Glycine From India, the People's Republic of China, and Thailand: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations, 18002-18006 [2018-08665]

Download as PDF 18002 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Notices Administrative Protective Orders This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. These amended final results and notice are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(h) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(e). Dated: April 18, 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. 2018–08657 Filed 4–24–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee (ETTAC) Public Meeting International Trade Administration, DOC. ACTION: Notice of an Open Meeting of a Federal Advisory Committee. AGENCY: This notice sets forth the schedule and proposed agenda of a meeting of the Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee (ETTAC). DATES: The meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, May 15, 2018 from 8:30 a.m.— 3:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). The deadline for members of the public to register or to submit written comments for dissemination prior to the meeting is 5:00 p.m. EDT on Monday, May 7, 2018. The deadline for members of the public to request auxiliary aids is 5:00 p.m. EDT on Monday, May 7, 2018. ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230, Room 6057–59. The address to register and obtain callin information; submit comments; or request auxiliary aids is: Ms. Tracy Gerstle, Office of Energy & Environmental Industries (OEEI), sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:12 Apr 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 International Trade Administration, Room 28018, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230 or email: tracy.gerstle@trade.gov. Ms. Tracy Gerstle, Office of Energy & Environmental Industries (OEEI), International Trade Administration, Room 28018, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230 (Phone: 202–482–0810; Fax: 202–482–5665; email: tracy.gerstle@trade.gov). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The meeting will take place on May 15 from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. EDT. The general meeting is open to the public and time will be permitted for public comment from 3:00—3:30 p.m. EDT. Members of the public seeking to attend the meeting are required to register in advance. Those interested in attending must provide notification by Monday, May 7, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. EDT, via the contact information provided above. This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to OEEI at (202) 482–0810 no less than one week prior to the meeting. Requests received after this date will be accepted, but it may not be possible to accommodate them. Written comments concerning ETTAC affairs are welcome any time before or after the meeting. To be considered during the meeting, written comments must be received by Monday, May 7, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. EDT to ensure transmission to the members before the meeting. Minutes will be available within 30 days of this meeting. Topic to be considered: During the May 15, 2018 meeting, the ETTAC will present to the Secretary of Commerce its final recommendations for this charter period as deliberated and adopted at its April 30, 2018 teleconference meeting, Topics to be deliberated at the April 30, 2018 meeting include optimizing the U.S. Government’s trade promotion programs, identifying market access barriers, pros and cons of existing trade agreements, and discussing foreign procurement policy, including issues with financing mechanisms, localization requirements and non-tariff barriers. The ETTAC’s subcommittees will present the recommendations to the Secretary. The subcommittees are: Trade Promotion and Export Market Development, Professional Services and Infrastructure Advancement, and Trade Policy and American Competitiveness. The Office of Energy & Environmental Industries will post the final agenda on its Office website https:// SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 www.trade.gov/td/energy/ at least one week prior to the meeting. Background: The ETTAC is mandated by Section 2313(c) of the Export Enhancement Act of 1988, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 4728(c), to advise the Environmental Trade Working Group of the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee, through the Secretary of Commerce, on the development and administration of programs to expand U.S. exports of environmental technologies, goods, services, and products. The ETTAC was originally chartered in May of 1994. It was most recently re-chartered until August 2018. Dated: April 16, 2018. Man Cho, Deputy Director, Office of Energy and Environmental Industries. [FR Doc. 2018–08560 Filed 4–24–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–533–884, C–570–081, C–549–838] Glycine From India, the People’s Republic of China, and Thailand: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. AGENCY: DATES: Applicable April 17, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tyler Weinhold at (202) 482–1121 (the People’s Republic of China (China)), Chelsey Simonovich at (202) 482–1979 (India), and George Ayache at (202) 482–2623 (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 countervailing duty (CVD) Petitions concerning imports of glycine from China, India, and Thailand, and antidumping duty (AD) Petitions concerning imports of glycine from India, Japan, and Thailand filed in proper form on behalf of GEO Specialty Chemicals, Inc. and Chattem Chemicals, E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Notices sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES Inc. (the petitioners).1 The petitioners are domestic producers of glycine.2 On April 2, 2018, Commerce requested supplemental information pertaining to certain areas of the Petitions.3 The petitioners filed responses to these requests on April 4 and 5, 2018.4 On April 10, 2018, the petitioners submitted certain revisions to the scope.5 In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that the Government of China (GOC), the Government of India (GOI), and the Royal Thai Government (RTG) are providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of glycine in China, India, and Thailand, respectively, and imports of such products are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic glycine industry in the United States. Consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged programs on which we are initiating a CVD investigation, the Petitions are accompanied by 1 See Petitioners’ letter, ‘‘Glycine from the People’s Republic of China, India, Japan and Thailand: Petitions for the 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 CVD Petitions. 2 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 4–5. 3 See Commerce’s letters, ‘‘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: Supplemental Questions’’ (General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire); ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Glycine from the People’s Republic of China: Supplemental Questions;’’ ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Glycine from India: Supplemental Questions;’’ and ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Glycine from Thailand: Supplemental Questions.’’ All of these documents are dated April 2, 2018. 4 See Petitioners’ Letters, ‘‘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,’’ dated April 4, 2018 (General Issues Supplement); ‘‘Glycine from the People’s Republic of China: Response to Supplemental Questions,’’ dated April 5, 2018 (China CVD Supplement); ’’ Glycine from India: Responses to Supplemental Questions,’’ dated April 5, 2018 (India CVD Supplement); and ‘‘Glycine from Thailand: Response to Supplemental Questions,’’ dated April 4, 2018 (Thailand CVD Supplement). 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. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:12 Apr 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 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 CVD investigations that the petitioners are requesting.6 Period of Investigation Because the Petitions were filed on March 28, 2018, the period of investigation for each of the investigations is January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017.7 Scope of the Investigations The product covered by these investigations is glycine from China, India, 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.8 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).9 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,10 all such factual information should be limited to public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, 6 See ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions’’ section, infra. 7 See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2). 8 See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire, at 3–5 and General Issues Supplement, at 3–8; see also Revised Scope Submission. 9 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble). 10 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual information’’). PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 18003 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.11 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).12 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. Consultations Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce notified representatives of the Governments of China, India and Thailand of the receipt of the Petitions, and provided them the opportunity for consultations with 11 See 19 CFR 351.303(b). 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. 12 See E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 18004 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Notices respect to the CVD Petitions.13 Commerce held consultations with the Governments of Thailand and India on April 5, 2018,14 and April 12, 2018, respectively.15 As the Government of China did not request consultations prior to the initiation of this investigation, none were held. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(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 702(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 13 See Letter from Kathleen Marksberry, Program Manager, Office VIII, to the Embassy of China, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Petition on Glycine from the People’s Republic of China: Invitation for Consultations,’’ dated March 28, 2018; Letter from Erin Kearney, Program Manager, Office VI, to the Embassy of India, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Petition on Glycine from India: Invitation for Consultations to Discuss the Countervailing Duty Petition,’’ dated March 29, 2018; and Letter from Kathleen Marksberry, Program Manager, Office VIII, to the Royal Thai Embassy, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Petition on Glycine from Thailand: Invitation for Consultations,’’ dated March 28, 2018. 14 See Memorandum, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Petition on Glycine from Thailand: Consultations with Officials from the Royal Thai Government,’’ dated April 5, 2018. 15 See Memorandum, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Petition on Glycine from India: Consultations with Officials from the Government of India,’’ dated April 13, 2018. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:12 Apr 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 industry. While both Commerce and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,16 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.17 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.18 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.19 In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 702(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 16 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)). 18 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 7. 19 For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as applied to these cases and information regarding industry support, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Glycine from the People’s Republic of China (China CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petition Covering Glycine from the People’s Republic of China, India, Japan, and Thailand (Attachment II); see also Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Glycine from India (India CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; see also Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Glycine from Thailand (Thailand CVD 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. 17 See PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 domestic like product in 2017.20 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.21 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.22 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).23 Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(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.24 Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(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.25 Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(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 CVD investigations that they are requesting that Commerce initiate.26 Injury Test Because China, India, and Thailand are ‘‘Subsidies Agreement Countries’’ 20 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2. at 6; see also General Issues Supplement, at 8 and Exhibit GEN–S4. For further discussion, see China CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Thailand CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 22 Id. 23 Id.; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act. 24 See China CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Thailand CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 25 Id. 26 Id. 21 Id., E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Notices within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to these investigations. Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from China, India, and Thailand materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES The petitioners allege that imports of the subject merchandise are benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.27 In CVD petitions, section 771(24)(B) of the Act provides that imports of subject merchandise from developing and least developed countries must exceed the negligibility threshold of four percent. The petitioners also demonstrate that subject imports from India and Thailand, which have been designated as least developed and developing countries under sections 771(36)(A) and 771(36)(B) of the Act, respectively, exceed the negligibility threshold of four percent.28 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.29 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.30 27 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 38–39; see also General Issues Supplement, at 8 and Exhibit GEN– S5. 28 Id. 29 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. 30 See China CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petition Covering Glycine from the People’s Republic of China, India, Japan, and Thailand (Attachment III); see also India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; see also Thailand CVD Initiation, at Attachment III. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:12 Apr 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 Initiation of CVD Investigations Based on the examination of the Petitions, we find that the Petitions meet the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating CVD investigations to determine whether imports of glycine from China, India, and Thailand benefit from countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOC, GOI, and RTG, respectively. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation. China Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 21 of the 22 alleged subsidy programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see China CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is available on ACCESS. India Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 38 of the 40 alleged subsidy programs.31 For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see India CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is available on ACCESS. Thailand Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on all ten alleged subsidy programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see Thailand CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is available on ACCESS. Respondent Selection In the Petitions, the petitioners named 29 companies in China,32 ten companies in India,33 and one company in Thailand,34 as producers/exporters of glycine. Commerce intends to follow its standard practice in CVD investigations and calculate company-specific subsidy 31 See India CVD Initiation Checklist for details on initiated sub-programs. 32 See Volume II of the Petitions, at Exhibit CC1; see also China CVD Supplement, at 18–19. 33 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 24–26. 34 Id. at 28. PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 18005 rates in these investigations. With respect to China and India, 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 mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of glycine from China and India during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers listed in the ‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ in the Appendix. On April 9 and 10, 2018, Commerce released CBP data from China and India, respectively, under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment regarding the CBP data and respondent selection must do so within three business days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of these CVD investigations.35 Commerce will not accept rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or respondent selection. 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 http:// 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 CVD investigations, 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.36 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 CVD 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 35 See Memorandum, ‘‘Glycine from the People’s Republic of China Countervailing Duty Petition: Release of Customs Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,’’ dated April 9, 2018; and Memorandum, ‘‘Glycine from India Countervailing Duty Petition: Release of Customs Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,’’ dated April 10, 2018. 36 See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit GEN– 6; see also General Issues Supplement, at 2 and Exhibit GEN–S2. E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1 18006 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Notices 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 date 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 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public versions of the Petitions have been provided to the GOC, GOI, and RTG 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 702(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 China, India, and Thailand are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.37 A negative ITC determination for any country will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country.38 Otherwise, the investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES 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 39 and, if the information is submitted to rebut, 37 See section 703(a)(2) of the Act. section 703(a)(1) of the Act. 39 See 19 CFR 351.301(b). 38 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:12 Apr 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 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.40 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 http://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.41 Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g).42 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 702 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 the 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 2922.49.4300. Sodium glycinate is classified in the HTSUS under 2922.49.8000. 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. 2018–08665 Filed 4–24–18; 8:45 am] 40 See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2). 41 See section 782(b) of the Act. 42 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 http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_ info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM 25APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18002-18006]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08665]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-884, C-570-081, C-549-838]


