Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 29828-29833 [2017-13823]

Download as PDF 29828 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 125 / Friday, June 30, 2017 / Notices certain welded stainless steel pipe from South Korea and Taiwan would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States. Therefore, the Department is publishing a notice of continuation for these AD orders. DATES: June 30, 2017. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqueline Arrowsmith, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–5255. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On December 30, 1992, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the antidumping duty orders on welded ASTM A–312 stainless steel pipe (WSSP) from South Korea and Taiwan. On November 1, 2016, the Department published a notice of initiation of its fourth five-year (sunset) reviews of the antidumping duty orders on welded ASTM A–312 stainless steel pipe from South Korea and Taiwan.1 As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department determined that revocation of the AD orders on WSSP from South Korea and Taiwan would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping, and therefore, notified the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) of the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail should these orders be revoked.2 On May 17, 2017, the ITC published its determination that revocation of the AD orders on WSSP from South Korea and Taiwan would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time, pursuant to section 751(C) of the Act.3 mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES Scope of the Orders The merchandise subject to the antidumping duty orders is welded austenitic stainless steel pipe that meets the standards and specifications set forth by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) for the 1 See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews, 81 FR 75808 (November 1, 2016). 2 See Welded ASTM A–312 Stainless Steel Pipe From South Korea and Taiwan: Final Results of the Expedited Fourth Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders, 82 FR 12798 (March 7, 2017) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. 3 See Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipe From Korea and Taiwan; Determinations, 94 FR 22674 (May 17, 2017). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:32 Jun 29, 2017 Jkt 241001 welded form of chromium-nickel pipe designated ASTM A–312. The merchandise covered by the scope of the orders also includes austenitic welded stainless steel pipes made according to the standards of other nations which are comparable to ASTM A–312. WSSP is produced by forming stainless steel flat-rolled products into a tubular configuration and welding along the seam. WSSP is a commodity product generally used as a conduit to transmit liquids or gases. Major applications for steel pipe include, but are not limited to, digester lines, blow lines, pharmaceutical lines, petrochemical stock lines, brewery process and transport lines, general food processing lines, automotive paint lines, and paper process machines. Imports of WSSP are currently classifiable under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 7306.40.5005, 7306.40.5015, 7306.40.5040, 7306.40.5062, 7306.40.5064, and 7306.40.5085.4 Although these subheadings include both pipes and tubes, the scope of the antidumping duty orders is limited to welded austenitic stainless steel pipes. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. However, the written description of the scope of the orders is dispositive. Continuation of the Orders As a result of the determinations by the Department and the ITC that revocation of the antidumping duty orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act, the Department hereby orders the continuation of the antidumping duty orders on welded ASTM A–312 stainless steel pipe from South Korea and Taiwan. U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect antidumping duty cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise. The effective date of the continuation of these orders will be the date of publication in the Federal Register of the notice of continuation of the antidumping duty orders on WSSP from Korea and Taiwan. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, the Department intends to initiate the sunset reviews of these orders not later than 30 days prior to the fifth 4 HTS 7306.40.5065 previously listed in the scope of the order for this product is no longer a valid reporting number, having been replaced by 7306.40.6052 and 7306.40.6054 as of January 1, 1996. PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 anniversary of the effective date of continuation. These sunset reviews and this notice are in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: June 27, 2017. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2017–13988 Filed 6–29–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–423–813, A–301–803, A–549–833] Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand: Initiation of Less-Than-FairValue Investigations Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective June 22, 2017. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Stolz at (202) 482–4474 (Belgium); Stephanie Moore at (202) 482–3692 (Colombia); and George McMahon at (202) 482–1167 (Thailand), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: The Petitions On June 2, 2017, the Department of Commerce (the Department) received antidumping duty (AD) petitions (the Petitions) concerning imports of citric acid and certain citrate salts (citric acid) from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand, filed in proper form on behalf of Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM); Cargill Incorporated (Cargill); and Tate & Lyle Ingredients America LLC (Tate & Lyle) (collectively, the petitioners).1 The Petitions were accompanied by a countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning citric acid from Thailand.2 The petitioners are domestic producers of citric acid.3 On June 7, 12, 14, and 16, 2017, the Department requested additional information and clarification of certain areas of the Petitions.4 The petitioners 1 See ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand,’’, dated June 2, 2017 (the Petitions). 2 Id. 3 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2. 4 See Country-specific letters to the petitioners from the Department concerning supplemental E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 125 / Friday, June 30, 2017 / Notices filed responses to these requests on June 9, 14, 15, and 16, 2017, respectively.5 In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of citric acid and certain citrate salts from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand, are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners supporting their allegations. The Department finds that the petitioners filed these Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the AD investigations that the petitioners are requesting.6 Period of Investigation Because the Petitions were filed on June 2, 2017, the period of investigation (POI) for each investigation is April 1, 2016, through March 31, 2017.7 Scope of the Investigations The product covered by these investigations is citric acid and certain citrate salts from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand. For a full description of the scope of these investigations, see the ‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ in the Appendix to this notice. mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES Comments on Scope of the Investigations During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions to, and received responses from, the petitioners pertaining to the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions would be an accurate questions on each of the country-specific records, dated June 7, 2017; see also Letter to the petitioners from the Department concerning supplemental questions on general issues, dated June 12, 2017; Memorandum to the File ‘‘Antidumping Duty Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Belgium and Thailand. Re: Overhead and Profit,’’ dated June 14, 2017. 5 See Country-specific amendments to the Petitions on each of the country-specific records; see also Letter from the Petitioners, ‘‘Antidumping Duty Investigation of Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand: Petitioners’ Responses to Supplemental Questions—Volume I,’’ dated June 14, 2017 (General Issues Supplement). 6 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions’’ section below. 