Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 55814-55816 [E8-22714]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
55814
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Notices
Lilit
Astvatsatrian, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 8, Import Administration, Room
1870, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–6412.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Background
On June 9, 2008, the Department of
Commerce (‘‘the Department’’)
published a notice of opportunity to
request an administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on folding
metal tables and chairs (‘‘FMTCs’’) from
the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).
See Antidumping or Countervailing
Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation: Opportunity to Request
Administrative Review, 73 FR 32557
(June 9, 2008). On June 23, 2008, Meco
Corporation (‘‘Meco’’), a domestic
producer of the like product, requested
that the Department conduct an
administrative review of Dongguan
Shichang Metals Factory Co. Ltd.
(‘‘Shichang’’). The Department
published a notice of initiation of the
antidumping duty administrative review
of FMTCs from the PRC for the period
June 1, 2007, through May 31, 2008. See
Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews, Request for Revocation in Part,
and Deferral of Administrative Review,
73 FR 44220 (July 30, 2008).
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Rescission of Review
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the
Secretary will rescind an administrative
review, in whole or in part, if the party
that requested the review withdraws the
request within 90 days of the date of
publication of the notice of initiation of
the requested review. On August 11,
2008, Meco timely withdrew its request
for an administrative review of
Shichang (i.e., within 90 days of the
publication of the notice of initiation of
this review). Because Meco was the only
requesting party of an administrative
review with respect to Shichang, the
Department hereby rescinds the
administrative review of FMTCs with
respect to Shichang, in accordance with
19 CFR 351.213(d)(1). The Department
intends to issue assessment instructions
to U.S. Customs and Border Protection
15 days after the publication of this
notice of partial rescission of
administrative review.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder
to importers of their responsibility
under section 351.402(f) of the
Department’s regulations to file a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:07 Sep 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
certificate regarding the reimbursement
of antidumping duties prior to
liquidation of the relevant entries
during this review period. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
result in the Secretary’s assumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and subsequent assessment of
double antidumping duties.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with section 777(i) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19
CFR 351.213(d)(4).
Dated: September 19, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–22711 Filed 9–25–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–836]
Glycine From the People’s Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 4, 2008, the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) published the
preliminary results and partial
rescission of the 2006–2007
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on glycine from
the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).
See Glycine from the People’s Republic
of China: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and Partial Rescission, 73 FR
18503 (April 4, 2008) (‘‘Preliminary
Results’’). We gave interested parties an
opportunity to comment on the
Preliminary Results. Based upon our
analysis of the comments and
information received, we made changes
to the margin calculation for the final
results. We find that certain
manufacturers/exporters sold subject
merchandise at less than normal value
during the period of review (‘‘POR’’)
March 1, 2006, through February 28,
2007.
AGENCY:
DATES:
Effective Date: September 26,
2008.
Erin
Begnal or Toni Dach, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 9, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
telephone: (202) 482–1442 or (202) 482–
1655, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The following events have occurred
subsequent to the publication of the
Preliminary Results. On April 10, 2008,
the Department issued Baoding
Mantong Fine Chemistry Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Baoding Mantong) a supplemental
questionnaire, and Baoding Mantong
submitted its response to the
Department’s supplemental
questionnaire on April 17, 2008. On
April 24, 2008, the Department
extended the deadline for submitting
surrogate value (‘‘SV’’) information, and
for submitting case briefs and rebuttal
briefs. On April 30, 2008, the
Department further extended the
deadline for submitting case briefs and
rebuttal briefs.
On May 8, 2008, parties submitted SV
comments, and on May 19, 2008, Geo
Specialty Chemicals Inc. (‘‘Petitioner’’)
submitted rebuttal comments. On May
19, 2008, Baoding Mantong submitted
its case brief, and on May 28, 2008,
Petitioner submitted its case brief. On
June 3, 2008, Baoding Mantong
submitted its rebuttal brief, and on June
4, 2008, Petitioner submitted its rebuttal
brief. On June 18, 2008, the Department
rejected Baoding Mantong’s rebuttal
brief for containing new factual
information, which Baoding Mantong
resubmitted on June 19, 2008. On July
15, 2008, we extended the time limit for
the completion of the final results of
this review by thirty days until
September 2, 2008. See Notice of
Extension of Time Limit for Final
Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Glycine from the
People’s Republic of China, 73 FR 40480
(July 15, 2008). On August 29, 2008, we
extended the time limit for completion
of the final results by an extra 17 days
until September 19, 2008. See Notice of
Extension of Time Limit for Final
Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Glycine from the
People’s Republic of China, 73 FR 50939
(August 29, 2008). Scope of the Order
The product covered by the 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 review covers glycine of all
purity levels. Glycine is currently
classified under subheading
2922.49.4020 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the HTSUS
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Notices
subheading is provided for convenience
and Customs purposes, the written
description of the merchandise under
the order is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the briefs are
addressed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Results in
the 2006–2007 Administrative Review
of Glycine from the People’s Republic of
China from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy
Assistant Secretary, to David M.
