Glycine From India, Japan, and Thailand: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 17995-18000 [2018-08664]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Notices
Please click on the ‘‘Meeting Details’’
and ‘‘Documents’’ links to download.
Records generated from this meeting
may also be inspected and reproduced
at the Regional Programs Unit, as they
become available, both before and after
the meeting. Persons interested in the
work of this Committee are directed to
the Commission’s website, https://
www.usccr.gov, or may contact the
Regional Programs Unit at the above
email or street address.
Agenda
I. Welcome
II. Approval of Minutes
III. Discussion
a. Report Publication: ‘‘Responses to
21st Century Policing in
Minnesota’’
b. Other Civil Rights Concerns in
Minnesota
IV. Public Comment
V. Next Steps
VI. Adjournment
Dated: April 19, 2018.
David Mussatt,
Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
notice inadvertently identified an
incorrect case number associated with
the antidumping duty (AD) order on
silicomanganese from China (i.e.,
incorrect case number A–570–864). The
correct case number associated with the
AD order on silicomanganese from
China is A–570–828. This notice serves
as a correction notice.
This correction is published in
accordance with sections 751(c), 752(c)
and 777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended.
Dated: March 22, 2018.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations,
performing the non-exclusive functions and
duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2018–08655 Filed 4–24–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[FR Doc. 2018–08588 Filed 4–24–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
[A–533–883, A–588–878, and A–549–837]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Glycine From India, Japan, and
Thailand: Initiation of Less-Than-FairValue Investigations
International Trade Administration
Silicomanganese From the People’s
Republic of China: Notice of
Correction to the Final Results of the
Expedited Fourth Sunset Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph Degreenia, AD/CVD Operations,
Office III, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 432–6430
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Correction
On February 8, 2018, the Department
of Commerce (Commerce) published the
final results of the expedited fourth
sunset review of the antidumping duty
order on silicomanganese from the
People’s Republic of China (China).1
The Final Results Federal Register
1 See Silicomanganese from the People’s Republic
of China and Ukraine: Final Results of Expedited
Fourth Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty
Orders, 83 FR 5609 (February 8, 2018) (Final
Results).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
AGENCY:
[A–570–828]
19:12 Apr 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
DATES:
Applicable April 17, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edythe Artman at (202) 482–3931 or
Kent Boydston at (202) 482–5649
(India); Madeline Heeren at (202) 482–
9179 or John McGowan at (202) 482–
3019 (Japan); and Brian Smith at (202)
482–1766 or Jesus Saenz at (202) 482–
8184 (Thailand); AD/CVD Operations,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On March 28, 2018, the U.S.
Department of Commerce (Commerce)
received antidumping duty (AD)
Petitions concerning imports of glycine
from India, Japan, and Thailand, and
countervailing duty (CVD) Petitions
concerning imports of glycine from the
People’s Republic of China, India, and
Thailand filed in proper form on behalf
of GEO Specialty Chemicals, Inc., and
Chattem Chemicals, Inc. (the
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17995
petitioners).1 The petitioners are
domestic producers of glycine.2
On April 2, 6, and 10, 2018,
Commerce requested supplemental
information pertaining to certain areas
of the Petitions.3 The petitioners filed
responses to these requests on April 4,
5, 9, 10, and 11, 2018.4 On April 10,
1 See the petitioners’ letter, ‘‘Glycine from the
People’s Republic of China, India, Japan and
Thailand: Petitions for Imposition of Antidumping
and Countervailing Duties,’’ dated March 28, 2018
(the Petitions). For the purposes of the instant
notice, all references to ‘the Petitions,’ herein, refer
specifically to the AD Petitions.
2 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 4–5.
3 See Commerce’s letters, ‘‘Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duties on Imports of Glycine from the People’s
Republic of China, India, Japan, and Thailand:
Supplemental Questions’’ (General Issues
Supplemental Questionnaire); ‘‘Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Glycine from India: Supplemental Questions’’
(India AD Supplemental Questionnaire); ‘‘Petition
for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on
Imports of Glycine from Japan: Supplemental
Questions’’ (Japan AD Supplemental
Questionnaire); and ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Glycine from
Thailand: Supplemental Questions’’ (Thailand AD
Supplemental Questionnaire). All four of these
documents are dated April 2, 2018. See also
‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties
on Imports of Glycine from India: Supplemental
Questions;’’ ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Glycine from
Thailand: Additional Supplemental Questions;’’
and Commerce’s memorandum, ‘‘Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Glycine from
Thailand: Phone Call with Counsel to the
Petitioners.’’ All four of these documents are dated
April 6, 2018. See also Commerce’s memoranda,
‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Glycine from
the People’s Republic of China, India, Japan, and
Thailand,’’ dated April 10, 2018; and ‘‘Petition for
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports
of Glycine from Japan,’’ dated April 11, 2018.
