Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Canada and the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 27492-27498 [E8-10515]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 93 (Tuesday, May 13, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27492-27498]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-10515]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-122-853, A-570-937]


Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Canada and the 
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty 
Investigations

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

DATES: Effective Date: May 13, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terre Keaton Stefanova (Canada) or 
Hallie Zink (People's Republic of China), AD/CVD Operations, Office 2 
and China/NME Group, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
1280 or (202) 482-6907, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions

    On April 14, 2008, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received petitions concerning imports of citric acid and certain 
citrate salts from Canada (Canada petition) and the People's Republic 
of China (PRC) (PRC petition) filed in proper form by Archer Daniels 
Midland Company, Cargill, Incorporated, and Tate & Lyle Americas, Inc. 
(collectively, the petitioners). See the Petitions on Citric Acid and 
Certain Citrate Salts from Canada and the PRC filed on April 14, 2008. 
On April 17, 2008, the Department issued a request for additional 
information and clarification of certain areas of the petitions. Based 
on the Department's request, the petitioners filed supplements to the 
petitions for both countries on April 22, 2008 (Supplement to the 
Petition). The Department requested further clarifications from the 
petitioners by phone. See Memorandum to the File: Conference Call 
Regarding Scope Language, Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duties: Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from 
Canada and the PRC, dated April 28, 2008. On May 1, 2008, the 
petitioners filed a revised scope. See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate 
Salts from Canada and the People's Republic of China; Revision of Scope 
Definition, dated May 1, 2008.
    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of citric acid 
and certain citrate salts from Canada and the PRC are being, or

[[Page 27493]]

are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value, 
within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such imports 
materially injure, or threaten material injury to, an industry in the 
United States.
    The Department finds that the petitioners filed these petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested 
parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and they have 
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the 
investigations that they are requesting the Department to initiate (see 
``Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions'' below).

Scope of Investigations

    The scope of these investigations includes all grades and 
granulation sizes of citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate 
in their unblended forms, whether dry or in solution, and regardless of 
packaging type. The scope also includes blends of citric acid, sodium 
citrate, and potassium citrate; as well as blends with other 
ingredients, such as sugar, where the unblended form(s) of citric acid, 
sodium citrate, and potassium citrate constitute 40 percent or more, by 
weight, of the blend. The scope of these investigations also includes 
all forms of unrefined calcium citrate, including dicalcium citrate 
monohydrate, and tricalcium citrate tetrahydrate, which are 
intermediate products in the production of citric acid, sodium citrate, 
and potassium citrate. The scope of these investigations includes the 
hydrous and anhydrous forms of citric acid, the dihydrate and anhydrous 
forms of sodium citrate, otherwise known as citric acid sodium salt, 
and the monohydrate and monopotassium forms of potassium citrate. 
Sodium citrate also includes both trisodium citrate and monosodium 
citrate, which are also known as citric acid trisodium salt and citric 
acid monosodium salt, respectively. Citric acid and sodium citrate are 
classifiable under 2918.14.0000 and 2918.15.1000 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), respectively. Potassium 
citrate and calcium citrate are classifiable under 2918.15.5000 of the 
HTSUS. Blends that include citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium 
citrate are classifiable under 3824.90.9290 of the HTSUS. Although the 
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, 
the written description of the merchandise is dispositive.

Comments on Scope of Investigations

    During our review of the petitions, we discussed the scope with the 
petitioners to ensure that it is an accurate reflection of the products 
for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as 
discussed in the preamble to the regulations (Antidumping Duties; 
Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)), 
we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all interested 
parties to submit such comments by May 27, 2008, the next business day 
after 20 calendar days from the date of signature of this notice. 
Comments should be addressed to Import Administration's APO/Dockets 
Unit, Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. The period of scope 
consultations is intended to provide the Department with ample 
opportunity to consider all comments and to consult with parties prior 
to the issuance of the preliminary determinations.