Spooner, Assistant Secretary, dated
September 19, 2008, (‘‘I&D Memo’’),
which is hereby adopted by this notice.
A list of the issues raised, all of which
are addressed in the I&D Memo, is
attached to this notice as Appendix I.
Parties can find a complete discussion
of all issues raised in the briefs and the
corresponding recommendations in this
public memorandum, which is on file in
the Central Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’), room
1117 of the Department of Commerce. In
addition, a complete version of the I&D
Memo can be accessed directly on the
Web at https://trade.gov/ia. The paper
copy and electronic version of the I&D
Memo are identical in content.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Separate Rates
Baoding Mantong requested a
separate, company-specific antidumping
duty rate. In the Preliminary Results, we
found that Baoding Mantong met the
criteria for the application of a separate
antidumping duty rate. Preliminary
Results, 73 FR at 18505. Therefore, the
Department has applied a rate to
Baoding Mantong separate from the rate
established for the PRC-wide entity.
Also in the Preliminary Results, the
Department found that Nantong
Dongchang Chemical Industry
Corporation (‘‘Nantong Dongchang’’)
ceased to participate in the
administrative review without having
demonstrated its entitlement to a
separate rate. Id. Accordingly, Nantong
Dongchang does not qualify for separate
rate status, but rather is appropriately
considered to be part of the PRC-wide
entity which is assigned a rate of 155.89
percent based on facts otherwise
available with an adverse inference
(‘‘AFA’’). Id. The Department did not
receive comments on this issue prior to
these final results.
Use of Facts Otherwise Available and
the PRC-Wide Rate
As noted above, the Department
found that Nantong Dongchang did not
establish its eligibility for separate rate
status, and thus is deemed to be part of
the PRC-wide entity. Also, in the
Preliminary Results, the Department
noted that Nantong Dongchang ceased
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:07 Sep 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
participating in the administrative
review, and did not respond to any
portions of the Department’s
questionnaires. As the Department
found that the PRC-wide entity, which
includes Nantong Dongchang, failed to
cooperate to the best of its ability in
responding to the Department’s requests
for information and thereby impeded
the Department’s proceeding, the
Department assigned the PRC-wide
entity a rate based on AFA pursuant to
sections 776(a)(2)(A), (B), and (C) and
section 776(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (‘‘the Act’’). See Preliminary
Results at 73 FR at 18506. The
Department did not receive any
comments regarding its preliminary
application of AFA to the PRC-wide
entity. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR at
18505–18507. Therefore, for these final
results, the Department has not altered
its analysis or decision to apply total
AFA to the PRC-wide entity.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of information
on the record of this review, and
comments received from the interested
parties, we have made changes to the
margin calculations for Baoding
Mantong.
We have made modifications to our
selecetion of certain SVs used in the
Preliminary Results. The values that
were modified for these final results are
those for steam coal, acetic acid, liquid
chlorine, and the surrogate financial
ratios. For further details see I&D Memo
at Comments 1, 2, 4, and 5, and
Memorandum to the File through Scot
T. Fullerton, Program Manager, Office 9
from Toni Dach, International Trade
Analyst, Office 9, regarding,
‘‘Administrative Review of Glycine from
the People’s Republic of China:
Surrogate Values for the Final Results,’’
dated September 19, 2008.
We determine that the following
antidumping duty margins exist for the
period of March 1, 2006, through
February 28, 2007:
55815
intends to issue assessment instructions
to CBP 15 days after the date of
publication of these final results of
review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of this notice of final results
of administrative review for all
shipments of glycine from the PRC
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the date of
publication, as provided by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Baoding
Mantong, which has a separate rate, the
cash deposit rate will be the companyspecific rate shown above; (2) for
previously reviewed or investigated
companies not listed above that have a
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the company-specific rate
published for the most recent period; (3)
the cash deposit rate for all other PRC
exporters will be 155.89 percent, the
current PRC-wide rate; and (4) the cash
deposit rate for all non-PRC exporters
will be the rate applicable to the PRC
exporter that supplied that exporter.
