1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid From the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 14876-14879 [2017-05805]
Download as PDF
14876
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 55 / Thursday, March 23, 2017 / Notices
International Trade Commission
Notification
In accordance with section 735(d) of
the Act, we will notify the U.S.
International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’)
of our final determination. As our final
determination is affirmative, in
accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the
Act, the ITC will determine within 45
days of the final determination whether
the domestic industry in the United
States is materially injured, or
threatened with material injury, by
reason of imports, or sales (or the
likelihood of sales) for importation, of
the subject merchandise. If the ITC
determines that such injury exists, the
Department will issue an antidumping
duty order directing CBP to assess, upon
further-instruction by the Department,
antidumping duties on all imports of the
subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the effective
date of the suspension of liquidation.
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Orders (‘‘APOs’’)
This notice will serve as a reminder
to parties subject to APOs of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the destruction of
APO materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the-regulations
and the terms of an APO is a
sanctionable violation.
This determination and notice are
issued and published in accordance
with sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the
Act.
Dated: March 16, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement
and Compliance.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Appendix
List of Topics in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum
I. Summary
II. List of Issues
III. Background
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. Discussion of the Issues
Comment 1: Whether the Department
Should Use Contract Date as the Date of
Sale for Korvan’s Sales to one of its U.S.
Customers
Comment 2: Duty Drawback
Comment 3: Whether the Department
Should Continue to Treat Korvan’s
Separate Home Market Sale of KorvanProduced and Korvan-Purchased
Ferrovanadium as a Separate Sales
Comment 4: Whether the Department
Should Apply Its Standard Average-To-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Mar 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
Average Method Calculating the Margin
in the Final Determination
Comment 5: Whether the Department Made
Certain Ministerial Errors in its
Calculations
Comment 6: General and administrative
(G&A) Expenses
Comment 7: Financial Expenses
Comment 8: Whether to Continue to Apply
a Quarterly Cost Methodology
V. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2017–05808 Filed 3–22–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–045]
1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1Diphosphonic Acid From the People’s
Republic of China: Final Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Department) determines that 1Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic
Acid (HEDP) from the People’s Republic
of China (PRC) is being, or is likely to
be, sold in the United States at less than
fair value (LTFV). The final weightedaverage dumping margins for the
investigation on HEDP from the PRC are
listed in the ‘‘Final Determination
Margins’’ section of this notice.
DATES: Effective March 23, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Omar Qureshi or Kenneth Hawkins, AD/
CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement
and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482–5307 or (202) 482–6491,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (POI) is
July 1, 2015, through December 31,
2015. This period corresponds to the
two most recent fiscal quarters prior to
the month of the filing of the petition,
which was January 2016.3
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by this
investigation includes all grades of
aqueous acidic (non-neutralized)
concentrations of 1-hydroxyethylidene1, 1-diphosphonic acid (HEDP), also
referred to as
hydroxyethylidenendiphosphonic acid,
hydroxyethanediphosphonic acid,
acetodiphosphonic acid, and etidronic
acid. The Chemical Abstract Service
(CAS) registry number for HEDP is
2809–21–4.
The merchandise subject to this
investigation is currently classified in
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) at subheading
2931.90.9043. It may also enter under
HTSUS subheadings 2811.19.6090 and
2931.90.9041. While HTSUS
subheadings and the CAS registry
number are provided for convenience
and customs purposes only, the written
description of the scope of this
investigation is dispositive.
Background
On November 4, 2016, the Department
published its Preliminary
Determination.1 We invited interested
parties to comment on our Preliminary
Determination of sales at LTFV. For a
list of the parties that filed case and
rebuttal briefs, see the Issues and
Decision Memorandum.2
Analysis of Comments Received
We addressed all issues raised by
parties in case and rebuttal briefs in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum.4 The
Appendix to this notice includes a list
of the issues which the parties raised
and to which the Department responded
in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum. The Issues and Decision
Memorandum is a public document and
is on file electronically via Enforcement
and Compliance’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (ACCESS).