4 See the petitioners’ separate letters regarding
General Issues, India, Japan and Thailand, each
entitled, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Glycine from
India, Japan and Thailand, and Countervailing
Duties on Imports from the People’s Republic of
China, India and Thailand: Responses to
Supplemental Questions’’ (General Issues
Supplement), dated April 4, 2018; ‘‘Glycine from
India: Responses to Supplemental Questions’’
(India AD Supplement), dated April 5, 2018;
‘‘Glycine from Japan: Responses to Supplemental
Questions’’ (Japan AD Supplement), dated April 5,
2018; and ‘‘Glycine from Thailand: Responses to
Supplemental Questions’’ (Thai AD Supplement),
dated April 5, 2018. See also the petitioners’
separate letters regarding ‘‘Glycine from Thailand:
Submission of Missing Declaration,’’ and ‘‘Glycine
from Japan: Additional Responses to Supplemental
Questions.’’ These two documents are dated April
5, 2018. See also the petitioners’ separate letters
regarding ‘‘Glycine from India: Response to Second
Supplemental Questionnaire’’ (Second India AD
Supplement); and ‘‘Glycine from Thailand:
Response to Second Supplemental Questionnaire’’
(Second Thailand AD Supplement). These two
documents are dated April 9, 2018. See also the
petitioners’ separate letters regarding ‘‘Petitions for
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports
of Glycine from India, Japan and Thailand, and
Countervailing Duties on Imports from the People’s
Republic of China, India and Thailand: Revised
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
Continued
25APN1
17996
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Notices
2018, the petitioners submitted certain
revisions to the scope.5 On April 16,
2018, the petitioners submitted a
revised publicly summarized affidavit
and attachment to the Second AD
Thailand Supplement in response to
Commerce’s request.6
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), the petitioners allege that imports
of glycine from India, Japan, 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, the domestic industry
producing glycine in the United States.
Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the
Act, the Petitions are accompanied by
information reasonably available to the
petitioners supporting their allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioners
filed the Petitions on behalf of the
domestic industry because the
petitioners are interested parties as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act.
Commerce also finds that the petitioners
demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the initiation of
the AD investigations that the
petitioners are requesting.7
Period of Investigation
Because the Petitions were filed on
March 28, 2018, the period of
investigation (POI) for each of the
investigations is January 1, 2017,
through December 31, 2017.8
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these
investigations is glycine from India,
Japan, and Thailand. For a full
description of the scope of these
investigations, see the Appendix to this
notice.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Comments on Scope of the
Investigations
During our review of the Petitions,
Commerce issued questions to, and
Scope’’ (Revised Scope Submission), dated April
10, 2018; and ‘‘Glycine from Japan: Additional
Calculations’’ (Second Japan AD Supplement),
dated April 11, 2018.
5 See Memorandum, ‘‘Phone Call with Counsel to
the Petitioners,’’ dated April 10, 2018; see also
Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Glycine from
India, Japan and Thailand, and Countervailing
Duties on Imports from the People’s Republic of
China, India and Thailand: Revised Scope,’’ dated
April 10, 2018 (Revised Scope Submission), at 1–
2.
6 See Memorandum, ‘‘Phone Call with Counsel to
the Petitioners,’’ dated April 13, 2018; and the
petitioners’ letter, ‘‘Glycine from Thailand: Revised
Bracketing,’’ dated April 16, 2018.
7 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions’’ section, infra.
8 See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:12 Apr 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
received responses from, the petitioners
pertaining to the proposed scope to
ensure that the scope language in the
Petitions is an accurate reflection of the
product for which the domestic industry
is seeking relief.9 As a result of these
exchanges, the scope of the Petitions
was modified to clarify the description
of merchandise covered by the Petitions.
The description of the merchandise
covered by this initiation, as described
in the Appendix to this notice, reflects
these clarifications.
As discussed in the Preamble to
Commerce’s regulations, we are setting
aside a period for interested parties to
raise issues regarding product coverage
(scope).10 Commerce will consider all
comments received from interested
parties and, if necessary, will consult
with interested parties prior to the
issuance of the preliminary
determinations. If scope comments
include factual information,11 all such
factual information should be limited to
public information. To facilitate
preparation of its questionnaires,
Commerce requests that all interested
parties submit such comments by 5:00
p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on May 7, 2018,
which is 20 calendar days from the
signature date of this notice. Any
rebuttal comments, which may include
factual information, must be filed by
5:00 p.m. ET on May 17, 2018, which
is 10 calendar days from the initial
comments deadline.12
Commerce 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 finds that additional
factual information pertaining to the
scope of the investigations may be
relevant, the party may contact
Commerce and request permission to
submit the additional information. All
such comments must be filed on the
records of each of the concurrent AD
and CVD investigations, in accordance
with the filing requirements, discussed
immediately below.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to Commerce must be
filed electronically using Enforcement
and Compliance’s Antidumping Duty
and Countervailing Duty Centralized
9 See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire,
at 3–5 and General Issues Supplement at 3–8; see
also Revised Scope Submission.
10 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing
Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19,
1997).
11 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual
information’’).
12 See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Electronic Service System (ACCESS).13
An electronically filed document must
be received successfully in its entirety
by the time and date it is due.
Documents exempted 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.
Comments on Product Characteristics
for AD Questionnaires
Commerce requests comments from
interested parties regarding the
appropriate physical characteristics of
glycine to be reported in response to
Commerce’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
glycine, 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, Commerce attempts to list
the most important physical
characteristics first and the least
important characteristics last.