7 See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:32 Jun 29, 2017 Jkt 241001 reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.8 As discussed in the preamble to the Department’s regulations, we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (scope). The Department will consider all comments received from parties and, if necessary, will consult with parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. If scope comments include factual information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), all such factual information should be limited to public information. In order to facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, the Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on July 12, 2017, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information (also limited to public information), must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on July 24, 2017, which is the next business day after 10 calendar days after the initial comments. All such comments must be filed on the records of each of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations. The Department requests that any factual information the parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this time period. However, if a party subsequently believes that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may be relevant, the party may contact the Department and request permission to submit the additional information. As stated above, all such comments must be filed on the records of each of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations. Filing Requirements All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).9 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date when it is due. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper 8 See General Issues Supplement, at 1–4. 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements); see also Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011) for details of the Department’s electronic filing requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. Information on help using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/ Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling %20Procedures.pdf. 9 See PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 29829 form) with Enforcement and Compliance’s APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the applicable deadlines. Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires The Department will provide interested parties an opportunity to comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of citric acid to be reported in response to the Department’s AD questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the merchandise under consideration in order to report the relevant costs of production accurately as well as to develop appropriate productcomparison criteria. Interested parties may provide any information or comments that they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product characteristics and (2) productcomparison criteria. We note that it is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as productcomparison criteria. We base productcomparison criteria on meaningful commercial differences among products. In other words, although there may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers to describe citric acid, it may be that only a select few product characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching products. Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics last. In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on July 12, 2017, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on July 24, 2017. All comments and submissions to the Department must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the records of the Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand less-than-fair-value investigations. E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1 mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES 29830 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 125 / Friday, June 30, 2017 / Notices Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, the Department shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method to poll the ‘‘industry.’’ Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers, as a whole, of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether ‘‘the domestic industry’’ has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,10 they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department’s determination is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may result in different definitions of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.11 Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ‘‘a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is 10 See section 771(10) of the Act. USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)). 11 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:32 Jun 29, 2017 Jkt 241001 ‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’ (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the Petitions). With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that citric acid, as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.12 In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ in the Appendix to this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioners provided their own production of the domestic like product in 2016.13 The petitioners state that they represent the totality of the domestic industry producing citric acid; therefore, the Petitions are supported by 100 percent of the U.S. industry.14 Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department indicates that the petitioners have established industry support for the Petitions.15 First, the Petitions established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., 12 For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Belgium (Belgium AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand (Attachment II); Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Colombia (Colombia AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Thailand (Thailand AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. 13 See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I–13. 14 Id., at 2–3 and Exhibits I–1 and I–2; see also General Issues Supplement, at 1, 7 and Attachments 1 and 3. 15 See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist, Colombia AD Initiation Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 polling).16 Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.17 Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petitions.18 Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. The Department finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the AD investigations that they are requesting that the Department initiate.19 Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation The petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.20 The petitioners contend that the industry’s injured condition is illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price suppression or depression; lost sales and revenues; adverse impact on the domestic industry’s production, capacity utilization, and U.S. shipments; and declines in financial performance.21 We have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material 16 See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also Belgium AD Initiation Checklist, Colombia AD Initiation Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 17 See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist, Colombia AD Initiation Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 18 Id. 19 Id. 20 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 21–22 and Exhibit I–12. 21 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 17–32 and Exhibits I–7 and I–9—I–15; see also General Issues Supplement, at 1, 7 and Attachments 1 and 3. E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 125 / Friday, June 30, 2017 / Notices injury, threat of material injury, and causation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.22 Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to initiate investigations of imports of citric acid from Belgium, Colombia and Thailand. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the country-specific initiation checklists.23 Export Price For Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand, the petitioners based export price (EP) on two methodologies: (1) POI average unit values (AUVs), and (2) transactionspecific AUVs for shipments of citric acid from the three countries. The first uses official U.S. import statistics to determine the AUV of imports of citric acid under the relevant Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheading during the POI. The second involves matching individual shipments of goods identified in the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP’s) Automated Manifest System (AMS) to individual entries of citric acid in the official U.S. import statistics for specific months and specific ports.24 Because the AUVs are based on the reported customs values and include freight and brokerage and handling to the port of exportation, the petitioners adjusted the customs values for foreign brokerage and handling and foreign inland freight costs to arrive at an ex-factory price.25 Normal Value Based on Home Market Prices mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES For Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand, the petitioners provided home market price information obtained through market research for citric acid produced in, and offered for sale in, each of these 22 See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand (Attachment III); Colombia AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III. 23 See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist; Colombia AD Initiation Checklist; and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist. 24 See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist; Colombia AD Initiation Checklist; and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist. 25 Id. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:32 Jun 29, 2017 Jkt 241001 countries.26 For all three of these countries, the petitioners provided a declaration from a market researcher for the price information.27 Where applicable, the petitioners made certain deductions from the prices for movement or other expenses, consistent with the terms of sale.28 For Belgium and Thailand, the petitioners provided information indicating that sales of citric acid in the home market were made at prices below the cost of production (COP) and, as a result, calculated NV based on constructed value (CV).29 30 For further discussion of COP and NV based on CV, see below. Normal Value Based on Constructed Value Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost of manufacturing (COM); selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses; financial expenses; and packing expenses. For Belgium, the petitioners calculated COM during the POI, adjusted for known differences based on information available to the petitioners.31 The petitioners valued material inputs using publicly available data for the prices of these inputs, where possible.32 The petitioners valued labor inputs for citric acid using publicly-available data multiplied by the product-specific usage rates.33 To calculate the factory overhead rate, the petitioners relied on the fiscal year end (FYE) December 31, 2015, audited financial statements of Belgian citric acid producer, S.A. Citrique Belge N.V. (Citrique Belge).34 To calculate the SG&A plus financial expense rate, the petitioners also relied on the FYE 26 Id. 27 Id. 28 Id. 29 See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist. 30 Under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, numerous amendments to the AD and CVD laws were made. See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 114–27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015). See also Dates of Application of Amendments to the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws Made by the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, 80 FR 46793 (August 6, 2015) (Applicability Notice). The amendments to sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are applicable to all determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to these AD investigations. See Applicability Notice, 80 FR at 46794–95. The 2015 amendments may be found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114thcongress/house-bill/1295/text/pl. 31 See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist. 32 Id. 33 Id. 34 Id. PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 29831 December 31, 2015, audited financial statements of Citrique Belge.35 Because certain home market prices fell below COP, pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b), and 773(e) of the Act, as noted above, the petitioners calculated NVs based on CV.36 Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the COM, SG&A, financial expenses, packing expenses, and profit. The petitioners calculated CV using the same COP described above, adding an amount for profit.37 The petitioners calculated the profit rate based on the fiscal year 2016 financial statements of one of the U.S. citric acid producers.38 The profit rate was applied to the corresponding total COM, SG&A, and financial expenses calculated above to derive CV.39 For Thailand, the petitioners calculated COM using the same surrogate as was used for Belgium during the POI, adjusted for known differences based on information available to the petitioners.40 The petitioners valued material inputs using publicly available data for the prices of these inputs, where possible. The petitioners valued labor and energy inputs for citric acid using publicly available data multiplied by the product-specific usage rates.41 To calculate the SG&A plus financial expense rate, the petitioners relied on the FYE December 31, 2015, audited financial statements for COFCO Biochemical (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (COFCO), Niran Thailand Co., Ltd. (Niran), Sunshine Biotech International Co., Ltd. (Sunshine), and Thai Citric Acid Co., Ltd. (Thai Citric). The rate was computed based on the FYE December 31, 2015, SG&A (including other income and expenses), plus financial and investment income and financial costs.42 Because none of the four companies’ financial statements contained any factory overhead detail, the petitioners relied on the audited financial statements for Ajinomoto Company (Thailand) Ltd. (Ajinomoto) for the fiscal year 2015–2016, i.e., April 2015 through March 2016. Ajinomoto is a producer of lysine and monosodium glutamate, both of which are biofermentation products produced using processes similar to those used for citric acid production.43 35 Id. 36 See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist. 37 Id. 38 Id. 39 Id. 40 See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist. 41 Id. 42 Id. 43 Id. E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1 29832 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 125 / Friday, June 30, 2017 / Notices Because certain home market prices fell below COP, pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b), and 773(e) of the Act, as noted above, the petitioners also calculated NV based on CV.44 Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the COM, SG&A, financial expenses, packing expenses, and profit. To calculate CV, we used the same COM calculated by the petitioners, plus the revised SG&A, and financial expense figures to compute the COP.45 To calculate the profit rate, we relied on the 2015 financial statements for a Thai producer which was then applied to the total of material, labor and energy (MLE), factory overhead costs, SG&A and financial expenses.46 Fair Value Comparisons Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to believe that imports of citric acid from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV, in accordance with sections 772 and 773(a) of the Act, the estimated dumping margin(s) for citric acid are as follows: 41.18 to 49.46 percent for Colombia,47 and 4.6 percent to 40.0 percent for Thailand.48 Based on comparisons of EP to CV in accordance with sections 772 and 773(e) of the Act, the estimated dumping margins are as follows: 15.80 percent to 62.13 percent for Belgium,49 and 15.18 percent to 39.98 percent for Thailand.50 mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations Based upon the examination of the AD Petitions, we find that the Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD investigations to determine whether imports of citric acid from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation. Respondent Selection Based on information from independent sources, the petitioners identified one company in Belgium, one company in Colombia, and four companies in Thailand, as producers/ 44 Id. 51 See 45 Id. Volume I of the Petitions at Exhibit I–5. see also Volume II of the Petitions, at 1 and Exhibit II–1. 53 See Volume I of the Petitions at Exhibit I–5, and Volume III of the Petitions, at 1 and Exhibit III– 1. 54 See Volume I of the Petitions at Exhibit I–5. 52 Id.; 46 Id. 47 See Colombia AD Initiation Checklist. Thailand AD Initiation Checklist. 