ACCESS is available to registered users
at https://access.trade.gov. The Issues
and Decision Memorandum is available
to all parties in the Central Records
Unit, Room B8024 of the main
Department of Commerce building. In
addition, a complete version of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum is
available at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
The signed and electronic versions of
1 See 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic
Acid from the People’s Republic of China:
Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value, and Postponement of Final
Determination, 81 FR 76916 (November 4, 2016)
(Preliminary Determination) and accompanying
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
2 See Memorandum from Gary Taverman,
Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations,
to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary
for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination
of the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of 1Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from
the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated concurrently
with this notice (Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
3 See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
4 See Issues and Decision Memorandum.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 55 / Thursday, March 23, 2017 / Notices
the Issues and Decision Memorandum
are identical in content.
surrogate value for Taihe and WW
Group.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the
Act, in December 2016, the Department
conducted verification of the
information submitted by Shandong
Taihe Chemical Co., Ltd. (Taihe),
Nanjing University of Chemical
Technology Changzhou Wujin Water
Quality Stabilizer Factory and Nantong
Uniphos Chemicals Co., Ltd.
(collectively, WW Group) for use in the
final determination. We issued our
verification reports on January 19,
2017.5 The Department used standard
verification procedures, including
examination of relevant accounting and
production records and original source
documents provided by respondents.6
PRC-Wide Entity
As explained in the Preliminary
Determination, we are applying a rate
based entirely on adverse facts available
(AFA) to the PRC-wide entity. The
Department did not receive timely
responses to its quantity and value
(Q&V) questionnaire or separate rate
applications from certain PRC exporters
and/or producers of subject
merchandise that were named in the
petition and to which the Department
issued Q&V questionnaires.7 As these
non-responsive PRC companies did not
demonstrate that they are eligible for
separate rate status, the Department
continues to consider them to be part of
the PRC-wide entity. Further, because
these non-responsive companies
withheld requested information,
significantly impeded the proceeding,
and failed to cooperate to the best of
their abilities, we are basing the PRCwide entity rate on AFA.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Changes Since the Preliminary
Determination
Based on the Department’s
verifications of Taihe and WW Group,
we made changes from the Preliminary
Determination. For WW Group, the
Department classified the company’s
joint-product as a co-product.
Additionally, we made a change to the
calculation of inventory carrying costs
and irrecoverable value-added tax.
For Taihe, the Department did not use
a net realizable value calculation in
Taihe’s margin calculation.
Additionally, for Taihe, we included
inventory carrying costs for all sales
where warehousing expenses were
reported. The Department also included
indirect selling expenses in Taihe’s
margin calculation.
The Department also made the
necessary calculation adjustment to
international freight, domestic
brokerage, and domestic inland freight
where the expenses are calculated on a
gross weight basis for both Taihe and
WW Group. Lastly, the Department
made the necessary calculation
adjustment for marine insurance
5 See the Department’s two memoranda regarding:
‘‘Verification of the Questionnaire Responses of
Shandong Taihe Chemical Co., Ltd. in the
Antidumping Investigation of HEDP from the
People’s Republic of China’’ (January 19, 2017)
(Taihe Verification Report); and ‘‘Verification of the
Questionnaire Responses of the WW Group in the
Antidumping Investigation of 1-Hydroxyethylidene1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid (‘‘HEDP’’) from the
People’s Republic of China’’ (January 19, 2017)
(WW Group’s Verification Report).
5 Id.
6 Id.
7 See Preliminary Determination, and
accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum
at 16–17 (Separate Rate).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Mar 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
PRC-Wide Rate
In selecting the AFA rate for the PRCwide entity, the Department’s practice is
to select a rate that is sufficiently
adverse to ensure that the uncooperative
party does not obtain a more favorable
result by failing to cooperate than if it
had fully cooperated.8 Specifically, it is
the Department’s practice to select, as
an AFA rate, the higher of: (a) The
highest dumping margin alleged in the
petition; or, (b) the highest calculated
dumping margin of any respondent in
the investigation.9 As AFA, the
Department has assigned to the PRCwide entity the rate of 184.01 percent,
which is the highest calculated
dumping margin of any respondent in
the investigation.
14877
the context of non-market economy
cases, the Department looks to section
735(c)(5)(A)–(B) of the Tariff Act of
1930, (as amended) (the Act), which
provides instructions for calculating the
all-others rate in an investigation.
Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides
that the estimated all-others rate shall be
equivalent to the weighted average of
the estimated weighted-average
dumping margins calculated for
exporters and producers individually
investigated, excluding any margins that
are zero, de minimis, or based entirely
on facts available. Section 735(c)(5)(B)
of the Act provides that where all
individually investigated exporters or
producers receive rates that are zero, de
minimis, or based entirely on facts
available, then the Department may use
‘‘any reasonable method’’ to establish
the all-others rate for those companies
not individually investigated.