Comments on Product Characteristics for Antidumping Duty Questionnaires

    We are requesting comments from interested parties regarding the 
appropriate physical characteristics of citric acid and certain citrate 
salts to be reported in response to the Department's antidumping 
questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key 
physical characteristics of the subject merchandise in order to more 
accurately report the relevant factors and costs of production, as well 
as to develop appropriate product comparison criteria.
    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that 
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate listing of 
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to 
which characteristics are appropriate to use as (1) general product 
characteristics and (2) the product comparison criteria. We note that 
it is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as 
product comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on 
meaningful commercial differences among products. In other words, while 
there may be some physical product characteristics utilized by 
manufacturers to describe citric acid and certain citrate salts, it may 
be that only a select few product characteristics take into account 
commercially meaningful physical characteristics. In addition, 
interested parties may comment on the order in which the physical 
characteristics should be used in product matching. Generally, the 
Department attempts to list the most important physical characteristics 
first and the least important characteristics last.
    In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in 
developing and issuing the antidumping duty questionnaires, we must 
receive comments at the above-referenced address by May 27, 2008. 
Additionally, rebuttal comments must be received by June 3, 2008.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department 
shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to 
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by 
subparagraph (A), or (ii) determine industry support using a 
statistically valid sampling method.
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which 
is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has 
been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like 
product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and 
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product (section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different 
purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In 
addition, the Department's determination is subject to limitations of 
time and information. Although this may result in different definitions 
of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of 
either agency contrary to law. See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. 
Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v.

[[Page 27494]]

United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 
(Fed. Cir. 1989), cert. denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989).
    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this subtitle.'' Thus, the reference point from which the 
domestic like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation,'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not 
offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of 
the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted 
on the record, we have determined that citric acid and certain citrate 
salts (unrefined calcium citrate, sodium citrate, and potassium 
citrate) constitute a single domestic like product and we have analyzed 
industry support in terms of that domestic like product. For a 
discussion of the domestic like product analysis in this case, see 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Citric Acid and 
Certain Citrate Salts from Canada (Canada Initiation Checklist), and 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Citric Acid and 
Certain Citrate Salts from the PRC (PRC Initiation Checklist) at 
Attachment II (Industry Support), on file in the Central Records Unit 
(CRU), Room 1117 of the main Department of Commerce building.
    Our review of the data provided in the petitions, supplemental 
submissions, and other information readily available to the Department 
indicates that the petitioners have established industry support. 
First, the petitions established support from domestic producers (or 
workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of 
the domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required 
to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., 
polling). See Section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act. Second, the domestic 
producers have met the statutory criteria for industry support under 
section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or 
workers) who support the petitions account for at least 25 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product. Finally, the 
domestic producers have met the statutory criteria for industry support 
under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic 
producers (or workers) who support the petitions account for more than 
50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by 
that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, 
the petitions. Accordingly, the Department determines that the 
petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the 
meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. See Canada Initiation 
Checklist and PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment II (Industry 
Support).
    The Department finds that the petitioners filed the petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping 
investigations that they are requesting the Department initiate. See 
Canada Initiation Checklist and PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment 
II (Industry Support).

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the 
domestic like product is being materially injured by reason of the 
imports of the subject merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). 
The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by the reduced market share, reduced production and 
capacity utilization, reduced employment, underselling and price 
depressing and suppressing effects, lost revenue and sales, a decline 
in financial performance, and an increase in import penetration. The 
Department has assessed the allegations and supporting evidence 
regarding material injury, threat of material injury, and causation, 
and the Department determines that these allegations are properly 
supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for 
initiation. See Canada Initiation Checklist and PRC Initiation 
Checklist at Attachment III.

Period of Investigations

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.204(b), because these petitions were 
filed on April 14, 2008, the anticipated period of investigation (POI) 
is April 1, 2007, through March 31, 2008, for Canada, and October 1, 
2007, through March 31, 2008, for the PRC.

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

    The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less 
than fair value upon which the Department has based its decision to 
initiate investigations with respect to Canada and the PRC. The sources 
of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and 
NV are discussed in greater detail in the Canada Initiation Checklist 
and the PRC Initiation Checklist. Should the need arise to use any of 
this information as facts available under section 776 of the Act, we 
may reexamine the information and revise the margin calculations, if 
appropriate.