49 See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist. 50 See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist. 48 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 exporters of citric acid.51 With respect to Thailand, following standard practice in AD investigations involving marketeconomy countries, the Department intends to review U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports under the appropriate HTSUS numbers listed with the ‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ in the Appendix below. If it determines that, due to the large number of exporters or producers, it cannot individually examine each company based upon the Department’s resources, then the Department will select respondents based on the CBP data. We also intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO. Comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection should be submitted seven calendar days after the placement of the CBP data on the record of the investigation. Parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments should submit those comments five calendar days after the deadline for the initial comments. Although the Department normally relies on the number of producers/ exporters identified in the petition and/ or import data from CBP to determine whether to select a limited number of producers/exporters for individual examination in AD investigations, the Petitions identified only one company as a producer/exporter of citric acid in Belgium, Citrique Belge,52 and one company in Colombia, Sucroal, S.A.53 We currently know of no additional producers/exporters of merchandise under consideration from these countries, and the petitioners provided information from independent sources as support.54 Accordingly, the Department intends to examine all known producers/exporters in the investigations for Belgium and Colombia (i.e., the companies cited above for each respective investigation). Parties wishing to comment on respondent selection for Belgium and Colombia must do so within five days of the publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Comments for the above-referenced investigations must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by 5:00 p.m. ET by the dates noted above. We intend to finalize our decision 17:32 Jun 29, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this notice. Distribution of Copies of the Petitions In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been provided to the governments of Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petitions to each exporter (as named in the Petitions), consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). ITC Notification We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 732(d) of the Act. Preliminary Determinations by the ITC The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of citric acid from Belgium, Colombia, and/or Thailand are materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry.55 A negative ITC determination for any country will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country.56 Otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. Submission of Factual Information Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by the Department; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)–(iv). Any party, when submitting factual information, must specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted and, if the information is submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the record, to provide an explanation identifying the information already on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. Time limits for the submission of factual information are addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based on the type of factual information being submitted. Parties should review the regulations prior to 55 See section 733(a) of the Act. 56 Id. E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 125 / Friday, June 30, 2017 / Notices submitting factual information in these investigations. Extensions of Time Limits Parties may request an extension of time limits before the expiration of a time limit established under Part 351, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. on the due date. Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will grant untimelyfiled requests for the extension of time limits. Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/ fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/201322853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in these investigations. Certification Requirements mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.57 Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are in effect for company/government officials, as well as their representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of petitions filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final Rule.58 The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification requirements. 57 See section 782(b) of the Act. Certification of Factual Information to Import Administration during Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_ info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. 58 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:32 Jun 29, 2017 Jkt 241001 Notification to Interested Parties Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed in 19 CFR 351.103(d)). This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.203(c). Dated: June 22, 2017. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix—Scope of the Investigations The merchandise covered by these investigations includes all grades and granulation sizes of citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate in their unblended forms, whether dry or in solution, and regardless of packaging type. The scope also includes blends of citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate; as well as blends with other ingredients, such as sugar, where the unblended form(s) of citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate constitute 40 percent or more, by weight, of the blend. The scope also includes all forms of crude calcium citrate, including dicalcium citrate monohydrate, and tricalcium citrate tetrahydrate, which are intermediate products in the production of citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate. The scope includes the hydrous and anhydrous forms of citric acid, the dihydrate and anhydrous forms of sodium citrate, otherwise known as citric acid sodium salt, and the monohydrate and monopotassium forms of potassium citrate. Sodium citrate also includes both trisodium citrate and monosodium citrate which are also known as citric acid trisodium salt and citric acid monosodium salt, respectively. The scope does not include calcium citrate that satisfies the standards set forth in the United States Pharmacopeia and has been mixed with a functional excipient, such as dextrose or starch, where the excipient constitutes at least 2 percent, by weight, of the product. Citric acid and sodium citrate are classifiable under 2918.14.0000 and 2918.15.1000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), respectively. Potassium citrate and crude calcium citrate are classifiable under 2918.15.5000 and, if included in a mixture or blend, 3824.99.9295 of the HTSUS. Blends that include citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate are classifiable under 3824.99.9295 of the HTSUS. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 29833 written description of the merchandise is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2017–13823 Filed 6–29–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–122–857] Certain Softwood Lumber Products From Canada: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) preliminarily determines that certain softwood lumber products (softwood lumber) from Canada is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016. DATES: Effective June 30, 2017. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Bailey or Thomas Martin, AD/ CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0193 or (202) 482–3936, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background This preliminary determination is made in accordance with section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The Department published the notice of initiation of this investigation on December 22, 2016.1 On April 14, 2017, the Department postponed the preliminary determination of this investigation and the revised deadline is now June 23, 2017.2 On April 13, 2017, the Department preliminarily determined that critical circumstances exist.3 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the Preliminary 1 See Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation, 81 FR 93892 (December 22, 2016) (Initiation Notice). 2 See Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Postponement of Preliminary Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 82 FR 18421 (April 19, 2017). 3 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations of Certain Softwood Lumber Products From Canada: Preliminary Determinations of Critical Circumstances, 82 FR 19219 (April 26, 2017) (Preliminary Critical Circumstances Determinations). E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 125 (Friday, June 30, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29828-29833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13823]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-423-813, A-301-803, A-549-833]


Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From Belgium, Colombia, and 
Thailand: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

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

DATES: Effective June 22, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Stolz at (202) 482-4474 
(Belgium); Stephanie Moore at (202) 482-3692 (Colombia); and George 
McMahon at (202) 482-1167 (Thailand), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement 
and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions

    On June 2, 2017, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions (the Petitions) concerning 
imports of citric acid and certain citrate salts (citric acid) from 
Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand, filed in proper form on behalf of 
Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM); Cargill Incorporated (Cargill); 
and Tate & Lyle Ingredients America LLC (Tate & Lyle) (collectively, 
the petitioners).\1\ The Petitions were accompanied by a countervailing 
duty (CVD) petition concerning citric acid from Thailand.\2\ The 
petitioners are domestic producers of citric acid.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties on Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from 
Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand,'', dated June 2, 2017 (the 
Petitions).
    \2\ Id.
    \3\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 7, 12, 14, and 16, 2017, the Department requested 
additional information and clarification of certain areas of the 
Petitions.\4\ The petitioners

[[Page 29829]]

filed responses to these requests on June 9, 14, 15, and 16, 2017, 
respectively.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Country-specific letters to the petitioners from the 
Department concerning supplemental questions on each of the country-
specific records, dated June 7, 2017; see also Letter to the 
petitioners from the Department concerning supplemental questions on 
general issues, dated June 12, 2017; Memorandum to the File 
``Antidumping Duty Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties 
on Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Belgium and Thailand. 
Re: Overhead and Profit,'' dated June 14, 2017.
    \5\ See Country-specific amendments to the Petitions on each of 
the country-specific records; see also Letter from the Petitioners, 
``Antidumping Duty Investigation of Citric Acid and Certain Citrate 
Salts from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand: Petitioners' Responses 
to Supplemental Questions--Volume I,'' dated June 14, 2017 (General 
Issues Supplement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of citric acid 
and certain citrate salts from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand, are 
being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair 
value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such 
imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, an 
industry in the United States. Also, consistent with section 732(b)(1) 
of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably 
available to the petitioners supporting their allegations.
    The Department finds that the petitioners filed these Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested 
parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also 
finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support 
with respect to the initiation of the AD investigations that the 
petitioners are requesting.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petitions'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    Because the Petitions were filed on June 2, 2017, the period of 
investigation (POI) for each investigation is April 1, 2016, through 
March 31, 2017.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is citric acid and 
certain citrate salts from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand. For a full 
description of the scope of these investigations, see the ``Scope of 
the Investigations,'' in the Appendix to this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigations

    During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions 
to, and received responses from, the petitioners pertaining to the 
proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions would 
be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic 
industry is seeking relief.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See General Issues Supplement, at 1-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations, we 
are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage (scope). The Department will consider all 
comments received from parties and, if necessary, will consult with 
parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. If 
scope comments include factual information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), 
all such factual information should be limited to public information. 
In order to facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, the 
Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments by 
5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on July 12, 2017, which is 20 calendar days 
from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which 
may include factual information (also limited to public information), 
must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on July 24, 2017, which is the next 
business day after 10 calendar days after the initial comments. All 
such comments must be filed on the records of each of the concurrent AD 
and CVD investigations.
    The Department requests that any factual information the parties 
consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted 
during this time period. However, if a party subsequently believes that 
additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the 
investigations may be relevant, the party may contact the Department 
and request permission to submit the additional information. As stated 
above, all such comments must be filed on the records of each of the 
concurrent AD and CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\9\ An electronically 
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the 
time and date when it is due. Documents excepted from the electronic 
submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) 
with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the applicable 
deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements); see 
also Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic 
Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 
39263 (July 6, 2011) for details of the Department's electronic 
filing requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. 
Information on help using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires

    The Department will provide interested parties an opportunity to 
comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of citric acid to 
be reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaires. This 
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics 
of the merchandise under consideration in order to report the relevant 
costs of production accurately as well as to develop appropriate 
product-comparison criteria.
    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that 
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of 
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to 
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product 
characteristics and (2) product-comparison criteria. We note that it is 
not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-
comparison criteria. We base product-comparison criteria on meaningful 
commercial differences among products. In other words, although there 
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers 
to describe citric acid, it may be that only a select few product 
characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical 
characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the 
order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching 
products. Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important 
physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics 
last.
    In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in 
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product 
characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on July 12, 
2017, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. 
Any rebuttal comments, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on July 24, 2017. 
All comments and submissions to the Department must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the records of the 
Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand less-than-fair-value investigations.