Apart from the mandatory
respondents in this investigation, two
other PRC exporters of the subject
merchandise during the POI established
entitlement to a separate rate.10 Thus,
separate rates are being assigned in this
segment to Jianghai Environmental
Protection Co., Ltd. (Jianghai) and
Henan Qingshuiyuan Technology Co.,
Ltd. (Qingshuiyuan). There currently
exist no individually investigated
respondents that have failed to
cooperate in this investigation, and
there are no zero or de minimis margins.
Therefore, we are continuing to
determine the separate rate for nonselected companies (Jianghai and
Qingshuiyuan) based on a weighted
average of the calculated rates
determined for the mandatory
respondents,11 in accordance with
section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act.
Final Determination
Non-Selected Separate Rate
In calculating rates for nonindividually investigated respondents in
The Department determines that the
estimated final weighted-average
dumping margins are as follows:
8 See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement
of Final Determination: Purified
Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, 69 FR 77216
(December 27, 2004), unchanged in Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, 70
FR 28279 (May 17, 2005).
9 See, e.g., Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening
Agents from the People’s Republic of China: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 77
FR 17436, 17438 (March 26, 2012); Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Certain Cold-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon Quality
Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China,
65 FR 34660 (May 31, 2000), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
10 See Preliminary Decision.
11 We have calculated (A) a weighted-average of
the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory
respondents; (B) a simple average of the dumping
margins calculated for the mandatory respondents;
and (C) a weighted-average of the dumping margins
calculated for the mandatory respondents using
each company’s publicly-ranged values for the
merchandise under consideration. We compared (B)
and (C) to (A) and selected the rate closest to (A).
Accordingly, we selected (C) as the most
appropriate rate for all other companies. See Ball
Bearings and Parts Thereof from France, Germany,
Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final
Results of Changed-Circumstances Review, and
Revocation of an Order in Part, 75 FR 53661, 53663
(September 1, 2010).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
14878
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 55 / Thursday, March 23, 2017 / Notices
Weighted-average
dumping margin
(percent)
Cash deposit rate
(percent)
184.01
184.01
167.58
167.28
Henan Qingshuiyuan Technology Co., Ltd ............
Jianghai Environmental Protection Co., Ltd ..........
179.76
179.76
179.46
179.46
.................................................................................
184.01
184.01
Producer
Exporter
Nanjing University of Chemical Technology
Changzhou Wujin Water Quality Stabilizer Factory.
Shandong Taihe Water Treatment Technologies
Co., Ltd.
Henan Qingshuiyuan Technology Co., Ltd ............
Jianghai Environmental Protection Co., Ltd ...........
Nanjing University of Chemical Technology
Changzhou Wujin Water Quality Stabilizer Factory and Nantong Uniphos Chemicals Co., Ltd.
Shandong Taihe Chemicals Co., Ltd .....................
PRC-Wide Entity ..............................................
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Disclosure
We intend to disclose to parties the
calculations performed in this
proceeding within five days of any
public announcement of this notice in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Continuation of Suspension of
Liquidation
In accordance with section
735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) to continue to suspend
liquidation of all entries of HEDP from
the PRC, as described in the ‘‘Scope of
the Investigation’’ section, entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after November 4,
2016, the date of publication of the
Preliminary Determination notice in the
Federal Register.
Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of
the Act, the Department will instruct
CBP to require a cash deposit 12 equal to
the weighted-average amount by which
NV exceeds U.S. price as follows: (1)
The cash deposit rate for the exporter/
producer combination listed in the table
above will be the rate identified for that
combination in the table; (2) for all
combinations of PRC exporters/
producers of merchandise under
consideration that have not received
their own separate rate above, the cashdeposit rate will be the cash deposit rate
established for the PRC-wide entity; and
(3) for all non-PRC exporters of the
merchandise under consideration which
have not received their own separate
rate above, the cash-deposit rate will be
the cash deposit rate applicable to the
PRC exporter/producer combination
that supplied that non-PRC exporter.
These suspension of liquidation
instructions will remain in effect until
further notice.
