[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 196 (Thursday, October 12, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47474-47475]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22068]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-836]


Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Rescission of Administrative 
Review, in Part; 2015-2016

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

SUMMARY: On April 7, 2017, 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), covering the period March 1, 2015, through February 29, 2016. We 
invited interested parties to comment on the preliminary results. We 
received comments from a domestic interested party, GEO Specialty 
Chemicals, Inc. (GEO), a respondent, Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry 
Co., Ltd. (Baoding Mantong) and a U.S. importer, Pharm-Rx Chemical 
Corporation (Pharm-Rx). As a result of comments filed by the parties, 
we have determined that the U.S. sale reported by Baoding Mantong is 
not a bona fide sale and the review should be rescinded with respect to 
this exporter. The final results remain unchanged from the preliminary 
results of review with respect to the other respondent, Jizhou City 
Huayang Chemical Co., Ltd. (Huayang Chemical).

DATES: Applicable October 12, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edythe Artman or Brian Davis, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3931 or (202) 482-7924, 
respectively.

Background

    On April 7, 2017, the Department published its notice of 
preliminary results of review for the administrative review on glycine 
from the PRC in the Federal Register.\1\ A summary of the events that 
occurred since the Department published these results, as well as a 
discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final 
determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, 
which is hereby adopted by this notice.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Rescission of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, In Part; 2015-2016, 82 FR 
16992 (April 7, 2017) (Preliminary Results).
    \2\ See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary 
for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, on the subject 
of ``Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Issues and 
Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Administrative Review 
and Rescission of Review, In Part; 2015-2016'', dated concurrently 
with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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).\3\ Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
merchandise under the order is dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In separate scope rulings, the Department determined that: 
(a) D(-) Phenylglycine Ethyl Dane Salt is outside the scope of the 
order and (b) PRC-glycine exported from India remains the same class 
or kind of merchandise as the PRC-origin glycine imported into 
India. See Notice of Scope Rulings and Anticircumvention Inquiries, 
62 FR 62288 (November 21, 1997) and Glycine from the People's 
Republic of China: Final Partial Affirmative Determination of 
Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 73426 (December 
10, 2012), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this administrative review are addressed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum. A list of the issues raised by parties is attached to this 
notice as Appendix I. 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 (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and it is available to all parties in the Central 
Records Unit, Room B8024 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/index.html. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    In Comment 1 of the Issues and Decision Memorandum, the Department 
concluded that the sole U.S. sale reported by Baoding Mantong for the 
period of review was not a bona fide sale. Consequently, we are 
rescinding the review with respect to this company. We made no changes 
to the PRC-wide rate assigned to Pharm-Rx's Chinese supplier, Huayang 
Chemical, as a result of our analysis of the issues.

Final Results of Review

    In the Preliminary Results, we determined that Huayang Chemical 
failed to establish its eligibility for a separate rate and 
preliminarily determined to treat the exporter as part of the 
PRC[hyphen]wide entity.\4\ Because no party requested a review of the 
PRC-wide entity and the Department no longer considers the PRC-wide 
entity as an exporter conditionally subject to administrative reviews, 
we did not conduct a review of the PRC-wide entity, and the entity's 
rate is not subject to change in this review.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Preliminary Results at 16992-16993.
    \5\ See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in 
Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty 
Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity 
in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963 (November 4, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department has determined, 
and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of 
subject merchandise covered

[[Page 47475]]

by this review. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions 
to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of 
review. Accordingly, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the entries 
reported by Baoding Mantong without regard to antidumping duties. The 
Department also intends to instruct CBP to liquidate entries of subject 
merchandise from the exporters identified above as being part of the 
PRC-wide entity (including Huayang Chemical) at the PRC-wide rate, 
i.e., 453.79 percent.
    Pursuant to a refinement in the Department's non-market economy 
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.\6\ Additionally, if the Department determines that 
an exporter 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.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment 
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 the final results 
of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of 
the Act: (1) For Baoding Mantong and other previously investigated or 
reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters which are not under review in this 
segment of the proceeding but received a separate rate in a previous 
segment, 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, 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.

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a final 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 sanctionable violation.
    We are issuing and publishing these results and this notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

     Dated: October 4, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

List of Topics Discussed in the Final Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. List of Issues
III. Background
IV. Scope of the Order
V. Discussion of Interested Party Comments
    Comment 1: Bona Fides of Baoding Mantong's U.S. Sale
    Comment 2: Moot Arguments Concerning Baoding Mantong's Margin 
Calculations
    Comment 3: Assignment of the PRC-Wide Rate to Pharm-Rx Following 
Judicial Review of the Rate
VI. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2017-22068 Filed 10-11-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P