13 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures;
Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR
39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System
Name, 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014) for details
of Commerce’s electronic filing requirements,
effective 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%20
Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Notices
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 May 7, 2018.
Any rebuttal comments must be filed by
5:00 p.m. ET on May 14, 2018. All
comments and submissions to
Commerce must be filed electronically
using ACCESS, as explained above, on
the records of the India, Japan, and
Thailand less-than-fair-value
investigations.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with 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,
Commerce 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 Commerce 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 Commerce and the
ITC must apply the same statutory
definition regarding the domestic like
product,14 they do so for different
purposes and pursuant to a separate and
distinct authority. In addition,
Commerce’s determination is subject to
limitations of time and information.
Although this may result in different
definitions of the like product, such
14 See
section 771(10) of the Act.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:12 Apr 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
differences do not render the decision of
either agency contrary to law.15
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 petition).
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.16 Based on our analysis
of the information submitted on the
record, we have determined that
glycine, as defined in the scope,
constitutes a single domestic like
product, and we have analyzed industry
support in terms of that domestic like
product.17
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 2017.18 The
petitioners state that there are no other
known producers of glycine in the
United States; therefore, the Petitions
are supported by 100 percent of the U.S.
industry.19
15 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)).
16 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 7.
17 For a discussion of the domestic like product
analysis as applied to these cases and information
regarding industry support, see Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Glycine from
India (India AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment
II, Analysis of Industry Support for the
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Glycine from the People’s Republic of
China, India, Japan, and Thailand (Attachment II);
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Glycine from Japan (Japan AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Glycine from
Thailand (Thailand AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II. These checklists are dated
concurrently with 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.
18 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2.
19 Id., at 6; see also General Issues Supplement,
at 8 and Exhibit GEN–S4. For further discussion,
see India AD Initiation Checklist, Japan AD
Initiation Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17997
Our review of the data provided in the
Petitions, the General Issues
Supplement, and other information
readily available to Commerce indicates
that the petitioners have established
industry support for the Petitions.20
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, Commerce is not
required to take further action in order
to evaluate industry support (e.g.,
polling).21 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.22 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.23 Accordingly, Commerce
determines that the Petitions were filed
on behalf of the domestic industry
within the meaning of section 732(b)(1)
of the Act.
Commerce 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 Commerce initiate.24
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.25
20 Id.
21 Id.;
see also section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
India AD Initiation Checklist, Japan AD
Initiation Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
23 Id.
24 Id.
25 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 38–39; see also
General Issues Supplement, at 8 and Exhibit GEN–
S5.
22 See
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
17998
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Notices
The petitioners contend that the
industry’s injured condition is
illustrated by a significant and
increasing volume of subject imports,
reduced market share, underselling and
price depression or suppression, decline
in the domestic industry’s shipments,
production, and capacity utilization,
decline in the domestic industry’s
financial performance, and lost sales
and revenues.26 We have assessed the
allegations and supporting evidence
regarding material injury, threat of
material injury, causation, as well as
cumulation, and we have determined
that these allegations are properly
supported by adequate evidence, and
meet the statutory requirements for
initiation.27
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 Commerce based its
decision to initiate AD investigations of
imports of glycine from India, Japan,
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.
Export Price
For India, Japan, and Thailand, the
petitioners based export price (EP) on
pricing information for glycine
produced in, and exported from, those
countries and sold or offered for sale in
the United States.28 For Thailand, the
petitioners also based EP on the average
unit value of publicly available import
data.29
Where appropriate, the petitioners
made deductions from U.S. price
consistent with the terms of sale, as
applicable.30
Normal Value
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
For India, Japan and Thailand, the
petitioners obtained home market prices
26 Id., at 1–3, 33–49 and Exhibits GEN–2 and
GEN–4 through GEN–6; see also General Issues
Supplement, at 1, 8–9 and Exhibits GEN–S1 and
GEN–S5.
27 See India AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and
Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Glycine from the People’s Republic of
China, India, Japan, and Thailand (Attachment III);
see also Japan AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment III; see also Thailand AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment III.
28 See India AD Initiation Checklist, Japan AD
Initiation Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation
Checklist.
29 See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
30 See India AD Initiation Checklist, Japan AD
Initiation Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation
Checklist.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:12 Apr 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
but demonstrated that these prices were
below the cost of production (COP)
during the proposed POI. Therefore, the
petitioners calculated NV based on
constructed value (CV) pursuant to
section 773(a)(4) of the Act. See the
section ‘‘Normal Value Based on
Constructed Value’’ below.31
Normal Value Based on Constructed
Value
As noted above, for India, Japan, and
Thailand, the petitioners were able to
obtain home market prices but
demonstrated that these prices were
below the COP during the POI;
therefore, the petitioners based NV on
CV pursuant to section 773(a)(4) of the
Act. Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the
Act, CV consists of the cost of
manufacturing (COM); selling, general
and administrative (SG&A) expenses;
financial expenses; profit; and packing
expenses.