We normally adjust antidumping duty
cash deposit rates by the amount of
export subsidies, where appropriate. In
12 See Modification of Regulations Regarding the
Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional
Measures Period in Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042
(October 3, 2011).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Mar 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
the companion CVD investigation, we
have found that the WW Group did not
receive export subsidies.13 Therefore, no
offset to the WW Group’s cash deposit
rate for export subsidies is necessary.14
With respect to Taihe, because its
countervailing duty rate in the
companion investigation included an
amount for export subsidies, an offset of
0.30 percent will be made to its cash
deposit rate.15 With respect to the
separate-rate companies, we find that an
export subsidy adjustment of 0.30
percent to the cash deposit rate is
warranted because this is the export
subsidy rate included in the
countervailing duty ‘‘all others’’ rate to
which the separate-rate companies are
subject. For the PRC-wide entity, which
received an adverse facts available rate
in this preliminary determination, as an
extension of the adverse inference found
necessary pursuant to section 776(b) of
the Act, the Department has not
adjusted the PRC-wide entity’s AD cash
deposit rate by the lowest export
subsidy rate determined for any party in
the companion CVD proceeding,
because the lowest export subsidy rate
determined in the companion CVD
proceeding is 0.00 percent.16 17
Pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act,
we normally adjust preliminary cash
deposit rates for estimated domestic
subsidy pass-through, where
appropriate. However, in this case there
is no basis to grant a domestic subsidy
pass-through adjustment.18
13 See Countervailing Duty Investigation of 1Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from
the People’s Republic of China: Final Affirmative
Determination and Alignment of Final
Determination with Final Antidumping Duty
Determination, filed concurrently with this notice.
14 Id.
15 Id.
16 See, e.g., Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light
Truck Tires from the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value; Preliminary Affirmative Determination
of Critical Circumstances; In Part and
Postponement of Final Determination, 80 FR 4250
(January 27, 2015), and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum at 35.
17 See HEDP CVD Prelim at 81 FR 62085.
18 See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 28–
29.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
International Trade Commission
Notification
In accordance with section 735(d) of
the Act, we notified the International
Trade Commission (ITC) of the final
affirmative determination of sales at
LTFV. As the Department’s final
determination is affirmative, in
accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the
Act, the ITC will determine, within 45
days, whether the domestic industry in
the United States is materially injured,
or threatened with material injury, by
reason of imports of HEDP for sale from
the PRC, or sales (or the likelihood of
sales) for importation, of HEDP from the
PRC. If the ITC determines that such
injury does not exist, this proceeding
will be terminated and all securities
posted will be refunded or canceled. If
the ITC determines that such injury
does exist, the Department will issue an
antidumping duty order directing CBP
to assess, upon further instruction by
the Department, antidumping duties on
all imports of the subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the effective
date of the suspension of liquidation.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary
Information
This notice also serves as a reminder
to the parties subject to administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition of propriety information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written
notification of return or destruction of
APO materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the regulations
and terms of an APO is a sanctionable
violation.
This determination is issued and
published in accordance with sections
735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 55 / Thursday, March 23, 2017 / Notices
Dated: March 20, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement
and Compliance.
Appendix—Issues and Decision
Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Period of Investigation
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. Scope Comments
VI. Changes Since the Preliminary
Determination
VII. List of Issues
VIII. Discussion of Comments
General Issues:
Comment 1: Selection of Surrogate Country
Comment 2: Selection of Surrogate Final
Ratios and Use of CYDSA’s Financial
Statement
Comment 3: Treatment of Joint Product
Comment 4: Treatment of Water
Comment 5: Net Versus Gross Weight
Comment 6: Surrogate Value for Marine
Insurance
Comment 7: Recalculating Marine
Insurance by Using Gross Unit Price
Comment 8: Consideration of FOPs as
Overhead
Comment 9: Partial Rejection of
Petitioner’s SV Submissions
Comment 10: Selection of Voluntary
Respondent
Comment 11: Surrogate Value for Ocean
Freight
Comment 12: Converting Expense for
INVCARU
Comment 13: Surrogate Value for PCl3
Comment 14: Adjustment of Import
Statistics
Company-Specific Issues: Taihe
Comment 15: Taihe’s Movement Expenses
Company-Specific Issues: WW Group
Comment 16: Conversion Calculation for
Water Surrogate Value
Comment 17: Adjustment of Irrecoverable
VAT
IX. Conclusion
[FR Doc. 2017–05805 Filed 3–22–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Institute of Standards and
Technology
[Docket No.: 170221188–7188–01]
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
RIN 0693–XC072
National Cybersecurity Center of
Excellence (NCCoE) Capabilities
Assessment for Securing
Manufacturing Industrial Control
Systems for the Manufacturing Sector
National Institute of Standards
and Technology, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST)
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Mar 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
invites organizations to provide
products and technical expertise to
support and demonstrate security
platforms for the Capabilities
Assessment for Securing Manufacturing
Industrial Control Systems. This notice
is the initial step for the National
Cybersecurity Center of Excellence
(NCCoE) in collaborating with
technology companies to address
cybersecurity challenges identified
under the Manufacturing sector
program. Participation in the
Capabilities Assessment for Securing
Manufacturing Industrial Control
Systems use case is open to all
interested organizations.