Canada

Export Price
    The petitioners calculated export price (EP) based on a POI price 
quote for subject merchandise produced by Jungbunzlauer Canada Inc. 
(JBL Canada), a potential Canadian respondent. The petitioners made 
adjustments for U.S. inland freight and brokerage and handling 
expenses. To calculate the transportation charges, the petitioners 
obtained freight estimates for transporting the subject merchandise by 
truck from the location of JBL Canada to the location of JBL Canada's 
U.S. customer. The petitioners obtained an estimate for brokerage fees 
related to crossing the border, by truck, from Canada to the United 
States. See Petition, Volume II at pages 10 through 13, and Exhibits 
II-6 and II-7; and Supplement to the Petition.
Normal Value
    The petitioners calculated NV based on: (1) A published POI list 
price for citric acid in eastern Canada from a Canadian chemical 
industry publication; and (2) a POI price quote from a Canadian 
purchaser of subject merchandise, adjusted for a distributor mark-up 
amount. The petitioners adjusted both starting prices for freight 
expenses, calculated using a rate obtained from a trucking company that 
operates in Canada. The petitioners made a circumstance-of-sale (COS) 
adjustment to the home market prices for differences in imputed credit 
expenses between the Canadian and U.S. markets. The petitioners' 
calculated home market and U.S. imputed credit expenses using prime 
rates from the Bank of Canada and the U.S. Federal Reserve, 
respectively. We revised the petitioners' margin calculations to 
correct certain errors in the application of the COS adjustment for 
credit expenses. See Petition, Volume II, Supplement to the Petition, 
Volume II and Canada Initiation Checklist and Checklist Attachment V: 
Revised Margin Calculations.
Sales-Below-Cost Allegation
    The petitioners provided information demonstrating reasonable 
grounds to believe or suspect that sales of citric acid in the Canadian 
market were made at prices below the fully absorbed cost

[[Page 27495]]

of production (COP), within the meaning of section 773(b) of the Act, 
and requested that the Department conduct a country-wide sales-below-
cost investigation. The Department's practice is to consider 
allegations of below-cost sales in the aggregate for a foreign country. 
See Sodium Metal from France: Notice of Initiation of an Antidumping 
Duty Investigation, 72 FR 65295, 65297 (November 20, 2007).
Cost of Production
    Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost 
of manufacturing (COM), selling, general and administrative (SG&A) 
expenses, and packing. The petitioners calculated COM and packing based 
on a U.S. producer's cost experience, adjusted for known differences to 
manufacture citric acid in Canada using publicly available data since 
actual Canadian cost information was not reasonably available to the 
petitioners. To calculate an SG&A rate, including financial expenses, 
the petitioners relied on cost data for a U.S. producer of citric acid. 
We recalculated SG&A and interest expenses using the 2007 financial 
statements for Corn Products International (CPI), a company with 
substantial operations in Canada and in the same general industry as 
JBL Canada. Based upon a comparison of the prices of the foreign like 
product in the home market to the calculated COP of the product, we 
find reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign 
like product were made below the COP, within the meaning of section 
773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, the Department is initiating a 
country-wide cost investigation.
Constructed Value (CV)
    Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the COM, SG&A 
expenses, financial expenses, packing expenses and profit.
    Consistent with their calculation of COP above, the petitioners 
calculated COM and packing based on a U.S. producer's cost experience, 
adjusted for known differences to manufacture citric acid in Canada 
using publicly available data. See Canada Initiation Checklist for 
details of the calculation of COM. To calculate an SG&A rate, including 
financial expenses, the petitioners relied on cost data for a U.S. 
producer of citric acid. To calculate profit, the petitioners relied on 
the financial statements of CPI because it has substantial operations 
in Canada and is in the same general industry as JBL Canada. See Volume 
II of the Petition at pages 9 and 10, and Exhibit II-18, dated April 
14, 2008. To be consistent with the calculation of CV profit, we 
recalculated SG&A and financial expenses using CPI's financial 
statements. See Canada Initiation Checklist.