[[Page 29830]]

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department 
shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to 
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by 
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a 
statistically valid sampling method to poll the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers, as a whole, of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which 
is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has 
been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like 
product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and 
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\10\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a 
separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department's 
determination is subject to limitations of time and information. 
Although this may result in different definitions of the like product, 
such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary 
to law.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \11\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
Petitions).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that citric acid, as 
defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product and we 
have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like 
product.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis, see 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Citric Acid and 
Certain Citrate Salts from Belgium (Belgium AD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Citric Acid 
and Certain Citrate Salts from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand 
(Attachment II); Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Colombia 
(Colombia AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; and 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Citric Acid and 
Certain Citrate Salts from Thailand (Thailand AD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are dated 
concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice and on file 
electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is 
also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main 
Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the Appendix to 
this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioners provided 
their own production of the domestic like product in 2016.\13\ The 
petitioners state that they represent the totality of the domestic 
industry producing citric acid; therefore, the Petitions are supported 
by 100 percent of the U.S. industry.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I-13.
    \14\ Id., at 2-3 and Exhibits I-1 and I-2; see also General 
Issues Supplement, at 1, 7 and Attachments 1 and 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the General 
Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to the 
Department indicates that the petitioners have established industry 
support for the Petitions.\15\ First, the Petitions established support 
from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 
percent of the total production of the domestic like product and, as 
such, the Department is not required to take further action in order to 
evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).\16\ Second, the domestic 
producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry 
support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic 
producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.\17\ 
Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory 
criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act 
because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions 
account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the Petitions.\18\ Accordingly, the Department 
determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic 
industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist, Colombia AD Initiation 
Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \16\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also Belgium AD 
Initiation Checklist, Colombia AD Initiation Checklist, and Thailand 
AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \17\ See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist, Colombia AD Initiation 
Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the AD investigations that 
they are requesting that the Department initiate.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the 
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened 
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject 
merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the 
petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility 
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 21-22 and Exhibit I-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price suppression 
or depression; lost sales and revenues; adverse impact on the domestic 
industry's production, capacity utilization, and U.S. shipments; and 
declines in financial performance.\21\ We have assessed the allegations 
and supporting evidence regarding material

[[Page 29831]]

injury, threat of material injury, and causation, and we have 
determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate 
evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 17-32 and Exhibits I-7 
and I-9--I-15; see also General Issues Supplement, at 1, 7 and 
Attachments 1 and 3.
    \22\ See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Belgium, 
Colombia, and Thailand (Attachment III); Colombia AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment III; and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist, 
at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

    The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less 
than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to 
initiate investigations of imports of citric acid from Belgium, 
Colombia and Thailand. The sources of data for the deductions and 
adjustments relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater 
detail in the country-specific initiation checklists.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist; Colombia AD Initiation 
Checklist; and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Export Price

    For Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand, the petitioners based export 
price (EP) on two methodologies: (1) POI average unit values (AUVs), 
and (2) transaction-specific AUVs for shipments of citric acid from the 
three countries. The first uses official U.S. import statistics to 
determine the AUV of imports of citric acid under the relevant 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheading 
during the POI. The second involves matching individual shipments of 
goods identified in the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP's) 
Automated Manifest System (AMS) to individual entries of citric acid in 
the official U.S. import statistics for specific months and specific 
ports.\24\ Because the AUVs are based on the reported customs values 
and include freight and brokerage and handling to the port of 
exportation, the petitioners adjusted the customs values for foreign 
brokerage and handling and foreign inland freight costs to arrive at an 
ex-factory price.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist; Colombia AD Initiation 
Checklist; and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
    \25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value Based on Home Market Prices

    For Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand, the petitioners provided home 
market price information obtained through market research for citric 
acid produced in, and offered for sale in, each of these countries.\26\ 
For all three of these countries, the petitioners provided a 
declaration from a market researcher for the price information.\27\ 
Where applicable, the petitioners made certain deductions from the 
prices for movement or other expenses, consistent with the terms of 
sale.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Id.
    \27\ Id.
    \28\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Belgium and Thailand, the petitioners provided information 
indicating that sales of citric acid in the home market were made at 
prices below the cost of production (COP) and, as a result, calculated 
NV based on constructed value (CV).29 30 For further 
discussion of COP and NV based on CV, see below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist and Thailand AD 
Initiation Checklist.
    \30\ Under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, numerous 
amendments to the AD and CVD laws were made. See Trade Preferences 
Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015). See 
also Dates of Application of Amendments to the Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Laws Made by the Trade Preferences Extension Act 
of 2015, 80 FR 46793 (August 6, 2015) (Applicability Notice). The 
amendments to sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are 
applicable to all determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, 
and, therefore, apply to these AD investigations. See Applicability 
Notice, 80 FR at 46794-95. The 2015 amendments may be found at 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value

    Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost 
of manufacturing (COM); selling, general and administrative (SG&A) 
expenses; financial expenses; and packing expenses.
    For Belgium, the petitioners calculated COM during the POI, 
adjusted for known differences based on information available to the 
petitioners.\31\ The petitioners valued material inputs using publicly 
available data for the prices of these inputs, where possible.\32\ The 
petitioners valued labor inputs for citric acid using publicly-
available data multiplied by the product-specific usage rates.\33\ To 
calculate the factory overhead rate, the petitioners relied on the 
fiscal year end (FYE) December 31, 2015, audited financial statements 
of Belgian citric acid producer, S.A. Citrique Belge N.V. (Citrique 
Belge).\34\ To calculate the SG&A plus financial expense rate, the 
petitioners also relied on the FYE December 31, 2015, audited financial 
statements of Citrique Belge.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist.
    \32\ Id.
    \33\ Id.
    \34\ Id.
    \35\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because certain home market prices fell below COP, pursuant to 
sections 773(a)(4), 773(b), and 773(e) of the Act, as noted above, the 
petitioners calculated NVs based on CV.\36\ Pursuant to section 773(e) 
of the Act, CV consists of the COM, SG&A, financial expenses, packing 
expenses, and profit. The petitioners calculated CV using the same COP 
described above, adding an amount for profit.\37\ The petitioners 
calculated the profit rate based on the fiscal year 2016 financial 
statements of one of the U.S. citric acid producers.\38\ The profit 
rate was applied to the corresponding total COM, SG&A, and financial 
expenses calculated above to derive CV.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist.
    \37\ Id.
    \38\ Id.
    \39\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Thailand, the petitioners calculated COM using the same 
surrogate as was used for Belgium during the POI, adjusted for known 
differences based on information available to the petitioners.\40\ The 
petitioners valued material inputs using publicly available data for 
the prices of these inputs, where possible. The petitioners valued 
labor and energy inputs for citric acid using publicly available data 
multiplied by the product-specific usage rates.\41\ To calculate the 
SG&A plus financial expense rate, the petitioners relied on the FYE 
December 31, 2015, audited financial statements for COFCO Biochemical 
(Thailand) Co., Ltd. (COFCO), Niran Thailand Co., Ltd. (Niran), 
Sunshine Biotech International Co., Ltd. (Sunshine), and Thai Citric 
Acid Co., Ltd. (Thai Citric). The rate was computed based on the FYE 
December 31, 2015, SG&A (including other income and expenses), plus 
financial and investment income and financial costs.\42\ Because none 
of the four companies' financial statements contained any factory 
overhead detail, the petitioners relied on the audited financial 
statements for Ajinomoto Company (Thailand) Ltd. (Ajinomoto) for the 
fiscal year 2015-2016, i.e., April 2015 through March 2016. Ajinomoto 
is a producer of lysine and monosodium glutamate, both of which are 
bio-fermentation products produced using processes similar to those 
used for citric acid production.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
    \41\ Id.
    \42\ Id.
    \43\ Id.

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

[[Page 29832]]

    Because certain home market prices fell below COP, pursuant to 
sections 773(a)(4), 773(b), and 773(e) of the Act, as noted above, the 
petitioners also calculated NV based on CV.\44\ Pursuant to section 
773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the COM, SG&A, financial expenses, 
packing expenses, and profit. To calculate CV, we used the same COM 
calculated by the petitioners, plus the revised SG&A, and financial 
expense figures to compute the COP.\45\ To calculate the profit rate, 
we relied on the 2015 financial statements for a Thai producer which 
was then applied to the total of material, labor and energy (MLE), 
factory overhead costs, SG&A and financial expenses.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Id.
    \45\ Id.
    \46\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of citric acid from Belgium, Colombia, and 
Thailand are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at 
less than fair value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV, in accordance 
with sections 772 and 773(a) of the Act, the estimated dumping 
margin(s) for citric acid are as follows: 41.18 to 49.46 percent for 
Colombia,\47\ and 4.6 percent to 40.0 percent for Thailand.\48\ Based 
on comparisons of EP to CV in accordance with sections 772 and 773(e) 
of the Act, the estimated dumping margins are as follows: 15.80 percent 
to 62.13 percent for Belgium,\49\ and 15.18 percent to 39.98 percent 
for Thailand.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See Colombia AD Initiation Checklist.
    \48\ See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
    \49\ See Belgium AD Initiation Checklist.
    \50\ See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the AD Petitions, we find that the 
Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, 
we are initiating AD investigations to determine whether imports of 
citric acid from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand are being, or are 
likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. In 
accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary 
determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this 
initiation.