DATES: Interested parties must contact
NIST to request a letter of interest
template to be completed and submitted
to NIST. Letters of interest will be
accepted on a first come, first served
basis. Collaborative activities will
commence as soon as enough completed
and signed letters of interest have been
returned to address all the necessary
components and capabilities of the
project, but no earlier than April 24,
2017. When the use case has been
completed, NIST will post a notice on
the NCCoE Manufacturing sector
program Web site at https://
nccoe.nist.gov/projects/use_cases/
manufacturing announcing the
completion of the use case and
informing the public that it will no
longer accept letters of interest for the
Capabilities Assessment for Securing
Manufacturing Industrial Control
Systems use case.
ADDRESSES: The NCCoE is located at
9700 Great Seneca Highway, Rockville,
MD 20850. Letters of interest must be
submitted to manufacturing_nccoe@
nist.gov, or via hardcopy to National
Institute of Standards and Technology,
NCCoE; 9700 Great Seneca Highway,
Rockville, MD 20850. Organizations
whose letters of interest are accepted in
accordance with the process set forth in
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this notice will be asked to sign a
Cooperative Research and Development
Agreement (CRADA) with NIST. A
CRADA template can be found at:
https://nccoe.nist.gov/library/nccoeconsortium-crada-example.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim
McCarthy via email at James.McCarthy@
nist.gov; by telephone at 301–975–0228;
or by mail to National Institute of
Standards and Technology, NCCoE,
9700 Great Seneca Highway, Rockville,
MD 20850. Additional details about the
Manufacturing sector program can be
found here: https://nccoe.nist.gov/
projects/use_cases/manufacturing.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14879
Background: The NCCoE, part of
NIST, is a public-private collaboration
for accelerating the widespread
adoption of integrated cybersecurity
tools and technologies. The NCCoE
brings together experts from industry,
government, and academia under one
roof to develop practical, interoperable
cybersecurity approaches that address
the real-world needs of complex
Information Technology (IT) systems.
By accelerating dissemination and use
of these integrated tools and
technologies for protecting IT assets, the
NCCoE will enhance trust in U.S. IT
communications, data, and storage
systems; reduce risk for companies and
individuals using IT systems; and
encourage development of innovative,
job-creating cybersecurity products and
services.
Process: NIST is soliciting responses
from all sources of relevant security
capabilities (see below) to enter into a
Cooperative Research and Development
Agreement (CRADA) to provide
products and technical expertise to
support and demonstrate security
platforms for the Capabilities
Assessment for Securing Manufacturing
Industrial Control Systems for the
Manufacturing sector. The full
Capabilities Assessment for Securing
Manufacturing Industrial Control
Systems use case can be viewed here:
https://nccoe.nist.gov/projects/use_
cases/capabilities-assessment-securingmanufacturing-industrial-controlsystems.
Interested parties should contact NIST
using the information provided in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this notice. NIST will then
provide each interested party with a
letter of interest template, which the
party must complete, certify that it is
accurate, and submit to NIST. NIST will
contact interested parties if there are
questions regarding the responsiveness
of the letters of interest to the use case
objective or requirements identified
below. NIST will select participants
who have submitted complete letters of
interest on a first come, first served
basis within each category of product
components or capabilities listed below
up to the number of participants in each
category necessary to carry out this use
case. However, there may be continuing
opportunities to participate even after
initial activity commences. Selected
participants will be required to enter
into a consortium CRADA with NIST
(for reference, see ADDRESSES section
above). NIST published a notice in the
Federal Register on October 19, 2012
(77 FR 64314) inviting U.S. companies
to enter into National Cybersecurity
Excellence Partnerships (NCEPs) in
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 55 (Thursday, March 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14876-14879]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05805]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-045]
1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid From the People's
Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Department) determines that 1-
Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid (HEDP) from the People's
Republic of China (PRC) is being, or is likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The final weighted-
average dumping margins for the investigation on HEDP from the PRC are
listed in the ``Final Determination Margins'' section of this notice.