For India, the petitioners calculated
the COM based on a domestic
producer’s own input factors of
production and usage rates for raw
materials, energy, and packing.32 The
input factors of production were valued
using publicly available data on costs
specific to India, during the proposed
POI.33 Specifically, the prices for raw
material and packing inputs were based
on publicly available import data for
India.34 Labor and energy costs were
valued using publicly available sources
for India.35 The petitioners calculated
factory overhead, SG&A (including
financial expenses) and profit based on
the experience of an Indian producer of
glycine.36
For Japan, the petitioners calculated
the COM based on a domestic
producer’s own input factors of
production and usage rates for raw
materials, energy, and packing.37 The
input factors of production were valued
using publicly available data on costs
specific to Japan, during the proposed
POI.38 Specifically, the prices for raw
material and packing inputs were based
on publicly available import or export
31 In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade
Preferences Extension Act of 2015, amending
section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for these investigations,
Commerce will request information necessary to
calculate the CV and COP to determine whether
there are reasonable grounds to believe or suspect
that sales of the foreign like product have been
made at prices that represent less than the COP of
the product. Commerce no longer requires a COP
allegation to conduct this analysis.
32 See India AD Initiation Checklist.
33 Id.
34 Id.
35 Id.
36 Id.
37 See Japan AD Initiation Checklist.
38 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
data for Japan.39 Labor and energy costs
were valued using publicly available
sources from Japan.40 The petitioners
calculated factory overhead, SG&A
(including financial expenses) and
profit based on the experience of a
Japanese producer of glycine.41
For Thailand, the petitioners
calculated the COM based on a domestic
producer’s own input factors of
production and usage rates for raw
materials, labor, energy, and packing.42
The input factors of production were
valued using publicly available data on
costs specific to Thailand, during the
proposed POI.43 Specifically, the prices
for raw material and packing inputs
were based on publicly available import
data for Thailand.44 Labor and energy
costs were valued using publicly
available sources for Thailand.45 The
petitioners calculated factory overhead,
SG&A (including financial expenses),
and profit for Thailand based the
experience of a Thai producer of
glycine.46
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the
petitioners, there is reason to believe
that imports of glycine from India,
Japan, 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 of the Act,
the estimated dumping margins for
glycine for each of the countries covered
by this initiation are as follows: (1)
India—80.49 percent; 47 (2) Japan—
86.22 percent; 48 and (3) Thailand—
176.00 to 227.17 percent.49
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value
Investigations
Based upon the examination of the
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 glycine from India, Japan,
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
39 Id.
40 Id.
41 Id.
42 See
Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
43 Id.
44 Id.
45 Id.
46 Id.
47 See
India AD Initiation Checklist.
Japan AD Initiation Checklist.
49 See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
48 See
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Notices
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
later than 140 days after the date of this
initiation.
Respondent Selection
In the Petitions, the petitioners named
ten companies in India, nine companies
in Japan, and one company in Thailand,
as producers/exporters of glycine.50
With regard to India and Japan,
following standard practice in AD
investigations involving market
economy countries, in the event
Commerce determines that the number
of companies is large and it cannot
individually examine each company
based upon Commerce’s resources,
where appropriate, Commerce intends
to select respondents based on U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
data for U.S. imports of glycine from
India and Japan during the POI under
the appropriate Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States numbers
listed in the ‘‘Scope of the
Investigations,’’ in the Appendix.
We also intend to release the CBP data
under Administrative Protective Order
(APO) to all parties with access to
information protected by APO on the
record within five business days of
publication of this Federal Register
notice. 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 these investigations. Parties wishing
to submit rebuttal comments should
submit those comments five calendar
days after the deadline for the initial
comments. Interested parties must
submit applications for disclosure under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR
351.305(b). Instructions for filing such
applications may be found on the
Commerce’s website at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
Although Commerce normally relies
on import data from CBP to determine
whether to select a limited number of
producers/exporters for individual
examination in AD investigations
involving market economy countries,
the petitioners identified only one
company as a producer/exporter of
glycine in Thailand, Newtrend Food
Ingredient (Thailand) Co., Ltd., and the
petitioners provided information from
independent sources as support.51
Furthermore, we currently know of no
additional producers/exporters of
subject merchandise from Thailand.
Accordingly, Commerce intends to
examine all known producers/exporters
in the Thailand AD investigation (i.e.,
50 See
Volume I of the Petitions, at 23–28.
Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit GEN–
6; see also General Issues Supplement, at 2 and
Exhibit GEN–S2.
Newtrend Food Ingredient (Thailand)
Co., Ltd.). We invite interested parties to
comment on this issue. Parties wishing
to comment on respondent selection for
Thailand must do so within three
business days of the publication of this
notice.
All respondent selection comments
must be filed electronically using
ACCESS. An electronically-filed
document must be received
successfully, in its entirety, by
Commerce’s electronic records system,
ACCESS, no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on
the dates noted above. We intend to
make our decisions 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)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version
of the Petitions have been provided to
the governments of India, Japan, 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 named in the
Petitions, as provided under 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 glycine from India, Japan, and/or
Thailand are materially injuring, or
threatening material injury to, a U.S.
industry.52 A negative ITC
determination for any country will
result in the investigation being
terminated with respect to that
country.53 Otherwise, the 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 Commerce; and (v)
evidence other than factual information
described in (i)–(iv). Any party, when
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:12 Apr 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
submitting factual information, must
specify under which subsection of 19
CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is
being submitted 54 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.55 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. Interested parties should
review the regulations prior to
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 19 CFR
351.301, 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. ET
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. Parties should review
Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78
FR 57790 (September 20, 2013),
available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/201322853.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.56
Parties must use the certification
formats provided in 19 CFR
54 See
51 See
52 See
section 733(a) of the Act.
