Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 77323-77325 [2015-31427]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 239 / Monday, December 14, 2015 / Notices review period. 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. We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213. Dated: December 2, 2015. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. Appendix I List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum (1) Summary (2) Background (3) Scope of the Order (4) Respondent Selection (5) DISCUSSION OF THE METHODOLOGY a. Preliminary Determination of No Shipments b. Duty Absorption c. NME Country Status d. Separate Rates (6) Conclusion [FR Doc. 2015–31426 Filed 12–11–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee Public Meeting auxiliary aids should be directed to OEEI at (202) 482–5225 no less than one week prior to the meeting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting will take place from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. EST. The general meeting is open to the public and time will be permitted for public comment from 3:00–3:30 p.m. EST. Those interested in attending must provide notification by Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 5:00 p.m. EST, via the contact information provided above. Written comments concerning ETTAC affairs are welcome any time before or after the meeting. Minutes will be available within 30 days of this meeting. Topics to be considered: The agenda for this meeting will include discussion of priorities and objectives for the committee, trade promotion programs within the International Trade Administration, and subcommittee working meetings. Background: The ETTAC is mandated by Public Law 103–392. It was created to advise the U.S. government on environmental trade policies and programs, and to help it to focus its resources on increasing the exports of the U.S. environmental industry. ETTAC operates as an advisory committee to the Secretary of Commerce and the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee (TPCC). ETTAC was originally chartered in May of 1994. It was most recently re-chartered until August 2016. International Trade Administration, DOC. ACTION: Notice of federal advisory committee meeting. Dated: December 7, 2015. Edward A. O’Malley, Office Director, Office of Energy and Environmental Industries. This notice sets forth the schedule and proposed agenda of a meeting of the Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee (ETTAC). DATES: The meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, January 12, 2016, at 8:30 a.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST). ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in Room 48019 at the U.S. Department of Commerce, Herbert Clark Hoover Building, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Amy Kreps, Office of Energy & Environmental Industries (OEEI), International Trade Administration, Room 4053, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (Phone: 202–482–3835; Fax: 202–482–5665; email: amy.kreps@trade.gov.) This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P AGENCY: mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:36 Dec 11, 2015 Jkt 238001 [FR Doc. 2015–31428 Filed 12–11–15; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–937] Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013–2014 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On June 8, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’) published the preliminary results of the fifth administrative review (‘‘AR’’) of the antidumping duty order on citric acid and certain citrate salts (‘‘citric acid’’) from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’), in accordance with section AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 77323 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’).1 On October 27, 2015, the Department issued PostPreliminary Results 2 in this AR. The period of review (‘‘POR’’) for the AR is May 1, 2013, through April 30, 2014. The review covers three companies, RZBC Import & Export Co., Ltd. (‘‘RZBC I&E’’),3 Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co., Ltd. (‘‘Taihe’’), and Yixing Union Biochemical Ltd. (‘‘Yixing Union’’). Based on our analysis of the comments received, we made certain changes to our Post-Preliminary Results. The final dumping margins for this review are listed in the ‘‘Final Results’’ section below. DATES: Effective date: December 14, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Krisha Hill, Maisha Cryor, or Aleksandras Nakutis, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4037, (202) 482– 5831, or (202) 482–3147, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background For a full history of the events that have taken place since the publication of the Preliminary Results and the PostPreliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.4 The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file in the Central Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’), Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building, as well as electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s 1 See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013– 2014, 80 FR 32353 (June 8, 2015) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). 2 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, regarding ‘‘Decision Memorandum for the Post-Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from the People’s Republic of China; 2013–14,’’ dated October 27, 2015 (‘‘PostPreliminary Results’’). 3 The Department initiated the fifth administrative review on RZBC Co., Ltd., RZBC I&E, and RZBC (Juxian) Co., Ltd. (collectively ‘‘RZBC’’). Only RZBC I&E exported subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. 