[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 250 (Wednesday, December 31, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78799-78800]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30661]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-570-938]
Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts: Final Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2012
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) has completed its
administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on citric
acid and certain citrate salts (citric acid) from the People's Republic
of China (PRC) for the period of review (POR) covering January 1, 2012,
through December 31, 2012. On June 25, 2014, we published the
preliminary results of this review and the post-preliminary results
were completed on September 5, 2014.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts: Preliminary
Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2012, 79 FR
36012 (June 25, 2014) (Preliminary Results) and Memorandum to Paul
Piquado, ``Post-Preliminary Results Decision Memorandum for the
Fourth Administrative Review of the Countervailing Duty Order:
Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from the People's Republic of
China,'' dated September 5, 2014 (Post-Preliminary Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We provided interested parties with an opportunity to comment on
the Preliminary Results and Post-Preliminary Results. Our analysis of
the comments submitted resulted in a change to the net subsidy rate for
RZBC Group Shareholding Co., Ltd., RZBC Co., Ltd., RZBC Juxian Co.,
Ltd., and RZBC Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. (collectively, the RZBC
Companies). The final net subsidy rate is listed below in the section
entitled ``Final Results of the Review.''
DATES: Effective Date: December 31, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia M. Tran and Raquel Silva, AD/
CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-1503
and (202) 482-6475, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Following the Preliminary Results and Post-Preliminary Results, on
September 11 through 19, 2014, the Department conducted verification of
the questionnaire responses submitted by the Government of the PRC
(GOC) and the RZBC Companies. The verification reports for the GOC and
the RZBC Companies were released on October 8, 2014.\2\ We received
case briefs from the GOC, the RZBC Companies, and Petitioners \3\ on
October 20, 2014.\4\ On October 27, 2014, all parties submitted their
rebuttal briefs.\5\ No hearing was held in this case as none was
requested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Memorandum to Eric Greynolds, Acting Office Director for
AD/CVD Duty Operations, Office III, ``Administrative Review of
Countervailing Duty Order on Citric and Certain Citrate Salts:
Verification of the Questionnaire Responses Submitted by the RZBC
Co. Ltd. and its cross-owned affiliates,'' (October 7, 2014); see
also Memorandum to Eric Greynolds, Acting Director, AD/CVD Duty
Operations, Office III, ``Administrative Review of Countervailing
Duty Order on Citric and Certain Citrate Salts: Verification of the
Questionnaire Responses Submitted by the Government of the People's
Republic of China,'' (October 7, 2014).
\3\ Petitioners are Archer Daniels Midland Company, Cargill
Incorporated, and Tate & Lyle Ingredients America LLC.
\4\ See letter from the GOC, ``GOC's POR 4 Administrative Case
Brief in the Fourth Administrative Review of the Countervailing Duty
Order on Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From the People's
Republic of China,'' (October 20, 2014); Letter from Petitioners,
``Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From The People's Republic
Of China/Petitioners' Case Brief,'' (October 20, 2014); Letter from
the RZBC Companies, ``Citric Acid and Citrate Salts From the
People's Republic of China: Case Brief,'' (October 20, 2014).
\5\ See letter from the GOC, ``GOC's Rebuttal Brief in the
Fourth Administrative Review of the Countervailing Duty Order on
Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from the People's Republic of
China,'' (October 27, 2014); Letter from Petitioners, ``Citric Acid
and Certain Citrate Salts From The People's Republic Of China/
Petitioners' Rebuttal Brief,'' (October 27, 2014); Letter from the
RZBC Companies, ``Citric Acid and Citrate Salts from the People's
Republic of China: Rebuttal Case Brief,'' (October 27, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order is citric acid and certain
citrate salts. The product is currently classified under the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers 2918.14.0000,
2918.15.1000, 2918.15.5000, 3824.90.9290, and 3824.90.9290. Although
the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes,
the written product description remains dispositive.