53 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17999
19 CFR 351.301(b).
19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
56 See section 782(b) of the Act.
55 See
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
18000
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Notices
351.303(g).57 Commerce intends to
reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with
the applicable certification
requirements.
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit
applications for disclosure under APO
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On
January 22, 2008, Commerce 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 at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i)
of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: April 17, 2018.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations,
performing the non-exclusive functions and
duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise covered by these
investigations is glycine at any purity level
or grade. This includes glycine of all purity
levels, which covers all forms of crude or
technical glycine including, but not limited
to, sodium glycinate, glycine slurry and any
other forms of amino acetic acid or glycine.
Subject merchandise also includes glycine
and precursors of dried crystalline glycine
that are processed in a third country,
including, but not limited to, refining or any
other processing that would not otherwise
remove the merchandise from the scope of
these investigations if performed in the
country of manufacture of the in-scope
glycine or precursors of dried crystalline
glycine. Glycine has the Chemical Abstracts
Service (CAS) registry number of 56–40–6.
Glycine and glycine slurry are classified
under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) subheading
2922.49.43.00. Sodium glycinate is classified
in the HTSUS under 2922.49.80.00. While
the HTSUS subheadings and CAS registry
number are provided for convenience and
customs purposes, the written description of
the scope of these investigations is
dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2018–08664 Filed 4–24–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Quarterly Update to Annual Listing of
Foreign Government Subsidies on
Articles of Cheese Subject to an InQuota Rate of Duty
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable April 25, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephanie Moore, AD/CVD Operations,
Office III, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20230, telephone: (202) 482–3692.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
702 of the Trade Agreements Act of
1979 (as amended) (the Act) requires the
Department of Commerce (Commerce)
to determine, in consultation with the
Secretary of Agriculture, whether any
foreign government is providing a
subsidy with respect to any article of
AGENCY:
cheese subject to an in-quota rate of
duty, as defined in section 702(h) of the
Act, and to publish quarterly updates to
the type and amount of those subsidies.
We hereby provide Commerce’s
quarterly update of subsidies on articles
of cheese that were imported during the
periods October 1, 2017, through
December 31, 2017.
Commerce has developed, in
consultation with the Secretary of
Agriculture, information on subsidies,
as defined in section 702(h) of the Act,
being provided either directly or
indirectly by foreign governments on
articles of cheese subject to an in-quota
rate of duty. The appendix to this notice
lists the country, the subsidy program or
programs, and the gross and net
amounts of each subsidy for which
information is currently available.
Commerce will incorporate additional
programs which are found to constitute
subsidies, and additional information
on the subsidy programs listed, as the
information is developed.
Commerce encourages any person
having information on foreign
government subsidy programs which
benefit articles of cheese subject to an
in-quota rate of duty to submit such
information in writing to the Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Ave., NW,
Washington, DC 20230.
This determination and notice are in
accordance with section 702(a) of the
Act.
Dated: April 19, 2018.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement
and Compliance.
Appendix
SUBSIDY PROGRAMS ON CHEESE SUBJECT TO AN IN-QUOTA RATE OF DUTY
Gross 1
Subsidy
($/lb)
Net 2 Subsidy
($/lb)
Program(s)
28 European Union Member States 3 ..........................
European Union Restitution Payments ........................
$ 0.00
$0.00
Canada .........................................................................
Export Assistance on Certain Types of Cheese ..........
0.44
0.44
Norway ..........................................................................
Indirect (Milk) Subsidy ..................................................
Consumer Subsidy .......................................................
Total .......................................................................
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Switzerland ...................................................................
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Country
Deficiency Payments ....................................................
0.00
0.00
1 Defined
in 19 U.S.C. 1677(5).
in 19 U.S.C. 1677(6).
3 The 28 member states of the European Union are: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
2 Defined
57 See also Certification of Factual Information to
Import Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:20 Apr 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked
questions regarding the Final Rule are available at
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_
info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17995-18000]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08664]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-533-883, A-588-878, and A-549-837]
Glycine From India, Japan, and Thailand: Initiation of Less-Than-
Fair-Value Investigations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable April 17, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edythe Artman at (202) 482-3931 or
Kent Boydston at (202) 482-5649 (India); Madeline Heeren at (202) 482-
9179 or John McGowan at (202) 482-3019 (Japan); and Brian Smith at
(202) 482-1766 or Jesus Saenz at (202) 482-8184 (Thailand); AD/CVD
Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On March 28, 2018, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce)
received antidumping duty (AD) Petitions concerning imports of glycine
from India, Japan, and Thailand, and countervailing duty (CVD)
Petitions concerning imports of glycine from the People's Republic of
China, India, and Thailand filed in proper form on behalf of GEO
Specialty Chemicals, Inc., and Chattem Chemicals, Inc. (the
petitioners).\1\ The petitioners are domestic producers of glycine.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See the petitioners' letter, ``Glycine from the People's
Republic of China, India, Japan and Thailand: Petitions for
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,'' dated March
28, 2018 (the Petitions). For the purposes of the instant notice,
all references to `the Petitions,' herein, refer specifically to the
AD Petitions.
