[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 211 (Friday, October 31, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64746-64749]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25859]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-836]


Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

DATES: Effective Date: October 31, 2014.

SUMMARY: On December 26, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from the People's 
Republic of China (PRC) in the Federal Register.\1\ The review covers 
the period from March 1, 2012, through February 28, 2013. In the 
Preliminary Results, the Department preliminarily applied facts 
otherwise available with an adverse inference to the PRC-wide entity 
because an element of the entity, Hebei Donghua Jiheng Fine Chemical 
Co., Ltd. (Donghua Fine Chemical), failed to act to the best of its 
ability in complying with the Department's request for information and, 
consequently, significantly impeded the proceeding. The Department gave 
interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results 
and, based on an analysis of the comments received, we found that no 
changes were warranted to these final results of review. However, based 
on further review of the record, we found that some companies did not 
have any reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the review 
period. The final weighted-average dumping margin for the review is 
listed below in the ``Final Results of Review'' section of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 78 FR 
78331 (December 26, 2013) (Preliminary Results).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 64747]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edythe Artman or Angelica Mendoza, AD/
CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3931 or (202) 482-3019, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On December 26, 2013, the Department published the Preliminary 
Results for this review, which covers the period from March 1, 2012, 
through February 28, 2013.\2\ In the Preliminary Results, we invited 
interested parties to comment on our findings and to request a hearing 
to discuss any issues raised in case and rebuttal briefs. Timely 
comments were received from the sole respondent in the review, Donghua 
Fine Chemical, the domestic interested party, GEO Specialty Chemicals, 
Inc., and two other interested parties, Evonik Rexim (Nanning) 
Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (Evonik), and Paras Intermediates Pvt. Ltd 
(Paras). GEO and Paras also submitted timely rebuttal comments. Donghua 
Fine Chemical and Evonik requested a public hearing to discuss briefed 
issues and a hearing was held on March 12, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 23, 2014, we extended the issuance of the final results of 
review until October 22, 2014.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, from 
Edythe Artman, International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office VI, 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, regarding ``Glycine 
from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for the 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-
2013,'' dated July 23, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The product covered by this antidumping duty order is glycine, 
which is a free-flowing crystalline material, like salt or sugar. 
Glycine is produced at varying levels of purity and is used as a 
sweetener/taste enhancer, a buffering agent, reabsorbable amino acid, 
chemical intermediate, and a metal complexing agent. This proceeding 
includes glycine of all purity levels. Glycine is currently classified 
under subheading 2922.49.4020 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTSUS). In a separate scope ruling, the Department 
determined that D(-) Phenylglycine Ethyl Dane Salt is outside the scope 
of the order.\4\ Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
merchandise under the order is dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Notice of Scope Rulings and Anticircumvention Inquiries, 
62 FR 62288 (November 21, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of No Shipments

    We received timely-filed ``no-shipment'' certifications from eight 
companies named in the notice of initiation and, in each certification, 
the company stated that it had no entries of subject merchandise during 
the period of review. These companies were: (1) AICO Laboratories India 
Ltd. (AICO), (2) Avid Organics, (3) Aqua Bond Inc., (4) Gurvey & Berry 
Co., (5) H.T. Griffin Food Ingredients, (6) Paras Intermediates Pvt. 
Ltd., (7) Unipex Solutions Canada Inc., and (8) Yuki Gosei Kogyo Co. We 
confirmed these companies had no entries in the data that we obtained 
from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) covering the period of 
review.\5\ Consistent with our practice \6\ and based on the no-
shipment certifications and the CBP data, we determine that these 
companies did not have any reviewable entries of subject merchandise 
during the review period and, accordingly, we will issue instructions 
that are consistent with our ``automatic assessment''' clarification 
for these final results.\7\ For these companies, the cash deposit 
requirements will remain unchanged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Memorandum to the File from Edythe Artman, International 
Trade Compliance Analyst, regarding ``Release of United States 
Customs and Border Protection Entry Data for Selection of 
Respondents for Individual Review, dated May 8, 2013.
    \6\ See, e.g., Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the 
People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2011-2012, 78 FR 55680, 55681 (September 11, 
2013).
    \7\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment 
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by interested 
parties are addressed in the issues and decision memorandum, 
accompanying this notice, which is hereby adopted by this notice.\8\ A 
list of the issues which the parties raised and to which the Department 
responded in the memorandum appears in the appendix of this notice. The 
Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file 
electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). 
IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http://iaaccess.trade.gov 
and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 
of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete 
version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly 
at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed and electronic 
versions of the memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for 
Enforcement and Compliance, from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, 
regarding ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of 
the Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Glycine 
from the People's Republic of China; 2012-2013,'' dated October 22, 
2014 (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    We made no changes to the Preliminary Results based on our analysis 
of the comments received from parties. However, based on our review of 
the record, including the review of the no-shipment determinations and 
CBP data described above, we have found that eight companies had no 
reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the period of review.