A full description of the scope of the order is contained in the
memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations to Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ``Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review: Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts; 2012''
(Final Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with this notice, and
hereby adopted by this notice.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case briefs are addressed in the Final
Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised is attached to this
notice as an Appendix. The Final Decision Memorandum is a public
document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service
System (ACCESS).\6\ ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main
Department of Commerce
[[Page 78800]]
building. In addition, a complete version of the Final Decision
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/. The signed Final Decision Memorandum and
the electronic versions of the Final Decision Memorandum are identical
in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and Compliance changed the
name of Enforcement and Compliance's AD and CVD Centralized
Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS'') to AD and CVD Centralized
Electronic Service System (``ACCESS''). The Web site location was
changed from http://iaaccess.trade.gov to http://access.trade.gov.
The Final Rule changing the references to the Regulations can be
found at 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methodology
The Department conducted this review in accordance with section
751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each
of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we determine that there
is a subsidy, i.e., a financial contribution from an ``authority'' that
confers a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is
specific.\7\ For a full description of the methodology underlying our
conclusions, see the Final Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act regarding
financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) of the Act regarding
benefit; and section 771(5A) of the Act regarding specificity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In making these findings, we relied, in part, on facts available
and, because the GOC did not act to the best of its ability to respond
to the Department's requests for information, we drew an adverse
inference in selecting from among the facts otherwise available.\8\ For
further information, see ``Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse
Inferences'' in the Final Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of the Review
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we determine a net
countervailable subsidy rate of 17.55 percent ad valorem for the RZBC
Companies.
Assessment Rates
The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions
directly to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days after the
date of publication of these final results, to liquidate shipments of
subject merchandise by the RZBC Companies entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after January 1, 2012, through
December 31, 2012.
Cash Deposit Instructions
The Department also intends to instruct CBP to collect cash
deposits of estimated CVDs in the amount shown above on shipments of
subject merchandise by the RZBC Companies entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the
final results of this review. For all non-reviewed companies, we will
instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits at the most recent
company-specific or country-wide rate applicable to the company.
Accordingly, the cash deposit rates that will be applied to companies
covered by this order, but not examined in this review, are those
established in the most recently completed segment of the proceeding
for each company. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Administrative Protective Order
This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written
notification of return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to
judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with
the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.
Dated: December 22, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix--List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum
I. Summary
II Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences
V. Subsidies Valuation Information
VI. Benchmarks and Discount Rates
VII. Analysis of Programs
VIII. Analysis of Comments
Comment 1: Whether to Reverse the Department's ``Authorities''
Determination
Comment 2: Whether to Find Certain Calcium Carbonate Producers are
``Authorities''
Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Countervail Input Purchases
Made Through Trading Companies and Produced by ``Authorities''
Comment 4: Whether to Find Input for LTAR Programs Not Specific
Comment 5: Whether to Find the Provision of Caustic Soda for LTAR
Countervailable
A. Specificity
B. ``Authorities''
C. Market Distortion
D. Benchmark
Comment 6: Export-Import Bank of China Buyer's Credit
Comment 7: Whether to Apply Adverse Facts Available (AFA) to Steam
Coal and Sulfuric Acid Purchases
Comment 8: Whether to Exclude Freight Surcharges for Limestone Flux
Comment 9: Whether the Provision of Calcium Carbonate for LTAR is
Specific to the RZBC Companies' Purchases
Comment 10: Whether to Average Benchmark Prices
Comment 11: Whether to Use Inland Freight Benchmark Data for Steam
Coal
Comment 12: Whether to Include Hazardous Shipping Charges in
International Freight Calculations for Sulfuric Acid and Caustic
Soda Benchmarks
Comment 13: How to Ensure That World Market Prices Used in
Benchmarks Are Reasonably Available in China
Comment 14: How to Treat Steam Coal Benchmark Data Reported on CIF
Basis
Comment 15: Whether to Account for Grade or Specification of
Sulfuric Acid, Steam Coal, and Limestone Flux In Benchmarks
Comment 16: Whether to Account for Quantities Sold for Limestone
Flux, Sulfuric Acid, and Steam Coal Benchmarks
Comment 17: How to Calculate Benchmarks Using GTIS Data
Comment 18: Whether to Recalculate Land Benchmark
IX. Conclusion
[FR Doc. 2014-30661 Filed 12-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P