\2\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 2, 6, and 10, 2018, Commerce requested supplemental
information pertaining to certain areas of the Petitions.\3\ The
petitioners filed responses to these requests on April 4, 5, 9, 10, and
11, 2018.\4\ On April 10,
[[Page 17996]]
2018, the petitioners submitted certain revisions to the scope.\5\ On
April 16, 2018, the petitioners submitted a revised publicly summarized
affidavit and attachment to the Second AD Thailand Supplement in
response to Commerce's request.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Commerce's letters, ``Petition for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Glycine from the
People's Republic of China, India, Japan, and Thailand: Supplemental
Questions'' (General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire); ``Petition
for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Glycine from
India: Supplemental Questions'' (India AD Supplemental
Questionnaire); ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties
on Imports of Glycine from Japan: Supplemental Questions'' (Japan AD
Supplemental Questionnaire); and ``Petition for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Glycine from Thailand: Supplemental
Questions'' (Thailand AD Supplemental Questionnaire). All four of
these documents are dated April 2, 2018. See also ``Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Glycine from India:
Supplemental Questions;'' ``Petition for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Glycine from Thailand: Additional
Supplemental Questions;'' and Commerce's memorandum, ``Petition for
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Glycine from Thailand: Phone
Call with Counsel to the Petitioners.'' All four of these documents
are dated April 6, 2018. See also Commerce's memoranda, ``Petitions
for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on
Imports of Glycine from the People's Republic of China, India,
Japan, and Thailand,'' dated April 10, 2018; and ``Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Glycine from Japan,''
dated April 11, 2018.
\4\ See the petitioners' separate letters regarding General
Issues, India, Japan and Thailand, each entitled, ``Petitions for
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Glycine from
India, Japan and Thailand, and Countervailing Duties on Imports from
the People's Republic of China, India and Thailand: Responses to
Supplemental Questions'' (General Issues Supplement), dated April 4,
2018; ``Glycine from India: Responses to Supplemental Questions''
(India AD Supplement), dated April 5, 2018; ``Glycine from Japan:
Responses to Supplemental Questions'' (Japan AD Supplement), dated
April 5, 2018; and ``Glycine from Thailand: Responses to
Supplemental Questions'' (Thai AD Supplement), dated April 5, 2018.
See also the petitioners' separate letters regarding ``Glycine from
Thailand: Submission of Missing Declaration,'' and ``Glycine from
Japan: Additional Responses to Supplemental Questions.'' These two
documents are dated April 5, 2018. See also the petitioners'
separate letters regarding ``Glycine from India: Response to Second
Supplemental Questionnaire'' (Second India AD Supplement); and
``Glycine from Thailand: Response to Second Supplemental
Questionnaire'' (Second Thailand AD Supplement). These two documents
are dated April 9, 2018. See also the petitioners' separate letters
regarding ``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on
Imports of Glycine from India, Japan and Thailand, and
Countervailing Duties on Imports from the People's Republic of
China, India and Thailand: Revised Scope'' (Revised Scope
Submission), dated April 10, 2018; and ``Glycine from Japan:
Additional Calculations'' (Second Japan AD Supplement), dated April
11, 2018.
\5\ See Memorandum, ``Phone Call with Counsel to the
Petitioners,'' dated April 10, 2018; see also Petitioners' Letter,
``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Glycine from India, Japan and Thailand, and Countervailing Duties on
Imports from the People's Republic of China, India and Thailand:
Revised Scope,'' dated April 10, 2018 (Revised Scope Submission), at
1-2.
\6\ See Memorandum, ``Phone Call with Counsel to the
Petitioners,'' dated April 13, 2018; and the petitioners' letter,
``Glycine from Thailand: Revised Bracketing,'' dated April 16, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of glycine from
India, Japan, 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, the domestic industry producing glycine
in the United States. Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the
Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably available to the
petitioners supporting their allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf
of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested parties
as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that
the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect
to the initiation of the AD investigations that the petitioners are
requesting.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the
Petitions'' section, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
Because the Petitions were filed on March 28, 2018, the period of
investigation (POI) for each of the investigations is January 1, 2017,
through December 31, 2017.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these investigations is glycine from India,
Japan, and Thailand. For a full description of the scope of these
investigations, see the Appendix to this notice.
Comments on Scope of the Investigations
During our review of the Petitions, Commerce issued questions to,
and received responses from, the petitioners pertaining to the proposed
scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions is an accurate
reflection of the product for which the domestic industry is seeking
relief.\9\ As a result of these exchanges, the scope of the Petitions
was modified to clarify the description of merchandise covered by the
Petitions. The description of the merchandise covered by this
initiation, as described in the Appendix to this notice, reflects these
clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire, at 3-5 and
General Issues Supplement at 3-8; see also Revised Scope Submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding
product coverage (scope).\10\ Commerce will consider all comments
received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with
interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary
determinations. If scope comments include factual information,\11\ all
such factual information should be limited to public information. To
facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that
all interested parties submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time
(ET) on May 7, 2018, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date
of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual
information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on May 17, 2018, which is 10
calendar days from the initial comments deadline.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
\11\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual
information'').