4 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, regarding ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from the People’s Republic of China,’’ issued concurrently with this notice (‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’). E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM 14DEN1 77324 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 239 / Monday, December 14, 2015 / Notices Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (‘‘ACCESS’’). ACCESS is available to registered users at https:// access.trade.gov and it is available to all parties in the CRU. In addition, parties can directly access a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum on the internet at http:// enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Scope of the Order The merchandise covered by this order is citric acid and certain citrate salts from the PRC. The product is currently classified under subheadings 2918.14.0000, 2918.15.1000, 2918.15.5000, and 3824.90.9290 of the Harmonized Tariff System of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of merchandise subject to the scope is dispositive. For a full description of the scope of the order, see Issues and Decision Memorandum. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in parties’ case and rebuttal briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. In an Appendix to this notice, we have provided a list of the issues raised by parties. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Changes Since the Post-Preliminary Results Based on our review of the record and comments received from interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results and Post-Preliminary Results, we have made certain revisions to the margin calculations for RZBC I&E and Taihe. Further, the Final Surrogate Value Memorandum contains descriptions of our changes to the surrogate values.5 • We deducted letter of credit costs from brokerage and handling expense for both respondents. • We made adjustments to labor and limestone consumption in Taihe’s coproduct calculations. • We made adjustments to the export subsidy calculation for RZBC I&E. 5 See Memorandum from Krisha Hill and Maisha Cryor to Robert Bolling regarding, ‘‘Final Results of the Fifth Administrative Review of Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from the People’s Republic of China: Surrogate Value Memorandum,’’ issued concurrently with this memorandum (‘‘Final Surrogate Value Memorandum’’). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:36 Dec 11, 2015 Jkt 238001 Final Determination of No Shipments In the Preliminary Results, the Department preliminarily determined that Yixing Union did not have any reviewable transactions during the POR. We have not received any information to contradict this determination. Therefore, the Department determines that Yixing Union did not have any reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR, and will issue appropriate instructions that are consistent with our ‘‘automatic assessment’’ clarification, for these final results.6 Final Results We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the POR: Weightedaverage dumping margin (percent) Exporter RZBC Import & Export Co., Ltd ..................................... Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co., Ltd ............................. 0.00 6.61 Assessment Rates Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of these final results of this review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we are calculating importer- (or customer-) specific assessment rates for the merchandise subject to this review. For any individually examined respondent whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent), the Department will calculate importer- (or customer)-specific assessment rates for merchandise subject to this review. Where appropriate, we calculated an ad valorem rate for each importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to that party by the total entered values associated with those transactions. For dutyassessment rates calculated on this basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting ad valorem rate against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise. Where appropriate, we 6 See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 4, 2011) (‘‘Assessment Practice Refinement’’). PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 calculated a per-unit rate for each importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to that party by the total sales quantity associated with those transactions. For duty-assessment rates calculated on this basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-unit rate against the entered quantity of the subject merchandise.7 We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-specific assessment rate is above de minimis. Where either the respondent’s weightedaverage dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. Pursuant to a refinement in the Department’s non-market economy (‘‘NME’’) practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales databases submitted by companies individually examined during this review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the PRC-wide rate (i.e., 156.87 percent). In addition, if the Department determines that an exporter under review had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that exporter’s case number (i.e., at that exporter’s rate) will be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.8 Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Yixing Union, which claimed no shipments, the cash deposit will remain unchanged from the rate assigned to Yixing Union in the most recently completed review of the company; (2) for the exporters listed above, the cash deposit rate will be the rate listed for each exporter in the table in the ‘‘Final Results’’ section of this notice; (3) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and nonPRC exporters that received a separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the existing exporter7 See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101, 8103 (February 14, 2012). 