[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 239 (Monday, December 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77323-77325]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31427]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-937]
Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From the People's Republic
of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review;
2013-2014
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On June 8, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the
``Department'') published the preliminary results of the fifth
administrative review (``AR'') of the antidumping duty order on citric
acid and certain citrate salts (``citric acid'') from the People's
Republic of China (``PRC''), in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'').\1\ On October 27,
2015, the Department issued Post-Preliminary Results \2\ in this AR.
The period of review (``POR'') for the AR is May 1, 2013, through April
30, 2014. The review covers three companies, RZBC Import & Export Co.,
Ltd. (``RZBC I&E''),\3\ Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co., Ltd. (``Taihe''),
and Yixing Union Biochemical Ltd. (``Yixing Union''). Based on our
analysis of the comments received, we made certain changes to our Post-
Preliminary Results. The final dumping margins for this review are
listed in the ``Final Results'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From the People's
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 80 FR 32353 (June 8, 2015)
(``Preliminary Results'').
\2\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance,
regarding ``Decision Memorandum for the Post-Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Citric Acid and Certain
Citrate Salts from the People's Republic of China; 2013-14,'' dated
October 27, 2015 (``Post-Preliminary Results'').
\3\ The Department initiated the fifth administrative review on
RZBC Co., Ltd., RZBC I&E, and RZBC (Juxian) Co., Ltd. (collectively
``RZBC''). Only RZBC I&E exported subject merchandise to the United
States during the POR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective date: December 14, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Krisha Hill, Maisha Cryor, or
Aleksandras Nakutis, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce,
14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482-4037, (202) 482-5831, or (202) 482-3147,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
For a full history of the events that have taken place since the
publication of the Preliminary Results and the Post-Preliminary
Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\4\ The Issues and
Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file in the Central
Records Unit (``CRU''), Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce
building, as well as electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's
[[Page 77324]]
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service
System (``ACCESS''). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and it is available to all parties in the CRU. In
addition, parties can directly access a complete version of the Issues
and Decision Memorandum on the internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant
Secretary, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul
Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance,
regarding ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Citric Acid and Certain
Citrate Salts from the People's Republic of China,'' issued
concurrently with this notice (``Issues and Decision Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by this order is citric acid and certain
citrate salts from the PRC. The product is currently classified under
subheadings 2918.14.0000, 2918.15.1000, 2918.15.5000, and 3824.90.9290
of the Harmonized Tariff System of the United States (HTSUS). Although
the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of merchandise subject to the scope
is dispositive. For a full description of the scope of the order, see
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in parties' case and rebuttal briefs are
addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. In an Appendix to this
notice, we have provided a list of the issues raised by parties.
Changes Since the Post-Preliminary Results
Based on our review of the record and comments received from
interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results and Post-
Preliminary Results, we have made certain revisions to the margin
calculations for RZBC I&E and Taihe. Further, the Final Surrogate Value
Memorandum contains descriptions of our changes to the surrogate
values.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Memorandum from Krisha Hill and Maisha Cryor to Robert
Bolling regarding, ``Final Results of the Fifth Administrative
Review of Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from the People's
Republic of China: Surrogate Value Memorandum,'' issued concurrently
with this memorandum (``Final Surrogate Value Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We deducted letter of credit costs from brokerage and
handling expense for both respondents.
We made adjustments to labor and limestone consumption in
Taihe's co-product calculations.
We made adjustments to the export subsidy calculation for
RZBC I&E.