PRC

Export Price
    The petitioners calculated the EP based on official U.S. import 
unit values for citric acid from the PRC during October 2007-February 
2008, imported under the HTS subheading 2918.14.0000 (citric acid).\1\ 
See Petition, Volume III, at page 12, Supplement to the Petition, at 
Revised Exhibit III-22, and PRC Initiation Checklist. Official U.S. 
import unit values for subject merchandise imported under HTS 
2918.14.0000 do not differentiate between anhydrous and monohydrate 
forms of citric acid. Using PIERS data for the same time period, the 
petitioners were able to determine that the majority of citric acid 
imported under HTS 2918.14.0000, entered in the form of anhydrous 
citric acid. Because, however, some of the subject merchandise entered 
as citric acid monohydrate, the petitioners explain that it is 
necessary to adjust the unit vale to reflect that citric acid 
monohydrate is relatively cheaper than the anhydrous form of the 
merchandise. See Petition, Volume III, at page 12, and PRC Initiation 
Checklist. Therefore, the petitioners converted the official U.S. 
import unit values for citric acid, imported under HTS 2918.14.0000, 
from the monohydrate form of citric acid to the anhydrous equivalent 
and used that figure to calculate an average unit, free on board 
(``FOB''), value. See Supplement to the Petition, at Revised Exhibit 
III-17, and PRC Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As reflected in the official U.S. import unit values, the 
bulk of U.S. imports of citric acid from the PRC (i.e., citric acid 
(HTS 2918.14.0000), sodium citrate (HTS 2818.15.1000), and other 
salts and esters of citric acid (2918.15.5000)), entered under HTS 
subheading 2918.14.0000 (citric acid). See Petition, Volume I, at 
Exhibit I-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners calculated foreign brokerage and handling using 
Indian data because Indonesian data was not readily available. See 
Petition, Volume III, at page 14, and Supplement to the Petition, at 
Revised Exhibit III-18, and PRC Initiation Checklist. The petitioners 
inflated their calculated foreign brokerage and handling rate to the 
POI using the Wholesale Price Index (WPI) for India from the 
International Financial Statistics (IFS) of the International Monetary 
Fund (IMF) and converted imports valued in Rupees/kilogram (Rs/Kg) to 
U.S. Dollars/kilogram (US$/Kg) using the exchange rates on the 
Department's Web site at: https://ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/. 
See Supplement to the Petition, Volume III, at pages 2-3, and Revised 
Exhibits III-18-21, and PRC Initiation Checklist. The petitioners then 
deducted the foreign brokerage and handling charge from the anhydrous 
equivalent average unit value. See Supplement to the Petition, Volume 
III, at Revised Exhibit III-21, and PRC Initiation Checklist. The 
petitioners did not adjust EP for inland freight charges in China. See 
Petition, Volume III, at page 14, and PRC Initiation Checklist.
Normal Value
    The petitioners note that the Department's long-standing treatment 
of the PRC as a non-market economy (NME) country remains in effect 
until revoked by the Department, and notes that no such revocation 
determination has been made to date. See Volume III of the Petition, at 
page 1, and PRC Initiation Checklist. The Department has previously 
examined the PRC's market status and determined that NME status should 
continue for the PRC. See Memorandum from the Office of Policy to David 
M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, regarding 
The People's Republic of China Status as a Non-Market Economy, dated 
May 15, 2006.\2\ In addition, in recent investigations, the Department 
has continued to determine that the PRC is an NME country. See Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative 
Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber 
from the People's Republic of China, 72 FR 19690 (April 19, 2007); 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Activated 
Carbon from the People's Republic of China, 72 FR 9508 (March 2, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This document is available online at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/
download/prc-nme-status/prc-nme-status-memo.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 
as amended (Act), the presumption of NME status remains in effect until 
revoked by the Department. The presumption of NME status for the PRC 
has not been revoked by the Department and, therefore, remains in 
effect for purposes of the initiation of this investigation. 
Accordingly, the NV of the product is appropriately based on factors of 
production valued in a surrogate market economy country, in accordance 
with section 773(c) of the Act. In the course of this investigation, 
all parties will have the opportunity to provide relevant information 
related to the issues of the PRC's NME status and

[[Page 27496]]