8 For a full discussion of this practice, see Assessment Practice Refinement, 76 FR at 65694. E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM 14DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 239 / Monday, December 14, 2015 / Notices specific rate; (4) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity established in the final determination of the less than fair value investigation (i.e., 156.87 percent); and (5) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Disclosure We intend to disclose the calculations performed within five days of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Notification to Importers Regarding the Reimbursement of Duties This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties has occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. We are issuing and publishing these final results of administrative review and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: December 7, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix—Issues and Decision Memorandum Summary VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:36 Dec 11, 2015 Jkt 238001 List of Issues Background Scope of the Order Discussion of the Issues Issues Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Select Indonesia as the Primary Surrogate Country Comment 2: Whether the Department’s Approach to the Surrogate Country Selection Process Is Counter to its Policy, Practice, and Statutory Obligations Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Rely on the Aditya Birla Financial Statements to Calculate the Financial Ratios Comment 4: Whether the Surrogate Financial Ratios Should be Based on PT Budi’s Segment Financial Information Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Assign Surrogate Values to Respondents’ Energy Factors of Production Values Comment 6: The Weight Denominator for Brokerage & Handling and Inland Freight Comment 7: Whether to Deduct Letter of Credit Cost from the Brokerage and Handling Surrogate Value Calculation Comment 8: Whether the Department Should Value Corn Using Indonesian Import Prices or, Alternatively, Recalculate the Thai Import Prices to Exclude Aberrational Data Comment 9: Distance to Calculate Inland Freight Comment 10: Whether the Department Should Make Certain Revisions to its Surrogate Value for Sludge Comment 11: Whether to Value RZBC’s High Protein Scrap as a Co-Product Comment 12: Whether the Department Used Incorrect Rates to Calculate RZBC I&E’s Export Subsidy Adjustment Comment 13: Whether the Department Should Treat Taihe’s Corn Feed as a ByProduct Comment 14: Whether the Department Should Make Certain Revisions to Taihe’s Co-Product Calculation Comment 15: Whether the Application of Differential Pricing Methodology to Taihe’s Sales is Contrary to Law and Otherwise Unsupported by Substantial Evidence on the Record Recommendation [FR Doc. 2015–31427 Filed 12–11–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–968] Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results, and Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) completed its AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 77325 administrative review of the countervailing duty order 1 (CVD) on aluminum extrusions from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) for the January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013 period of review (POR). We determined that the Guang Ya Group 2 and the Jangho Companies 3 (mandatory respondents) received countervailable subsidies during the POR. The final net subsidy rates are listed below in ‘‘Final Results of Administrative Review.’’ DATES: Effective date: December 14, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Davina Friedmann, Tyler Weinhold or Robert James, 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) 482–0698, (202) 482–1121 or (202) 482– 0649, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On June 9, 2015, the Department published the Preliminary Results of this administrative review.4 On October 7, 2015, the Department extended the final results of this administrative review until December 7, 2015. On October 27, 2015, the Department issued its post-preliminary results of review.5 The Department invited interested parties to comment on both the Preliminary Results and Post1 See Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China: Countervailing Duty Order, 76 FR 30653 (May 26, 2011) (Order). 2 For purposes of this administrative review, the Guang Ya Group includes Guang Ya Aluminium Industries Co. Ltd.; Foshan Guangcheng Aluminium Co., Ltd.; and Yonghi Guanghai Aluminium Industry Co., Ltd. Also, these companies submitted responses on the record of this review clarifying the usage of ‘‘Aluminium’’ in its name, rather than ‘‘Aluminum,’’ the form on which we both received a request for review and/or on which we initiated this review. 3 For purposes of this administrative review, the Jangho companies includes Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., Ltd., (Guangzhou Jangho); Jangho Group Co., Ltd. (Jangho Group Co.); Beijing Jiangheyuan Holding Co., Ltd (Beijing Jiangheyuan); Beijing Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., Ltd. (Beijing Jangho); and Shanghai Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., Ltd., (Shanghai Jangho). 4 See Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results, Preliminary Intent To Rescind, in Part, and Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013, 80 FR 32528, dated June 9, 2015 (Preliminary Results). 5 See Memorandum from Scot Fullerton through Christian Marsh to Paul Piquado re: ‘‘PostPreliminary Analysis Memorandum in the 2013 Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated October 27, 2015 (Post-Preliminary Analysis). E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM 14DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 239 (Monday, December 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77323-77325]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31427]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-937]


Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From the People's Republic 
of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 
2013-2014

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

SUMMARY: On June 8, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the 
``Department'') published the preliminary results of the fifth 
administrative review (``AR'') of the antidumping duty order on citric 
acid and certain citrate salts (``citric acid'') from the People's 
Republic of China (``PRC''), in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of 
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'').\1\ On October 27, 
2015, the Department issued Post-Preliminary Results \2\ in this AR. 
The period of review (``POR'') for the AR is May 1, 2013, through April 
30, 2014. The review covers three companies, RZBC Import & Export Co., 
Ltd. (``RZBC I&E''),\3\ Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co., Ltd. (``Taihe''), 
and Yixing Union Biochemical Ltd. (``Yixing Union''). Based on our 
analysis of the comments received, we made certain changes to our Post-
Preliminary Results. The final dumping margins for this review are 
listed in the ``Final Results'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From the People's 
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 80 FR 32353 (June 8, 2015) 
(``Preliminary Results'').
    \2\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to 
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, 
regarding ``Decision Memorandum for the Post-Preliminary Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Citric Acid and Certain 
Citrate Salts from the People's Republic of China; 2013-14,'' dated 
October 27, 2015 (``Post-Preliminary Results'').
    \3\ The Department initiated the fifth administrative review on 
RZBC Co., Ltd., RZBC I&E, and RZBC (Juxian) Co., Ltd. (collectively 
``RZBC''). Only RZBC I&E exported subject merchandise to the United 
States during the POR.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective date: December 14, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Krisha Hill, Maisha Cryor, or 
Aleksandras Nakutis, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and 
Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 
14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 
telephone: (202) 482-4037, (202) 482-5831, or (202) 482-3147, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    For a full history of the events that have taken place since the 
publication of the Preliminary Results and the Post-Preliminary 
Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\4\ The Issues and 
Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file in the Central 
Records Unit (``CRU''), Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce 
building, as well as electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's

[[Page 77324]]

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service 
System (``ACCESS''). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and it is available to all parties in the CRU. In 
addition, parties can directly access a complete version of the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum on the internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed Issues and Decision 
Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul 
Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, 
regarding ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Citric Acid and Certain 
Citrate Salts from the People's Republic of China,'' issued 
concurrently with this notice (``Issues and Decision Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by this order is citric acid and certain 
citrate salts from the PRC. The product is currently classified under 
subheadings 2918.14.0000, 2918.15.1000, 2918.15.5000, and 3824.90.9290 
of the Harmonized Tariff System of the United States (HTSUS). Although 
the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes, the written description of merchandise subject to the scope 
is dispositive. For a full description of the scope of the order, see 
Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in parties' case and rebuttal briefs are 
addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. In an Appendix to this 
notice, we have provided a list of the issues raised by parties.

Changes Since the Post-Preliminary Results

    Based on our review of the record and comments received from 
interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results and Post-
Preliminary Results, we have made certain revisions to the margin 
calculations for RZBC I&E and Taihe. Further, the Final Surrogate Value 
Memorandum contains descriptions of our changes to the surrogate 
values.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Memorandum from Krisha Hill and Maisha Cryor to Robert 
Bolling regarding, ``Final Results of the Fifth Administrative 
Review of Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from the People's 
Republic of China: Surrogate Value Memorandum,'' issued concurrently 
with this memorandum (``Final Surrogate Value Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     We deducted letter of credit costs from brokerage and 
handling expense for both respondents.
     We made adjustments to labor and limestone consumption in 
Taihe's co-product calculations.
     We made adjustments to the export subsidy calculation for 
RZBC I&E.

Final Determination of No Shipments

    In the Preliminary Results, the Department preliminarily determined 
that Yixing Union did not have any reviewable transactions during the 
POR. We have not received any information to contradict this 
determination. Therefore, the Department determines that Yixing Union 
did not have any reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the 
POR, and will issue appropriate instructions that are consistent with 
our ``automatic assessment'' clarification, for these final results.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment 
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 4, 2011) (``Assessment 
Practice Refinement'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Results

