

through April 2021 to the quantity of its 

shipments of subject merchandise to the 

United States from May 2021 through 

November 2021 to determine whether 

imports have been massive. This 

comparison shows that imports over the 

comparison period have been massive 

(there has been an increase of 15 percent 

or more) for Ban Me Thuot and 

DakHoney. Accordingly, we 

preliminarily find that there were 

massive imports of subject merchandise 

from Ban Me Thuot and DakHoney into 

the United States over a relatively short 

period pursuant to section 773(e)(1)(B) 

of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206(h).20

To determine whether there have 

been massive imports of subject 

merchandise into the United States over 

a relatively short period from the 

eligible separate rate respondent 

companies in Vietnam and the 

‘‘Vietnam-wide entity,’’ consistent with 

Commerce’s practice, we compared the 

quantity of imports into the United 

States under the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule numbers listed in the scope, 

as reported by Global Trade Atlas, for 

the same periods noted above (i.e., 

October 2020 through April 2021 and 

May 2021 through November 2021) less 

the quantity of shipments of subject 

merchandise to the United States 

reported by Ban Me Thuot and 

DakHoney for those periods.21 Based on 

this comparison, we preliminarily find 

that imports of subject merchandise into 

the United States from the eligible 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
2130 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2022 / Notices 

22See Critical Circumstances Memo. 

23See section 733(f) of the Act; see also 19 CFR 

351.206(c)(2)(ii). 

24See Preliminary Determination. 

25See 19 CFR 351.309; see also 19 CFR 351.303 

(for general filing requirements). 

26See Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD 

Service Requirements Due to COVID–19, 85 FR 

17006 (March 26, 2020); and Temporary Rule 

Modifying AD/CVD Service Requirements Due to 

COVID–19; Extension of Effective Period, 85 FR 

41363 (July 10, 2020). 

separate rate respondent companies in 

Vietnam and the ‘‘Vietnam-wide entity’’ 

increased by more than 15 percent in 

the comparison period compared to the 

base period.22 Therefore, we 

preliminarily find that there were 

massive imports of subject merchandise 

from the eligible separate rate 

respondent companies in Vietnam and 

the ‘‘Vietnam-wide entity’’ over a 

relatively short period pursuant to 

section 773(e)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.206(h). 

Preliminary Affirmative Determination 

of Critical Circumstances 

Record evidence indicates that 

importers of raw honey from Vietnam 

knew, or should have known, that 

exporters were selling the merchandise 

at LTFV, and that there was likely to be 

material injury by reason of such sales. 

In addition, we have found that Ban Me 

Thuot, DakHoney, the eligible separate 

rate respondent companies in Vietnam, 

and the ‘‘Vietnam-wide entity’’ had 

massive imports during a relatively 

short period. Therefore, in accordance 

with section 733(e)(1) of the Act, we 

preliminarily find that there is reason to 

believe or suspect that critical 

circumstances exist for imports of the 

merchandise under consideration from 

Ban Me Thuot, DakHoney, the eligible 

separate rate respondent companies in 

Vietnam, and the ‘‘Vietnam-wide 

entity.’’ 23

Suspension of Liquidation 

In accordance with section 

703(e)(2)(A) of the Act, we are directing 

the U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

to suspend liquidation of any 

unliquidated entries of the merchandise 

under consideration from Vietnam 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse 

for consumption, on or after August 25, 

2021, which is 90 days prior to the date 

of publication of the Preliminary 

Determination in the Federal Register. 

ITC Notification 

In accordance with section 733(f) of 

the Act, we have notified the ITC of our 

preliminary affirmative critical 

circumstances determination. 

Public Comment 

In the Preliminary Determination, 

Commerce stated that case briefs or 

other written comments may be 

submitted to the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance.24 A 

timeline for the submission of case 

briefs and written comments on nonscope issues will be announced at a 

later date. Rebuttal briefs, limited to 

issues raised in case briefs, may be 

submitted no later than seven days after 

the deadline for case briefs.25 Note that 

Commerce has temporarily modified 

certain of its requirements for serving 

documents containing business 

proprietary information, until further 

notice.26 Pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who 

submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in 

this investigation are encouraged to 

submit with each argument: (1) A 

statement of the issue; (2) a brief 

summary of the argument; and (3) a 

table of authorities. 

This determination is published 

pursuant to sections 733(f) and 777(i) of 

the Act, and 19 CFR 351.206(c)(2)(ii). 

Dated: December 30, 2021. 

Ryan Majerus, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and 

Negotiations, performing the non-exclusive 

functions and duties of the Assistant 

Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2022–00579 Filed 1–12–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

Announcement of Certain Approved 

2022 International Trade 

Administration Trade Missions 

AGENCY: International Trade 

Administration, Department of 

Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The United States Department 

of Commerce, International Trade 

Administration (ITA), is announcing 

four upcoming trade missions that will 

be recruited, organized, and 

implemented by ITA. A summary of 

each mission is found below. 

ADDRESSES: Application information 

and more detailed mission information, 

including the commercial setting and 

sector information, can be found at the 

trade mission website: https://

www.trade.gov/trade-missions. 

For each mission, recruitment will be 

conducted in an open and public 

manner, including publication in the 

Federal Register, posting on the 

Commerce Department trade mission 

calendar (https://www.trade.gov/trademissions-schedule) and other internet 

websites, press releases to general and 

trade media, direct mail, broadcast fax, 

notices by industry trade associations 

and other multiplier groups, and 

publicity at industry meetings, 

symposia, conferences, and trade shows. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gemal Brangman, Trade Promotion 

Programs, Industry and Analysis, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–3773 or 

email Gemal.Brangman@trade.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These 

missions are: 

• Trade Mission to the UAE in 

Conjunction with Trade Winds Middle 

East & North Africa Business Forum— 

March 2–10, 2022. 

• Trade Mission to Central America 

in Conjunction with Trade Americas— 

Business Opportunities in Central 

America Conference—March 27, 2022– 

April 1, 2022. 

• Minority-Business Focused Trade 

Mission (MBTM) to Italy, Spain, and 

Portugal—May 15–20, 2022. 

• Aerospace Trade Mission to India— 

June 21–24, 2022. 

The Following Conditions for 

Participation Will Be Used for Each 

Mission 

Applicants must submit a completed 

and signed mission application and 

supplemental application materials, 

including adequate information on their 

products and/or services, primary 

market objectives, and goals for 

participation to allow the Department of 

Commerce to evaluate their application. 

If the Department of Commerce receives 

an incomplete application, the 

Department may either: Reject the 

application, request additional 

information/clarification, or take the 

lack of information into account when 

evaluating the application. If the 

requisite minimum number of 

participants is not selected for the 

mission by the recruitment deadline, the 

mission may be cancelled. 

Each applicant must also certify that 

the products and services it seeks to 

export through the mission are either 

produced in the United States, or, if not, 

are marketed under the name of a U.S. 

firm and have at least 51% U.S. content 

by value. In the case of an organization, 

the applicant must certify that, for each 

entity to be represented by the 

organization, the products and/or 

services the represented firm or service 

provider seeks to export are either 

produced in the United States or, if not, 

marketed under the name of a U.S. firm 

and have at least 51% U.S. content. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1