the granting of separate rates to individual exporters.
    The petitioners assert that of the five countries normally 
considered as alternative surrogate market economies for the PRC, i.e., 
India, Egypt, Indonesia, the Philippines and Sri Lanka, only Indonesia 
appears to have production of subject merchandise. See Petition, Volume 
I, at Exhibit I-2, and Volume III, at page 2, and PRC Initiation 
Checklist. The petitioners note that although the Department has 
regularly used India as its preferred surrogate country for determining 
the NV of merchandise from the PRC, they were unable to identify any 
current producers of subject merchandise in India. See Petition, Volume 
III, at page 2, Supplement to the Petition, Volume III, at pages 3-4, 
and Revised Exhibit III-22, and PRC Initiation Checklist.
    According to the petitioners, however, Indonesia is a significant 
producer of subject merchandise. Further, a significant producer of 
subject merchandise in Indonesia, Budi Acid Jaya PT (Budi Jaya), 
employs similar manufacturing techniques, equipment and economics to 
that of a large Chinese producer of subject merchandise. See Petition, 
Volume III, at page 4, Supplement to the Petition, Volume III, at pages 
4-6, and PRC Initiation Checklist. In addition, the petitioners contend 
that Indonesia is a regular importer of corn (which, the petitioners 
state, is the principal input of the subject merchandise in China), and 
information on raw materials, energy inputs and import data for 
additional bulk chemicals are readily available for Indonesia. See 
Petition, Volume III, at pages 4-5, and PRC Initiation Checklist. Thus, 
the petitioners have used Indonesia as the surrogate country for China. 
However, after initiation of the investigation, interested parties will 
have the opportunity to submit comments regarding surrogate country 
selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an 
opportunity to submit publicly available information to value factors 
of production within 40 days after the date of publication of the 
preliminary determination.
    The petitioners provided dumping margin calculations using the 
Department's NME methodology as required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C) 
and 19 CFR 351.408. See Petition, Volume III, at page 5, and PRC 
Initiation Checklist. The petitioners calculated NV, with adjustments 
made for known differences, based on their own experience and 
knowledge, which the petitioners state, reflects the experience of a 
large Chinese producer of subject merchandise. See Petition, Volume 
III, pages at 5-7, and PRC Initiation Checklist. As noted above, the 
petitioners made adjustments in their calculation of NV to take into 
account known differences in the PRC production process, which included 
adjustments related to corn usage, labor hours and usage factors for 
calcium carbonate and sulphuric acid. See Petition, Volume III, at page 
6, Supplement to the Petition, Volume III, at page 12 and Revised 
Exhibits III-6 and III-7, and PRC Initiation Checklist.
    The petitioners valued the factors of production based on 
reasonably available, public surrogate country data, including 
Indonesian government import statistics. See Petition, Volume III, at 
page 8, and PRC Initiation Checklist. The petitioners sourced the 
Global Trade Atlas for the latest available six-month period, i.e., 
July 2007-December 2007, excluding values from countries previously 
determined by the Department to be NME countries, as well as imports 
into Indonesia from India, the Republic of Korea, and Thailand because 
they maintain broadly available, non-industry specific, export 
subsidies. Where the petitioners were unable to find imports into 
Indonesia for a particular input during that time period, they used 
imports during the next most recent time period. See Supplement to the 
Petition, Volume III, at Revised Exhibit III-8, and PRC Initiation 
Checklist.
    The petitioners also relied on Global Trade Atlas data to value 
packing inputs. See Petition, Volume III, at page 11 and Exhibit III-
16, Supplement to the Petition, Volume III, at page 10, and Revised 
Exhibit III-8, and PRC Initiation Checklist. The petitioners valued 
electricity using a World Bank publication, Electricity for All: 
Options for Increasing Access in Indonesia. Specifically, the 
petitioners used the Batam and Tarakan average electricity tariffs from 
2004, the most recent time period for which data is available. See 
Petition, Volume III, at pages 9-10, and Exhibit III-12, Supplement to 
the Petition, at Revised Exhibit III-12, and PRC Initiation Checklist. 
The petitioners valued steam using a methodology developed in Hot-
Rolled Steel from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 66 FR 22183 (May 3, 
2001), and accompanying Factors of Production Memorandum at Exhibit 7, 
and used in Tissue Paper from the PRC. \3\ See Petition, Volume III, at 
page 10, Supplement to the Petition, at Revised Exhibit III-13, and PRC 
Initiation Checklist. The petitioners valued water based on information 
contained in a United Nations Report from 2006 which discusses the 
average water tariff in Jakarta for large factories. See Petition, 
Volume III, at page10, Supplement to the Petition, at Revised Exhibit 
III-14, and PRC Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Certain Tissue Paper Products and Certain Crepe Paper 
Products From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary 
Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Affirmative 
Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances and Postponement 
of Final Determination for Certain Tissue Paper Products, 69 FR 
56407 (September 21, 2004) (``Tissue Paper from the PRC'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners valued labor using US$ 0.83/hour labor rate for the 
PRC currently available for 2004 on the Department's Web site. See 
Supplement to the Petition, Volume III, at pages 8-9, and Revised 
Exhibit III-11, and PRC Initiation Checklist. For the surrogate 
financial expenses for factory overhead, SG&A, and profit, the 
petitioners relied on the financial ratios of Budi Jaya, a significant 
producer of subject merchandise in Indonesia. See Petition, Volume I, 
at Exhibit I-2, Volume III, at page 4, and Exhibit III-3 at 30, 41, 42, 
and PRC Initiation Checklist.
    Where the petitioners were unable to find input prices 
contemporaneous with the POI, they adjusted for inflation using the WPI 
for Indonesia, as published in IFS by the IMF. See Supplement to the 
Petition, at page 11, and Revised Exhibit III-9, and PRC Initiation 
Checklist. For exchange rates to convert Indonesian rupiah to U.S. 
dollars, the petitioners averaged the foreign currency exchanges rates, 
as provided on the Department's Web site, for each day of the POI. 
Monetary conversions were applied only after having first applied a 
rupiah-based inflator to the original source rupiah value, as 
necessary. Id., at 11 and Revised Exhibit III-10, and PRC Initiation 
Checklist.