\12\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce 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 finds that additional
factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may
be relevant, the party may contact Commerce and request permission to
submit the additional information. All such comments must be filed on
the records of each of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations, in
accordance with the filing requirements, discussed immediately below.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\13\ An electronically
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the
time and date it is due. Documents exempted 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046
(November 20, 2014) for details of Commerce's electronic filing
requirements, effective 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
Commerce requests comments from interested parties regarding the
appropriate physical characteristics of glycine to be reported in
response to Commerce'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 glycine, 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, Commerce attempts to list the most
important physical characteristics first and the least important
characteristics last.
[[Page 17997]]
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 May 7, 2018.
Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on May 14, 2018.
All comments and submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically
using ACCESS, as explained above, on the records of the India, Japan,
and Thailand less-than-fair-value investigations.
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, Commerce 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 Commerce 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 Commerce and the
ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic
like product,\14\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce'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.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\15\ 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
petition).
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.\16\ Based on our analysis of the information
submitted on the record, we have determined that glycine, as defined in
the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have
analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 7.
\17\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support,
see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Glycine
from India (India AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II,
Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Petitions Covering Glycine from the People's Republic of China,
India, Japan, and Thailand (Attachment II); Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Glycine from Japan (Japan AD
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Glycine from Thailand (Thailand
AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are
dated concurrently with 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 2017.\18\ The
petitioners state that there are no other known producers of glycine in
the United States; therefore, the Petitions are supported by 100
percent of the U.S. industry.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2.
\19\ Id., at 6; see also General Issues Supplement, at 8 and
Exhibit GEN-S4. For further discussion, see India AD Initiation
Checklist, Japan AD Initiation Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the General
Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce
indicates that the petitioners have established industry support for
the Petitions.\20\ 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,
Commerce is not required to take further action in order to evaluate
industry support (e.g., polling).\21\ 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.\22\ 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.\23\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that
the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the
meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Id.
\21\ Id.; see also section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
\22\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, Japan AD Initiation
Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce 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 Commerce initiate.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ 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.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 38-39; see also General
Issues Supplement, at 8 and Exhibit GEN-S5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 17998]]
The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports,
reduced market share, underselling and price depression or suppression,
decline in the domestic industry's shipments, production, and capacity
utilization, decline in the domestic industry's financial performance,
and lost sales and revenues.\26\ We have assessed the allegations and
supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material
injury, causation, as well as cumulation, and we have determined that
these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet
the statutory requirements for initiation.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Id., at 1-3, 33-49 and Exhibits GEN-2 and GEN-4 through
GEN-6; see also General Issues Supplement, at 1, 8-9 and Exhibits
GEN-S1 and GEN-S5.
\27\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III,
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Glycine from the People's Republic of China, India, Japan,
and Thailand (Attachment III); see also Japan AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment III; see also 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 Commerce based its decision to initiate AD
investigations of imports of glycine from India, Japan, 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.
Export Price
For India, Japan, and Thailand, the petitioners based export price
(EP) on pricing information for glycine produced in, and exported from,
those countries and sold or offered for sale in the United States.\28\
For Thailand, the petitioners also based EP on the average unit value
of publicly available import data.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, Japan AD Initiation
Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
\29\ See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where appropriate, the petitioners made deductions from U.S. price
consistent with the terms of sale, as applicable.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, Japan AD Initiation
Checklist, and Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value
For India, Japan and Thailand, the petitioners obtained home market
prices but demonstrated that these prices were below the cost of
production (COP) during the proposed POI. Therefore, the petitioners
calculated NV based on constructed value (CV) pursuant to section
773(a)(4) of the Act. See the section ``Normal Value Based on
Constructed Value'' below.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade Preferences
Extension Act of 2015, amending section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for
these investigations, Commerce will request information necessary to
calculate the CV and COP to determine whether there are reasonable
grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product
have been made at prices that represent less than the COP of the
product. Commerce no longer requires a COP allegation to conduct
this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value Based on Constructed Value
As noted above, for India, Japan, and Thailand, the petitioners
were able to obtain home market prices but demonstrated that these
prices were below the COP during the POI; therefore, the petitioners
based NV on CV pursuant to section 773(a)(4) of the Act. Pursuant to
section 773(b)(3) of the Act, CV consists of the cost of manufacturing
(COM); selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses; financial
expenses; profit; and packing expenses.
For India, the petitioners calculated the COM based on a domestic
producer's own input factors of production and usage rates for raw
materials, energy, and packing.\32\ The input factors of production
were valued using publicly available data on costs specific to India,
during the proposed POI.\33\ Specifically, the prices for raw material
and packing inputs were based on publicly available import data for
India.\34\ Labor and energy costs were valued using publicly available
sources for India.\35\ The petitioners calculated factory overhead,
SG&A (including financial expenses) and profit based on the experience
of an Indian producer of glycine.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
\33\ Id.