These cash deposit requirements shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice serves as the 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
review period. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
Secretary’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and in the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
This notice also serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’)
Margin
of their responsibility concerning the
Exporter
(percent)
return/destruction or conversion to
judicial protective order of proprietary
Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co., Ltd. ...........................
52.02 information disclosed under APO in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3).
PRC-Wide Rate (including
Failure to comply is a violation of the
Nantong Dongchang Chemical
Industry Corporation) ..............
155.89 APO.
This notice of final results is issued
Assessment Rates
and published in accordance with
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), the
Act.
Department will determine, and U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’)
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries. The Department
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
55816
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Notices
Dated: September 19, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I
List of Issues
Comment 1: Surrogate Value for Steam Coal.
Comment 2: Surrogate Value for Acetic Acid.
Comment 3: Surrogate Value for Ammonia.
Comment 4: Surrogate Financial Ratios.
Comment 5: Surrogate Value for Chlorine.
Comment 6: Surrogate Value for Truck
Freight.
[FR Doc. E8–22714 Filed 9–25–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[Docket No. 0808271163; RIN 0648–ZA70]
NOAA Community-based Restoration
Program Guidelines
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On August 24, 2005 NOAA
published a notice in the Federal
Register that announced revisions to
guidelines for the Community-based
Restoration Program (Program). The
notice requested public comment on
proposed updates to the guidelines that
describe how the Program is
implemented, and notified the public
about a constituent feedback meeting
that was scheduled for September 13,
2005 in Washington DC. This notice
makes minor changes to the previously
published guidelines and responds
generally to the comments received,
summarizes the constituent feedback
meeting in Washington, D.C., and
highlights specific authorization for the
Program established in the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Reauthorization Act of
2006. NOAA expects to periodically
update these guidelines every 3 to 5
years to reflect the evolution of the
Program. This is not a solicitation of
project proposals.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robin Bruckner, (301) 713–0174, or by
e-mail at Robin.Bruckner@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
NOAA Community-based Restoration
Program (Program) was established in
1996. Proposed Guidelines for the
Program were first published in the
Federal Register on October 1, 1999 (64
FR 53339). In that document, comments
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:07 Sep 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
were sought on modifications to the
Program that would allow greater
flexibility to support community-based
habitat restoration projects. Final
Program Guidelines, including
responses to comments, were published
on March 30, 2000 (65 FR 16890). In the
time since the original guidelines were
issued, the Program has: experienced an
increase in base funding; emphasized
certain techniques through targeted
initiatives, such as fish passage and
marine debris prevention and removal,
to expand benefits to aquatic resources;
undertaken projects in new geographic
locations; increased its focus on
ecosystem-based approaches to
management; and generally has
implemented increased numbers of
locally initiated, grass-roots habitat
restoration projects through
partnerships at the local, regional and
national levels. The Program is now
specifically authorized through the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management
Reauthorization Act of 2006 on January
12, 2007. The NOAA Restoration Center
(Restoration Center) within NMFS is
issuing revised Program guidelines,
which include measures that are in
place or planned to enable the Program
to demonstrate increased accountability
for the expenditure of public dollars.
Responses to Comments
The Program received comments from
three entities during the comment
period (August 24, 2005 through
October 11, 2005). A private individual,
Trout Unlimited, and the Massachusetts
Division of Marine Fisheries submitted
comments. Comments are summarized
below, by commenter, with responses.
Comment 1: The first commenter
noted the Program had reached $13
million in appropriations and inquired
about the Program’s accomplishments in
2004. Specifically, the commenter
requested names and locations of
projects, the amount of money spent,
and what was accomplished (e.g. acres
restored).
Response: Project-specific information
is made available to the public via the
‘‘Funded Projects’’ section of the
Restoration Center website at: https://
seahorse2.nmfs.noaa.gov/hcrcdblapp/
class/. Projects can be viewed by
location, habitat type, or partnership.
Project names, locations, funding
recipients, award amounts and year
awarded, project partners and contacts,
and a summary of each project’s goals,
objectives and results can be found
there.
Comment 2: Trout Unlimited offered
full support for the proposed Program
changes, and emphasized the most
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
beneficial changes. These included: (1)
the requirement for project partners to
provide detailed project information for
the Restoration Center database; (2) the
requirement for science-based
monitoring where appropriate as
supported by the Estuaries and Clean
Waters Act of 2000; (3) consideration of
habitat restoration in the Great Lakes
region; and (4) the increase of upper and
lower funding ranges for financial
assistance for projects.