Fair-Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of citric acid and certain citrate salts from 
Canada and the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United 
States at less than fair value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV that 
we revised as discussed above, the estimated dumping margins for Canada 
are 22.91 percent (EP-to-NV comparison where NV is based on a home 
market price quote), 111.83 percent (EP-to-NV comparison where NV is 
based on a published list price), and 57.06 percent (EP-to-CV 
comparison). Based on a comparison of EP to NV, the estimated

[[Page 27497]]

dumping margin for the PRC is 156.87 percent.

Initiation of Antidumping Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the petitions on citric acid and 
certain citrate salts from Canada and the PRC and other information 
reasonably available to the Department, the Department finds that these 
petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, 
we are initiating antidumping duty investigations to determine whether 
imports of citric acid and certain citrate salts from Canada and the 
PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less 
than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act, 
unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later 
than 140 days after the date of this initiation.

Respondent Selection

Canada

    For Canada, the Department intends to select respondents based on 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. import during 
the POI. We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative 
Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information 
protected by APO within five days of publication of this Federal 
Register notice, and make our decision regarding respondent selection 
within 20 days of publication of this notice. The Department invites 
comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within 10 days 
of publication of this Federal Register notice.
    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Instructions for filing such 
applications may be found on the Department's Web site at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/apo.

PRC

    For the PRC, the Department will request quantity and value 
information from all known exporters and producers identified, with 
complete contact information, in the petition. The quantity and value 
data received from NME exporters/producers will be used as the basis to 
select the mandatory respondents.
    The Department requires that the respondents submit a response to 
both the quantity and value questionnaire and the separate-rate 
application by the respective deadlines in order to receive 
consideration for separate-rate status. See Circular Welded Austenitic 
Stainless Pressure Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Initiation 
of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 73 FR 10221, 10225 (February 26, 
2008); and Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain Artist 
Canvas From the People's Republic of China, 70 FR 21996, 21999 (April 
28, 2005). Appendix I of this notice contains the quantity and value 
questionnaire that must be submitted by all NME exporters/producers no 
later than May 27, 2008. In addition, the Department will post the 
quantity and value questionnaire along with the filing instructions on 
the Import Administration Web site, at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-
highlights-and-news.html. The Department will send the quantity and 
value questionnaire to those PRC companies identified in the petition, 
Volume I, at Exhibit I-8.

Separate Rates

    In order to obtain separate-rate status in NME investigations, 
exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate status application. 
See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the 
Republic of Korea and the People's Republic of China: Initiation of 
Antidumping Duty Investigations, 73 FR 23188, 23193 (April 29, 2008) 
(Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the PRC). 
The specific requirements for submitting the separate-rate application 
in this investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself, 
available on the Department's Web site at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-
highlights-and-news.html on the date of publication of this initiation 
notice in the Federal Register. The separate-rate application will be 
due sixty (60) days from the date of publication of this initiation 
notice in the Federal Register.