Final Determination of No Shipments
In the Preliminary Results, the Department preliminarily determined
that Yixing Union did not have any reviewable transactions during the
POR. We have not received any information to contradict this
determination. Therefore, the Department determines that Yixing Union
did not have any reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the
POR, and will issue appropriate instructions that are consistent with
our ``automatic assessment'' clarification, for these final results.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 4, 2011) (``Assessment
Practice Refinement'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results
We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins
exist for the POR:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter dumping margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RZBC Import & Export Co., Ltd........................... 0.00
Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co., Ltd....................... 6.61
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b),
the Department has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries
covered by this review. The Department intends to issue assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of these final
results of this review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we are
calculating importer- (or customer-) specific assessment rates for the
merchandise subject to this review. For any individually examined
respondent whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis
(i.e., 0.50 percent), the Department will calculate importer- (or
customer)-specific assessment rates for merchandise subject to this
review. Where appropriate, we calculated an ad valorem rate for each
importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for
reviewed sales to that party by the total entered values associated
with those transactions. For duty-assessment rates calculated on this
basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting ad valorem rate
against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise. Where
appropriate, we calculated a per-unit rate for each importer (or
customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to
that party by the total sales quantity associated with those
transactions. For duty-assessment rates calculated on this basis, we
will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-unit rate against the
entered quantity of the subject merchandise.\7\ We will instruct CBP to
assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this
review when the importer-specific assessment rate is above de minimis.
Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero
or de minimis, or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de
minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries
without regard to antidumping duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-
Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping
Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101, 8103 (February 14,
2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to a refinement in the Department's non-market economy
(``NME'') practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S.
sales databases submitted by companies individually examined during
this review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries
at the PRC-wide rate (i.e., 156.87 percent). In addition, if the
Department determines that an exporter under review had no shipments of
the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that
exporter's case number (i.e., at that exporter's rate) will be
liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ For a full discussion of this practice, see Assessment
Practice Refinement, 76 FR at 65694.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for
shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as
provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Yixing Union,
which claimed no shipments, the cash deposit will remain unchanged from
the rate assigned to Yixing Union in the most recently completed review
of the company; (2) for the exporters listed above, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate listed for each exporter in the table in the
``Final Results'' section of this notice; (3) for previously
investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters that received a
separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit
rate will continue to be the existing exporter-
[[Page 77325]]
specific rate; (4) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that
have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit
rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity established in the final
determination of the less than fair value investigation (i.e., 156.87
percent); and (5) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise
which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be
the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that non-PRC
exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in
effect until further notice.
Disclosure
We intend to disclose the calculations performed within five days
of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Notification to Importers Regarding the Reimbursement of Duties
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Department's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties has occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which
continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of
the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or
destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective
order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and
terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these final results of administrative
review and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: December 7, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix--Issues and Decision Memorandum
Summary
List of Issues
Background
Scope of the Order
Discussion of the Issues
Issues
Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Select Indonesia as the
Primary Surrogate Country
Comment 2: Whether the Department's Approach to the Surrogate
Country Selection Process Is Counter to its Policy, Practice, and
Statutory Obligations
Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Rely on the Aditya
Birla Financial Statements to Calculate the Financial Ratios
Comment 4: Whether the Surrogate Financial Ratios Should be
Based on PT Budi's Segment Financial Information
Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Assign Surrogate Values
to Respondents' Energy Factors of Production Values
Comment 6: The Weight Denominator for Brokerage & Handling and
Inland Freight
Comment 7: Whether to Deduct Letter of Credit Cost from the
Brokerage and Handling Surrogate Value Calculation
Comment 8: Whether the Department Should Value Corn Using
Indonesian Import Prices or, Alternatively, Recalculate the Thai
Import Prices to Exclude Aberrational Data
Comment 9: Distance to Calculate Inland Freight
Comment 10: Whether the Department Should Make Certain Revisions
to its Surrogate Value for Sludge
Comment 11: Whether to Value RZBC's High Protein Scrap as a Co-
Product
Comment 12: Whether the Department Used Incorrect Rates to
Calculate RZBC I&E's Export Subsidy Adjustment
Comment 13: Whether the Department Should Treat Taihe's Corn
Feed as a By-Product
Comment 14: Whether the Department Should Make Certain Revisions
to Taihe's Co-Product Calculation
Comment 15: Whether the Application of Differential Pricing
Methodology to Taihe's Sales is Contrary to Law and Otherwise
Unsupported by Substantial Evidence on the Record
Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2015-31427 Filed 12-11-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P