Response: NOAA agrees with the
commenter that the proposed changes:
(1) are essential to evaluate progress of
work funded by the Program; (2)
represent a long-term commitment of
the Program to measure project
outcomes such as improvements in
habitat productivity and fish
populations; (3) represent a reasonable
direction for the Program expansion
(into the Great Lakes, dependant on
Congressional appropriations) given
NOAA’s traditional responsibilities for
habitat restoration in large aquatic
systems; and (4) increases efficiency and
cost-effectiveness of the Program.
Regarding the fourth point, since small
projects often require the same level of
NOAA staff support to ensure
environmental compliance as do larger
projects, they have become less costeffective. NOAA agrees with the
commenter that national and regional
partnerships can provide smaller
awards more cost-effectively as part of
larger, more comprehensive restoration
activities.
Comment 3: The Massachusetts
Division of Marine Fisheries (MADMF)
was generally very supportive of the
goals and efforts of programs within
NOAA Fisheries Office of Habitat
Conservation, and offered specific
comments in the context of improving
federal-state communication and project
execution. The commenter: (1)
requested clarification of state-federal
interactions to ensure the objectives of
the Program are consistent with existing
state authority and objectives for
anadromous and marine fisheries
resources; (2) requested a process that
would allow the state to provide
technical comments and approval on
project proposals and designs, and
suggested that NOAA require support
letters from the state agency with
responsibility over the target resources;
(3) suggested that formal partnerships
between NOAA and state agencies be
established to provide a streamlined and
dedicated annual funding source for
ongoing state programs that routinely
address priority anadromous fish
restoration projects; and (4) suggested
that improvements were needed in the
coordination between the Program and
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 188 (Friday, September 26, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55814-55816]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22714]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-836]
Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 4, 2008, the Department of Commerce (``Department'')
published the preliminary results and partial rescission of the 2006-
2007 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on glycine
from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''). See Glycine from the
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Partial Rescission, 73 FR 18503 (April 4,
2008) (``Preliminary Results''). We gave interested parties an
opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results. Based upon our
analysis of the comments and information received, we made changes to
the margin calculation for the final results. We find that certain
manufacturers/exporters sold subject merchandise at less than normal
value during the period of review (``POR'') March 1, 2006, through
February 28, 2007.
DATES: Effective Date: September 26, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin Begnal or Toni Dach, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
1442 or (202) 482-1655, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The following events have occurred subsequent to the publication of
the Preliminary Results. On April 10, 2008, the Department issued
Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co., Ltd. (``Baoding Mantong) a
supplemental questionnaire, and Baoding Mantong submitted its response
to the Department's supplemental questionnaire on April 17, 2008. On
April 24, 2008, the Department extended the deadline for submitting
surrogate value (``SV'') information, and for submitting case briefs
and rebuttal briefs. On April 30, 2008, the Department further extended
the deadline for submitting case briefs and rebuttal briefs.
On May 8, 2008, parties submitted SV comments, and on May 19, 2008,
Geo Specialty Chemicals Inc. (``Petitioner'') submitted rebuttal
comments. On May 19, 2008, Baoding Mantong submitted its case brief,
and on May 28, 2008, Petitioner submitted its case brief. On June 3,
2008, Baoding Mantong submitted its rebuttal brief, and on June 4,
2008, Petitioner submitted its rebuttal brief. On June 18, 2008, the
Department rejected Baoding Mantong's rebuttal brief for containing new
factual information, which Baoding Mantong resubmitted on June 19,
2008. On July 15, 2008, we extended the time limit for the completion
of the final results of this review by thirty days until September 2,
2008. See Notice of Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of the
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Glycine from the People's
Republic of China, 73 FR 40480 (July 15, 2008). On August 29, 2008, we
extended the time limit for completion of the final results by an extra
17 days until September 19, 2008. See Notice of Extension of Time Limit
for Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review:
Glycine from the People's Republic of China, 73 FR 50939 (August 29,
2008). Scope of the Order
The product covered by the 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 review covers glycine of all purity
levels. Glycine is currently classified under subheading 2922.49.4020
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'').
Although the HTSUS
[[Page 55815]]
subheading is provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the
written description of the merchandise under the order is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the briefs are addressed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Final Results in the 2006-2007
Administrative Review of Glycine from the People's Republic of China
from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary, to David M.