Use of Combination Rates in an NME Investigation

    The Department will calculate combination rates for certain 
respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this 
investigation. The Separate Rates/Combination Rates Bulletin states:

    [w]hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates only 
to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now assign 
in its NME investigations will be specific to those producers that 
supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, 
however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the 
producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period 
of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory 
respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as 
well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-
average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is 
referred to as the application of combination rates because such 
rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more 
producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply 
only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question and 
produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of 
investigation.

See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the 
PRC.

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the petitions have been 
provided to the representatives of the Governments of Canada and the 
PRC. Because of the particularly large number of producers/exporters 
identified in the petitions, the Department considers the service of 
the public version of the petitions to the foreign producers/exporters 
satisfied by the delivery of the public version to the Governments of 
Canada and the PRC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

International Trade Commission (ITC) Notification

    We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the International Trade Commission

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, no later than May 27, 2008, 
whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of citric acid 
and certain citrate salts from Canada and the PRC materially injure, or 
threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. A negative ITC 
determination covering all classes or kinds of merchandise covered by 
the petitions would result in the investigations being terminated. 
Otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to statutory and 
regulatory time limits.
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.

    Dated: May 5, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I

    Where it is not practicable to examine all known exporters/
producers of subject merchandise, section 777A(c)(2) of the Tariff Act 
of 1930, as amended, permits us to investigate (1) a sample of 
exporters, producers, or types of products that is statistically valid 
based on the information available at the time of selection, or (2) 
exporters and producers accounting for the largest volume and value of 
the subject

[[Page 27498]]

merchandise that can reasonably be examined.
    In the chart below, please provide the total quantity and total 
value of all your sales of merchandise covered by the scope of this 
investigation (see ``Scope of Investigation'' section of this notice), 
produced in the PRC, and exported/shipped to the United States during 
the period October 1, 2007, through March 31, 2007.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Total quantity in
       Market               metric tons            Terms of sale           Total value
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    United States
1. Export Price
 Sales
2. a. Exporter Name
    b. Address
    c. Contact
    d. Phone No.
    e. Fax No.
3. Constructed
 Export Price Sales
                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Further
 Manufactured
    Total Sales
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Quantity:
     Please report quantity on a metric ton basis. If any 
conversions were used, please provide the conversion formula and 
source.
    Terms of Sales:
     Please report all sales on the same terms (e.g., free on 
board at port of export).
    Total Value:
     All sales values should be reported in U.S. dollars. 
Please indicate any exchange rates used and their respective dates and 
sources.
    Export Price Sales:
     Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as an export price 
sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated customer occurs before 
importation into the United States.
     Please include any sales exported by your company directly 
to the United States.
     Please include any sales exported by your company to a 
third-country market economy reseller where you had knowledge that the 
merchandise was destined to be resold to the United States.
     If you are a producer of subject merchandise, please 
include any sales manufactured by your company that were subsequently 
exported by an affiliated exporter to the United States.
     Please do not include any sales of subject merchandise 
manufactured in Hong Kong in your figures.
    Constructed Export Price Sales:
     Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as a constructed 
export price sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated customer 
occurs after importation. However, if the first sale to the 
unaffiliated customer is made by a person in the United States 
affiliated with the foreign exporter, constructed export price applies 
even if the sale occurs prior to importation.
     Please include any sales exported by your company directly 
to the United States;
     Please include any sales exported by your company to a 
third-country market economy reseller where you had knowledge that the 
merchandise was destined to be resold to the United States.
     If you are a producer of subject merchandise, please 
include any sales manufactured by your company that were subsequently 
exported by an affiliated exporter to the United States.
     Please do not include any sales of subject merchandise 
manufactured in Hong Kong in your figures.
    Further Manufactured:
     Sales of further manufactured or assembled (including re-
packaged) merchandise is merchandise that undergoes further manufacture 
or assembly in the United States before being sold to the first 
unaffiliated customer.
     Further manufacture or assembly costs include amounts 
incurred for direct materials, labor and overhead, plus amounts for 
general and administrative expense, interest expense, and additional 
packing expense incurred in the country of further manufacture, as well 
as all costs involved in moving the product from the U.S. port of entry 
to the further manufacturer.

 [FR Doc. E8-10515 Filed 5-9-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P