Final Determination as to the PRC-wide Entity

    As detailed in the decision memorandum accompanying the Preliminary 
Results,\9\ the Department found that, because Donghua Fine Chemical 
had not qualified for a separate rate in a prior segment of the 
proceeding and had not filed the requisite application in this review, 
it was part of the PRC-wide entity. The Department then preliminarily 
determined that it had to rely on facts otherwise available to assign a 
dumping margin to the PRC-wide entity in accordance with sections 
776(a)(1), (2)(A), (B) and (C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(the Act), because necessary information was not on the record, the 
PRC-wide entity (including Donghua Fine Chemical) had withheld 
information that was requested within the established deadline, and, by 
not providing requested information, the entity had significantly 
impeded the proceeding. We further preliminarily found that Donghua 
Fine Chemical's failure to provide the requested information 
constituted circumstances

[[Page 64748]]

under which the company and, hence, the PRC-wide entity, had not acted 
to the best of its ability to comply with the Department's request for 
information. We therefore preliminarily determined, pursuant to section 
776(b) of the Act, that the PRC-wide entity failed to cooperate by not 
acting to the best of its ability and that, accordingly, when selecting 
from among the facts otherwise available, an adverse inference was 
warranted with respect to the PRC-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Memorandum to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant 
Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, from Christian Marsh, 
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, regarding ``Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013: 
Glycine from the People's Republic of China'' (Preliminary Decision 
Memorandum), dated December 18, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department also stated its intent in the Preliminary Results 
not to rescind the review for 40 exporters because these companies had 
been named in the initiation notice for the review, were then withdrawn 
from consideration of individual review because of the submission of 
timely withdrawals of requests for review by GEO, and do not have 
separate rates from a completed segment of the proceeding. We thus 
found all of the companies to be part of the PRC-wide entity under 
review. However, in light of our no-shipment determinations, only the 
following companies remain in this category: (1) A&A Pharmachem Inc., 
(2) Amol Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., (3) Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry 
Co., Ltd., (4) Beijing Onlystar Technology Co., Ltd., (5) Chiyuen 
International Trading Ltd., (6) China Jiangsu International Economic 
Technical Cooperation Corporation, (7) E-Heng Import and Export Co., 
Ltd., (8) Evonik Rexim (Nanning) Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., (9) 
FarmaSino Pharmaceuticals (Jiangsu) Co., Ltd., (10) General Ingredient 
Inc., (11) Gulbrandsen Technologies (India), (12) Hong Kong United 
Biochemistry Co. Ltd., (13) Jiangsu Dongchang Chemical, (14) Jiangxi 
Ansun Chemical Technology, (15) Jiangyin Trust International Inc., (16) 
Jizhou City Huayang Chemical Co., Ltd., (17) Kissner Milling Co. Ltd., 
(18) NALCO Canada Co., (19) Ningbo Create-Bio Engineering Co. Ltd., 
(20) Ningbo Generic Chemical Co., (21) Qingdao Samin Chemical Co., 
Ltd., (22) Ravi Industries, (23) Salvi Chemical Industries, (24) 
Shanpar Industries Pvt. Ltd., (25) Showa Denko K.K., (26) Shijiazhuang 
Jackchem Co., Ltd., (27) Shijiazhuang Zexing Amino Acid Co., (28) 
Tianjin Garments Import & Export, (29) Tianjin Tiancheng Pharmaceutical 
Company, (30) Tianjin Tianen Enterprise Co. Ltd., (31) Tywoon 
Development (China) Co., Ltd., and (32) XPAC Technologies Inc.
    The Department found no basis to make changes to the Preliminary 
Results based on our analysis of the comments received by parties on 
those results.
    Therefore, for these final results, the Department finds that 
Donghua Fine Chemical and the 32 exporters named in this section are 
part of the PRC-wide entity and that the use of adverse facts available 
is warranted with respect to the PRC-wide entity.

Final Results of Review

    The Department determines that the following percentage weighted-
average dumping margin exists for the period March 1, 2012, through 
February 28, 2013:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Dumping margin
                       Exporter                            (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-wide entity (including Hebei Donghua Jiheng Fine              453.79
 Chemical Co., Ltd.) \10\............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ As noted immediately above, the PRC-wide entity also includes the
  32 exporters we are not rescinding from the review.

Disclosure

    Normally, the Department discloses to interested parties the 
calculations performed in connection with a final determination within 
five days of the date of publication of the notice of the final 
determination in the Federal Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.224(b). But because the Department applied adverse facts available 
to determine the estimated weighted-average dumping margin for the 
mandatory respondent in this investigation, there are no calculations 
to disclose to parties.

Assessment Rates

    The Department determined, and the U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of 
this review.\11\ The Department intends to issue assessment 
instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these 
final results of review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the PRC-wide entity, the Department will instruct CBP to assess 
antidumping duties on entries of subject merchandise at the PRC-wide 
rate of 453.79 percent. For companies we found to have no reviewable 
entries in this review period, we will instruct CBP to assess duties on 
entries of subject merchandise consistent with our ``automatic 
assessment'' clarification for these final results.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash-deposit requirements will be effective for all 
shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 
for consumption on or after the publication date of this notice of 
final results of the administrative review, as provided by section 
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For any previously investigated or 
reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters which are not under review in this 
segment of the proceeding that received a separate rate in a previous 
segment of this proceeding, the cash-deposit rate will continue to be 
the exporter-specific rate published for the most recently-completed 
period; (2) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not 
been found to be entitled to a separate rate, including Donghua Fine 
Chemical, the cash-deposit rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity 
(i.e., 453.79 percent); and (3) 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(s) that supplied 
the non-PRC exporter. These cash-deposit requirements, when imposed, 
shall remain in effect until further notice.

Notification to Importers

    This notice 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 period of review. Failure to comply 
with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also 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 the return or destruction of APO materials, or

[[Page 64749]]

conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure 
to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable 
violation.
    We are issuing and publishing these final results and this notice 
in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: October 22, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

Comments Discussed in the Accompanying Final Issues and Decision 
Memorandum

I. Summary
II Background
III. Period of Investigation
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. Discussion of Comments
    Comment 1: Application of Adverse Facts Available to the PRC-
Wide Entity
    Comment 2A: The Status of Paras as Part of the PRC-Wide Entity
    Comment 2B: The Status of Evonik as Part of the PRC-Wide Entity
VI. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2014-25859 Filed 10-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P