Spooner, Assistant Secretary, dated September 19, 2008, (``I&D Memo''),
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues raised,
all of which are addressed in the I&D Memo, is attached to this notice
as Appendix I. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues
raised in the briefs and the corresponding recommendations in this
public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit
(``CRU''), room 1117 of the Department of Commerce. In addition, a
complete version of the I&D Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at
https://trade.gov/ia. The paper copy and electronic version of the I&D
Memo are identical in content.
Separate Rates
Baoding Mantong requested a separate, company-specific antidumping
duty rate. In the Preliminary Results, we found that Baoding Mantong
met the criteria for the application of a separate antidumping duty
rate. Preliminary Results, 73 FR at 18505. Therefore, the Department
has applied a rate to Baoding Mantong separate from the rate
established for the PRC-wide entity. Also in the Preliminary Results,
the Department found that Nantong Dongchang Chemical Industry
Corporation (``Nantong Dongchang'') ceased to participate in the
administrative review without having demonstrated its entitlement to a
separate rate. Id. Accordingly, Nantong Dongchang does not qualify for
separate rate status, but rather is appropriately considered to be part
of the PRC-wide entity which is assigned a rate of 155.89 percent based
on facts otherwise available with an adverse inference (``AFA''). Id.
The Department did not receive comments on this issue prior to these
final results.
Use of Facts Otherwise Available and the PRC-Wide Rate
As noted above, the Department found that Nantong Dongchang did not
establish its eligibility for separate rate status, and thus is deemed
to be part of the PRC-wide entity. Also, in the Preliminary Results,
the Department noted that Nantong Dongchang ceased participating in the
administrative review, and did not respond to any portions of the
Department's questionnaires. As the Department found that the PRC-wide
entity, which includes Nantong Dongchang, failed to cooperate to the
best of its ability in responding to the Department's requests for
information and thereby impeded the Department's proceeding, the
Department assigned the PRC-wide entity a rate based on AFA pursuant to
sections 776(a)(2)(A), (B), and (C) and section 776(b) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). See Preliminary Results at 73 FR
at 18506. The Department did not receive any comments regarding its
preliminary application of AFA to the PRC-wide entity. See Preliminary
Results, 73 FR at 18505-18507. Therefore, for these final results, the
Department has not altered its analysis or decision to apply total AFA
to the PRC-wide entity.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of information on the record of this review,
and comments received from the interested parties, we have made changes
to the margin calculations for Baoding Mantong.
We have made modifications to our selecetion of certain SVs used in
the Preliminary Results. The values that were modified for these final
results are those for steam coal, acetic acid, liquid chlorine, and the
surrogate financial ratios. For further details see I&D Memo at
Comments 1, 2, 4, and 5, and Memorandum to the File through Scot T.
Fullerton, Program Manager, Office 9 from Toni Dach, International
Trade Analyst, Office 9, regarding, ``Administrative Review of Glycine
from the People's Republic of China: Surrogate Values for the Final
Results,'' dated September 19, 2008.
We determine that the following antidumping duty margins exist for
the period of March 1, 2006, through February 28, 2007:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Exporter (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co., Ltd..................... 52.02
PRC-Wide Rate (including Nantong Dongchang Chemical Industry 155.89
Corporation)...............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), the Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries. The Department intends to issue assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these
final results of review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review
for all shipments of glycine from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as
provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Baoding Mantong,
which has a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the company-
specific rate shown above; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated
companies not listed above that have a separate rate, the cash deposit
rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the
most recent period; (3) the cash deposit rate for all other PRC
exporters will be 155.89 percent, the current PRC-wide rate; and (4)
the cash deposit rate for all non-PRC exporters will be the rate
applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that exporter. These cash
deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further notice.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice serves as the 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 review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and in the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the return/destruction or conversion to judicial protective
order of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with
19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Failure to comply is a violation of the APO.
This notice of final results is issued and published in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
[[Page 55816]]
Dated: September 19, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I
List of Issues
Comment 1: Surrogate Value for Steam Coal.
Comment 2: Surrogate Value for Acetic Acid.
Comment 3: Surrogate Value for Ammonia.
Comment 4: Surrogate Financial Ratios.
Comment 5: Surrogate Value for Chlorine.
Comment 6: Surrogate Value for Truck Freight.
[FR Doc. E8-22714 Filed 9-25-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