    We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins 
exist for the POR:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Weighted-
                                                              average
                        Exporter                          dumping margin
                                                             (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RZBC Import & Export Co., Ltd...........................            0.00
Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co., Ltd.......................            6.61
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), 
the Department has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries 
covered by this review. The Department intends to issue assessment 
instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of these final 
results of this review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we are 
calculating importer- (or customer-) specific assessment rates for the 
merchandise subject to this review. For any individually examined 
respondent whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis 
(i.e., 0.50 percent), the Department will calculate importer- (or 
customer)-specific assessment rates for merchandise subject to this 
review. Where appropriate, we calculated an ad valorem rate for each 
importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for 
reviewed sales to that party by the total entered values associated 
with those transactions. For duty-assessment rates calculated on this 
basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting ad valorem rate 
against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise. Where 
appropriate, we calculated a per-unit rate for each importer (or 
customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to 
that party by the total sales quantity associated with those 
transactions. For duty-assessment rates calculated on this basis, we 
will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-unit rate against the 
entered quantity of the subject merchandise.\7\ We will instruct CBP to 
assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this 
review when the importer-specific assessment rate is above de minimis. 
Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero 
or de minimis, or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de 
minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries 
without regard to antidumping duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-
Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping 
Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101, 8103 (February 14, 
2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to a refinement in the Department's non-market economy 
(``NME'') practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. 
sales databases submitted by companies individually examined during 
this review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries 
at the PRC-wide rate (i.e., 156.87 percent). In addition, if the 
Department determines that an exporter under review had no shipments of 
the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that 
exporter's case number (i.e., at that exporter's rate) will be 
liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For a full discussion of this practice, see Assessment 
Practice Refinement, 76 FR at 65694.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this administrative review for 
shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as 
provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Yixing Union, 
which claimed no shipments, the cash deposit will remain unchanged from 
the rate assigned to Yixing Union in the most recently completed review 
of the company; (2) for the exporters listed above, the cash deposit 
rate will be the rate listed for each exporter in the table in the 
``Final Results'' section of this notice; (3) for previously 
investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters that received a 
separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit 
rate will continue to be the existing exporter-

[[Page 77325]]

specific rate; (4) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that 
have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit 
rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity established in the final 
determination of the less than fair value investigation (i.e., 156.87 
percent); and (5) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise 
which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be 
the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that non-PRC 
exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in 
effect until further notice.

Disclosure

    We intend to disclose the calculations performed within five days 
of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding 
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Notification to Importers Regarding the Reimbursement of Duties

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this 
requirement could result in the Department's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties has occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which 
continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of 
the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or 
destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective 
order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and 
terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.
    We are issuing and publishing these final results of administrative 
review and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of 
the Act.

    Dated: December 7, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix--Issues and Decision Memorandum

Summary
List of Issues
Background
Scope of the Order
Discussion of the Issues
Issues
    Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Select Indonesia as the 
Primary Surrogate Country
    Comment 2: Whether the Department's Approach to the Surrogate 
Country Selection Process Is Counter to its Policy, Practice, and 
Statutory Obligations
    Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Rely on the Aditya 
Birla Financial Statements to Calculate the Financial Ratios
    Comment 4: Whether the Surrogate Financial Ratios Should be 
Based on PT Budi's Segment Financial Information
    Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Assign Surrogate Values 
to Respondents' Energy Factors of Production Values
    Comment 6: The Weight Denominator for Brokerage & Handling and 
Inland Freight
    Comment 7: Whether to Deduct Letter of Credit Cost from the 
Brokerage and Handling Surrogate Value Calculation
    Comment 8: Whether the Department Should Value Corn Using 
Indonesian Import Prices or, Alternatively, Recalculate the Thai 
Import Prices to Exclude Aberrational Data
    Comment 9: Distance to Calculate Inland Freight
    Comment 10: Whether the Department Should Make Certain Revisions 
to its Surrogate Value for Sludge
    Comment 11: Whether to Value RZBC's High Protein Scrap as a Co-
Product
    Comment 12: Whether the Department Used Incorrect Rates to 
Calculate RZBC I&E's Export Subsidy Adjustment
    Comment 13: Whether the Department Should Treat Taihe's Corn 
Feed as a By-Product
    Comment 14: Whether the Department Should Make Certain Revisions 
to Taihe's Co-Product Calculation
    Comment 15: Whether the Application of Differential Pricing 
Methodology to Taihe's Sales is Contrary to Law and Otherwise 
Unsupported by Substantial Evidence on the Record
Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2015-31427 Filed 12-11-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P