DATES: Effective March 23, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Omar Qureshi or Kenneth Hawkins, AD/
CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5307 or (202)
482-6491, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 4, 2016, the Department published its Preliminary
Determination.\1\ We invited interested parties to comment on our
Preliminary Determination of sales at LTFV. For a list of the parties
that filed case and rebuttal briefs, see the Issues and Decision
Memorandum.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the
People's Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Postponement of Final
Determination, 81 FR 76916 (November 4, 2016) (Preliminary
Determination) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
\2\ See Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the
Final Determination of the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of 1-
Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the People's Republic
of China,'' dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (POI) is July 1, 2015, through December
31, 2015. This period corresponds to the two most recent fiscal
quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition, which was
January 2016.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by this investigation includes all grades
of aqueous acidic (non-neutralized) concentrations of 1-
hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-diphosphonic acid (HEDP), also referred to as
hydroxyethylidenendiphosphonic acid, hydroxyethanediphosphonic acid,
acetodiphosphonic acid, and etidronic acid. The Chemical Abstract
Service (CAS) registry number for HEDP is 2809-21-4.
The merchandise subject to this investigation is currently
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) at subheading 2931.90.9043. It may also enter under HTSUS
subheadings 2811.19.6090 and 2931.90.9041. While HTSUS subheadings and
the CAS registry number are provided for convenience and customs
purposes only, the written description of the scope of this
investigation is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
We addressed all issues raised by parties in case and rebuttal
briefs in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\4\ The Appendix to this
notice includes a list of the issues which the parties raised and to
which the Department responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file
electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).
ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. The
Issues and Decision Memorandum is available to all parties in the
Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce
building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum is available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
The signed and electronic versions of
[[Page 14877]]
the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in December 2016, the
Department conducted verification of the information submitted by
Shandong Taihe Chemical Co., Ltd. (Taihe), Nanjing University of
Chemical Technology Changzhou Wujin Water Quality Stabilizer Factory
and Nantong Uniphos Chemicals Co., Ltd. (collectively, WW Group) for
use in the final determination. We issued our verification reports on
January 19, 2017.\5\ The Department used standard verification
procedures, including examination of relevant accounting and production
records and original source documents provided by respondents.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See the Department's two memoranda regarding: ``Verification
of the Questionnaire Responses of Shandong Taihe Chemical Co., Ltd.
in the Antidumping Investigation of HEDP from the People's Republic
of China'' (January 19, 2017) (Taihe Verification Report); and
``Verification of the Questionnaire Responses of the WW Group in the
Antidumping Investigation of 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic
Acid (``HEDP'') from the People's Republic of China'' (January 19,
2017) (WW Group's Verification Report).
\5\ Id.
\6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes Since the Preliminary Determination
Based on the Department's verifications of Taihe and WW Group, we
made changes from the Preliminary Determination. For WW Group, the
Department classified the company's joint-product as a co-product.
Additionally, we made a change to the calculation of inventory carrying
costs and irrecoverable value-added tax.
For Taihe, the Department did not use a net realizable value
calculation in Taihe's margin calculation. Additionally, for Taihe, we
included inventory carrying costs for all sales where warehousing
expenses were reported. The Department also included indirect selling
expenses in Taihe's margin calculation.
The Department also made the necessary calculation adjustment to
international freight, domestic brokerage, and domestic inland freight
where the expenses are calculated on a gross weight basis for both
Taihe and WW Group. Lastly, the Department made the necessary
calculation adjustment for marine insurance surrogate value for Taihe
and WW Group.