Respondent Selection

    Based on information from independent sources, the petitioners 
identified one company in Belgium, one company in Colombia, and four 
companies in Thailand, as producers/exporters of citric acid.\51\ With 
respect to Thailand, following standard practice in AD investigations 
involving market-economy countries, the Department intends to review 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports under 
the appropriate HTSUS numbers listed with the ``Scope of the 
Investigations,'' in the Appendix below. If it determines that, due to 
the large number of exporters or producers, it cannot individually 
examine each company based upon the Department's resources, then the 
Department will select respondents based on the CBP data. We also 
intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order 
(APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO. 
Comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection should be 
submitted seven calendar days after the placement of the CBP data on 
the record of the investigation. Parties wishing to submit rebuttal 
comments should submit those comments five calendar days after the 
deadline for the initial comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See Volume I of the Petitions at Exhibit I-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the Department normally relies on the number of producers/
exporters identified in the petition and/or import data from CBP to 
determine whether to select a limited number of producers/exporters for 
individual examination in AD investigations, the Petitions identified 
only one company as a producer/exporter of citric acid in Belgium, 
Citrique Belge,\52\ and one company in Colombia, Sucroal, S.A.\53\ We 
currently know of no additional producers/exporters of merchandise 
under consideration from these countries, and the petitioners provided 
information from independent sources as support.\54\ Accordingly, the 
Department intends to examine all known producers/exporters in the 
investigations for Belgium and Colombia (i.e., the companies cited 
above for each respective investigation). Parties wishing to comment on 
respondent selection for Belgium and Colombia must do so within five 
days of the publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ Id.; see also Volume II of the Petitions, at 1 and Exhibit 
II-1.
    \53\ See Volume I of the Petitions at Exhibit I-5, and Volume 
III of the Petitions, at 1 and Exhibit III-1.
    \54\ See Volume I of the Petitions at Exhibit I-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments for the above-referenced investigations must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be 
received successfully in its entirety by 5:00 p.m. ET by the dates 
noted above. We intend to finalize our decision regarding respondent 
selection within 20 days of publication of this notice.

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been 
provided to the governments of Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand via 
ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of 
the public version of the Petitions to each exporter (as named in the 
Petitions), consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

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

Preliminary Determinations by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of citric acid from Belgium, Colombia, and/or 
Thailand are materially injuring or threatening material injury to a 
U.S. industry.\55\ A negative ITC determination for any country will 
result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that 
country.\56\ Otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \56\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) 
Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence 
submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available 
information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the 
adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence 
placed on the record by the Department; and (v) evidence other than 
factual information described in (i)-(iv). Any party, when submitting 
factual information, must specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 
351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted and, if the 
information is submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct factual 
information already on the record, to provide an explanation 
identifying the information already on the record that the factual 
information seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. Time limits for the 
submission of factual information are addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, 
which provides specific time limits based on the type of factual 
information being submitted. Parties should review the regulations 
prior to

[[Page 29833]]

submitting factual information in these investigations.

Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under Part 351, or as otherwise 
specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be 
considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time 
limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are due 
from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be 
considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. on the due date. 
Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time 
limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for 
submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such 
a case, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting 
forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension 
requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request 
must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited 
circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension 
of time limits. Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 
57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual 
information in these investigations.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\57\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect for company/government officials, as well as their 
representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of petitions 
filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD 
proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the 
formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final 
Rule.\58\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \58\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration during Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also 
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the 
Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 
22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations 
should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures 
(e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed in 19 CFR 
351.103(d)).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act and 19 CFR 351.203(c).

     Dated: June 22, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix--Scope of the Investigations

    The merchandise covered by these investigations includes all 
grades and granulation sizes of citric acid, sodium citrate, and 
potassium citrate in their unblended forms, whether dry or in 
solution, and regardless of packaging type. The scope also includes 
blends of citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate; as 
well as blends with other ingredients, such as sugar, where the 
unblended form(s) of citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium 
citrate constitute 40 percent or more, by weight, of the blend.
    The scope also includes all forms of crude calcium citrate, 
including dicalcium citrate monohydrate, and tricalcium citrate 
tetrahydrate, which are intermediate products in the production of 
citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate.
    The scope includes the hydrous and anhydrous forms of citric 
acid, the dihydrate and anhydrous forms of sodium citrate, otherwise 
known as citric acid sodium salt, and the monohydrate and 
monopotassium forms of potassium citrate. Sodium citrate also 
includes both trisodium citrate and monosodium citrate which are 
also known as citric acid trisodium salt and citric acid monosodium 
salt, respectively.
    The scope does not include calcium citrate that satisfies the 
standards set forth in the United States Pharmacopeia and has been 
mixed with a functional excipient, such as dextrose or starch, where 
the excipient constitutes at least 2 percent, by weight, of the 
product.
    Citric acid and sodium citrate are classifiable under 
2918.14.0000 and 2918.15.1000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
the United States (HTSUS), respectively. Potassium citrate and crude 
calcium citrate are classifiable under 2918.15.5000 and, if included 
in a mixture or blend, 3824.99.9295 of the HTSUS. Blends that 
include citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate are 
classifiable under 3824.99.9295 of the HTSUS. Although the HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the 
written description of the merchandise is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2017-13823 Filed 6-29-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P