\34\ Id.
\35\ Id.
\36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Japan, the petitioners calculated the COM based on a domestic
producer's own input factors of production and usage rates for raw
materials, energy, and packing.\37\ The input factors of production
were valued using publicly available data on costs specific to Japan,
during the proposed POI.\38\ Specifically, the prices for raw material
and packing inputs were based on publicly available import or export
data for Japan.\39\ Labor and energy costs were valued using publicly
available sources from Japan.\40\ The petitioners calculated factory
overhead, SG&A (including financial expenses) and profit based on the
experience of a Japanese producer of glycine.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See Japan AD Initiation Checklist.
\38\ Id.
\39\ Id.
\40\ Id.
\41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Thailand, the petitioners calculated the COM based on a
domestic producer's own input factors of production and usage rates for
raw materials, labor, energy, and packing.\42\ The input factors of
production were valued using publicly available data on costs specific
to Thailand, during the proposed POI.\43\ Specifically, the prices for
raw material and packing inputs were based on publicly available import
data for Thailand.\44\ Labor and energy costs were valued using
publicly available sources for Thailand.\45\ The petitioners calculated
factory overhead, SG&A (including financial expenses), and profit for
Thailand based the experience of a Thai producer of glycine.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
\43\ Id.
\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 glycine from India, Japan, 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 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for glycine for each
of the countries covered by this initiation are as follows: (1) India--
80.49 percent; \47\ (2) Japan--86.22 percent; \48\ and (3) Thailand--
176.00 to 227.17 percent.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
\48\ See Japan AD Initiation Checklist.
\49\ See Thailand AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations
Based upon the examination of the 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
glycine from India, Japan, 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
[[Page 17999]]
later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.
Respondent Selection
In the Petitions, the petitioners named ten companies in India,
nine companies in Japan, and one company in Thailand, as producers/
exporters of glycine.\50\ With regard to India and Japan, following
standard practice in AD investigations involving market economy
countries, in the event Commerce determines that the number of
companies is large and it cannot individually examine each company
based upon Commerce's resources, where appropriate, Commerce intends to
select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
data for U.S. imports of glycine from India and Japan during the POI
under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
numbers listed in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the Appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 23-28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also intend to release the CBP data under Administrative
Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information
protected by APO on the record within five business days of publication
of this Federal Register notice. 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 these investigations.
Parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments should submit those
comments five calendar days after the deadline for the initial
comments. Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure
under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing
such applications may be found on the Commerce's website at https://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
Although Commerce normally relies on import data from CBP to
determine whether to select a limited number of producers/exporters for
individual examination in AD investigations involving market economy
countries, the petitioners identified only one company as a producer/
exporter of glycine in Thailand, Newtrend Food Ingredient (Thailand)
Co., Ltd., and the petitioners provided information from independent
sources as support.\51\ Furthermore, we currently know of no additional
producers/exporters of subject merchandise from Thailand. Accordingly,
Commerce intends to examine all known producers/exporters in the
Thailand AD investigation (i.e., Newtrend Food Ingredient (Thailand)
Co., Ltd.). We invite interested parties to comment on this issue.
Parties wishing to comment on respondent selection for Thailand must do
so within three business days of the publication of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit GEN-6; see also
General Issues Supplement, at 2 and Exhibit GEN-S2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All respondent selection comments must be filed electronically
using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be received
successfully, in its entirety, by Commerce's electronic records system,
ACCESS, no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the dates noted above. We intend
to make our decisions 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)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been
provided to the governments of India, Japan, 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 named in the
Petitions, as provided under 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 glycine from India, Japan, and/or Thailand
are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S.
industry.\52\ A negative ITC determination for any country will result
in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country.\53\
Otherwise, the investigations will proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
\53\ 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 Commerce; 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 \54\ 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.\55\ 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. Interested parties should review the
regulations prior to submitting factual information in these
investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
\55\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extensions of Time Limits
Parties may request an extension of time limits before the
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, 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. ET 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. Parties should review Extension of Time Limits; Final
Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at https://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.\56\
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR
[[Page 18000]]
351.303(g).\57\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\57\ See also Certification of Factual Information to Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available at
https://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, Commerce
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 at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2)
and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: April 17, 2018.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise covered by these investigations is glycine at
any purity level or grade. This includes glycine of all purity
levels, which covers all forms of crude or technical glycine
including, but not limited to, sodium glycinate, glycine slurry and
any other forms of amino acetic acid or glycine. Subject merchandise
also includes glycine and precursors of dried crystalline glycine
that are processed in a third country, including, but not limited
to, refining or any other processing that would not otherwise remove
the merchandise from the scope of these investigations if performed
in the country of manufacture of the in-scope glycine or precursors
of dried crystalline glycine. Glycine has the Chemical Abstracts
Service (CAS) registry number of 56-40-6. Glycine and glycine slurry
are classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) subheading 2922.49.43.00. Sodium glycinate is classified in
the HTSUS under 2922.49.80.00. While the HTSUS subheadings and CAS
registry number are provided for convenience and customs purposes,
the written description of the scope of these investigations is
dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2018-08664 Filed 4-24-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