PRC-Wide Entity
As explained in the Preliminary Determination, we are applying a
rate based entirely on adverse facts available (AFA) to the PRC-wide
entity. The Department did not receive timely responses to its quantity
and value (Q&V) questionnaire or separate rate applications from
certain PRC exporters and/or producers of subject merchandise that were
named in the petition and to which the Department issued Q&V
questionnaires.\7\ As these non-responsive PRC companies did not
demonstrate that they are eligible for separate rate status, the
Department continues to consider them to be part of the PRC-wide
entity. Further, because these non-responsive companies withheld
requested information, significantly impeded the proceeding, and failed
to cooperate to the best of their abilities, we are basing the PRC-wide
entity rate on AFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Preliminary Determination, and accompanying Preliminary
Decision Memorandum at 16-17 (Separate Rate).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-Wide Rate
In selecting the AFA rate for the PRC-wide entity, the Department's
practice is to select a rate that is sufficiently adverse to ensure
that the uncooperative party does not obtain a more favorable result by
failing to cooperate than if it had fully cooperated.\8\ Specifically,
it is the Department's practice to select, as an AFA rate, the higher
of: (a) The highest dumping margin alleged in the petition; or, (b) the
highest calculated dumping margin of any respondent in the
investigation.\9\ As AFA, the Department has assigned to the PRC-wide
entity the rate of 184.01 percent, which is the highest calculated
dumping margin of any respondent in the investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination:
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, 69 FR 77216 (December
27, 2004), unchanged in Notice of Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland,
70 FR 28279 (May 17, 2005).
\9\ See, e.g., Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from
the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value, 77 FR 17436, 17438 (March 26, 2012); Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled
Flat-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel Products from the People's Republic
of China, 65 FR 34660 (May 31, 2000), and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Selected Separate Rate
In calculating rates for non-individually investigated respondents
in the context of non-market economy cases, the Department looks to
section 735(c)(5)(A)-(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, (as amended) (the
Act), which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate
in an investigation. Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the
estimated all-others rate shall be equivalent to the weighted average
of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins calculated for
exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any
margins that are zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts
available. Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act provides that where all
individually investigated exporters or producers receive rates that are
zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts available, then the
Department may use ``any reasonable method'' to establish the all-
others rate for those companies not individually investigated.
Apart from the mandatory respondents in this investigation, two
other PRC exporters of the subject merchandise during the POI
established entitlement to a separate rate.\10\ Thus, separate rates
are being assigned in this segment to Jianghai Environmental Protection
Co., Ltd. (Jianghai) and Henan Qingshuiyuan Technology Co., Ltd.
(Qingshuiyuan). There currently exist no individually investigated
respondents that have failed to cooperate in this investigation, and
there are no zero or de minimis margins. Therefore, we are continuing
to determine the separate rate for non-selected companies (Jianghai and
Qingshuiyuan) based on a weighted average of the calculated rates
determined for the mandatory respondents,\11\ in accordance with
section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Preliminary Decision.
\11\ We have calculated (A) a weighted-average of the dumping
margins calculated for the mandatory respondents; (B) a simple
average of the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory
respondents; and (C) a weighted-average of the dumping margins
calculated for the mandatory respondents using each company's
publicly-ranged values for the merchandise under consideration. We
compared (B) and (C) to (A) and selected the rate closest to (A).
Accordingly, we selected (C) as the most appropriate rate for all
other companies. See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France,
Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final Results of Changed-
Circumstances Review, and Revocation of an Order in Part, 75 FR
53661, 53663 (September 1, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Determination
The Department determines that the estimated final weighted-average
dumping margins are as follows:
[[Page 14878]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-average
Producer Exporter dumping margin Cash deposit rate
(percent) (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nanjing University of Chemical Technology Nanjing University of 184.01 184.01
Changzhou Wujin Water Quality Stabilizer Chemical Technology
Factory. Changzhou Wujin Water
Quality Stabilizer Factory
and Nantong Uniphos
Chemicals Co., Ltd.
Shandong Taihe Water Treatment Technologies Shandong Taihe Chemicals Co., 167.58 167.28
Co., Ltd. Ltd.
Henan Qingshuiyuan Technology Co., Ltd..... Henan Qingshuiyuan Technology 179.76 179.46
Co., Ltd.
Jianghai Environmental Protection Co., Ltd. Jianghai Environmental 179.76 179.46
Protection Co., Ltd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-Wide Entity........................ ............................. 184.01 184.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure
We intend to disclose to parties the calculations performed in this
proceeding within five days of any public announcement of this notice
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to
suspend liquidation of all entries of HEDP from the PRC, as described
in the ``Scope of the Investigation'' section, entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or after November 4, 2016, the date
of publication of the Preliminary Determination notice in the Federal
Register.
Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act, the Department
will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit \12\ equal to the weighted-
average amount by which NV exceeds U.S. price as follows: (1) The cash
deposit rate for the exporter/producer combination listed in the table
above will be the rate identified for that combination in the table;
(2) for all combinations of PRC exporters/producers of merchandise
under consideration that have not received their own separate rate
above, the cash-deposit rate will be the cash deposit rate established
for the PRC-wide entity; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of the
merchandise under consideration which have not received their own
separate rate above, the cash-deposit rate will be the cash deposit
rate applicable to the PRC exporter/producer combination that supplied
that non-PRC exporter. These suspension of liquidation instructions
will remain in effect until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of
Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042
(October 3, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We normally adjust antidumping duty cash deposit rates by the
amount of export subsidies, where appropriate. In the companion CVD
investigation, we have found that the WW Group did not receive export
subsidies.\13\ Therefore, no offset to the WW Group's cash deposit rate
for export subsidies is necessary.\14\ With respect to Taihe, because
its countervailing duty rate in the companion investigation included an
amount for export subsidies, an offset of 0.30 percent will be made to
its cash deposit rate.\15\ With respect to the separate-rate companies,
we find that an export subsidy adjustment of 0.30 percent to the cash
deposit rate is warranted because this is the export subsidy rate
included in the countervailing duty ``all others'' rate to which the
separate-rate companies are subject. For the PRC-wide entity, which
received an adverse facts available rate in this preliminary
determination, as an extension of the adverse inference found necessary
pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act, the Department has not adjusted
the PRC-wide entity's AD cash deposit rate by the lowest export subsidy
rate determined for any party in the companion CVD proceeding, because
the lowest export subsidy rate determined in the companion CVD
proceeding is 0.00 percent.\16\ \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation of 1-
Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the People's Republic
of China: Final Affirmative Determination and Alignment of Final
Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, filed
concurrently with this notice.
\14\ Id.
\15\ Id.
\16\ See, e.g., Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires
from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value; Preliminary Affirmative Determination
of Critical Circumstances; In Part and Postponement of Final
Determination, 80 FR 4250 (January 27, 2015), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum at 35.
\17\ See HEDP CVD Prelim at 81 FR 62085.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act, we normally adjust
preliminary cash deposit rates for estimated domestic subsidy pass-
through, where appropriate. However, in this case there is no basis to
grant a domestic subsidy pass-through adjustment.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 28-29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Trade Commission Notification
In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we notified the
International Trade Commission (ITC) of the final affirmative
determination of sales at LTFV. As the Department's final determination
is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the
ITC will determine, within 45 days, whether the domestic industry in
the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material
injury, by reason of imports of HEDP for sale from the PRC, or sales
(or the likelihood of sales) for importation, of HEDP from the PRC. If
the ITC determines that such injury does not exist, this proceeding
will be terminated and all securities posted will be refunded or
canceled. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the
Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to
assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties
on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the
suspension of liquidation.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information
This notice also serves as a reminder to the parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of propriety information disclosed under APO
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written notification of
return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the
regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
This determination is issued and published in accordance with
sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
[[Page 14879]]
Dated: March 20, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix--Issues and Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Period of Investigation
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. Scope Comments
VI. Changes Since the Preliminary Determination
VII. List of Issues
VIII. Discussion of Comments
General Issues:
Comment 1: Selection of Surrogate Country
Comment 2: Selection of Surrogate Final Ratios and Use of
CYDSA's Financial Statement
Comment 3: Treatment of Joint Product
Comment 4: Treatment of Water
Comment 5: Net Versus Gross Weight
Comment 6: Surrogate Value for Marine Insurance
Comment 7: Recalculating Marine Insurance by Using Gross Unit
Price
Comment 8: Consideration of FOPs as Overhead
Comment 9: Partial Rejection of Petitioner's SV Submissions
Comment 10: Selection of Voluntary Respondent
Comment 11: Surrogate Value for Ocean Freight
Comment 12: Converting Expense for INVCARU
Comment 13: Surrogate Value for PCl3
Comment 14: Adjustment of Import Statistics
Company-Specific Issues: Taihe
Comment 15: Taihe's Movement Expenses
Company-Specific Issues: WW Group
Comment 16: Conversion Calculation for Water Surrogate Value
Comment 17: Adjustment of Irrecoverable VAT
IX. Conclusion
[FR Doc. 2017-05805 Filed 3-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P