Glycine From India, the People's Republic of China, and Thailand: 
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations

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

DATES: Applicable April 17, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tyler Weinhold at (202) 482-1121 (the 
People's Republic of China (China)), Chelsey Simonovich at (202) 482-
1979 (India), and George Ayache at (202) 482-2623 (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 countervailing duty (CVD) Petitions concerning imports of 
glycine from China, India, and Thailand, and antidumping duty (AD) 
Petitions concerning imports of glycine from India, Japan, and Thailand 
filed in proper form on behalf of GEO Specialty Chemicals, Inc. and 
Chattem Chemicals,

[[Page 18003]]

Inc. (the petitioners).\1\ The petitioners are domestic producers of 
glycine.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Petitioners' letter, ``Glycine from the People's 
Republic of China, India, Japan and Thailand: Petitions for the 
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 
CVD Petitions.
    \2\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 2, 2018, Commerce requested supplemental information 
pertaining to certain areas of the Petitions.\3\ The petitioners filed 
responses to these requests on April 4 and 5, 2018.\4\ On April 10, 
2018, the petitioners submitted certain revisions to the scope.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Commerce's letters, ``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: Supplemental Questions'' 
(General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire); ``Petition for the 
Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Glycine from the 
People's Republic of China: Supplemental Questions;'' ``Petition for 
the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Glycine from 
India: Supplemental Questions;'' and ``Petition for the Imposition 
of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Glycine from Thailand: 
Supplemental Questions.'' All of these documents are dated April 2, 
2018.
    \4\ See Petitioners' Letters, ``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,'' dated April 4, 2018 (General Issues Supplement); 
``Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Response to 
Supplemental Questions,'' dated April 5, 2018 (China CVD 
Supplement); '' Glycine from India: Responses to Supplemental 
Questions,'' dated April 5, 2018 (India CVD Supplement); and 
``Glycine from Thailand: Response to Supplemental Questions,'' dated 
April 4, 2018 (Thailand CVD Supplement).
    \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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that the Government of China 
(GOC), the Government of India (GOI), and the Royal Thai Government 
(RTG) are providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of 
sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of glycine in China, 
India, and Thailand, respectively, and imports of such products are 
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic 
glycine industry in the United States. Consistent with section 
702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged programs 
on which we are initiating a CVD investigation, 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 CVD investigations that the petitioners are 
requesting.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See ``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 for each of the investigations is January 1, 2017, 
through December 31, 2017.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is glycine from China, 
India, 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.\8\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 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).\9\ 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,\10\ 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.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble).
    \10\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
    \11\ 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).\12\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce 
notified representatives of the Governments of China, India and 
Thailand of the receipt of the Petitions, and provided them the 
opportunity for consultations with

[[Page 18004]]

respect to the CVD Petitions.\13\ Commerce held consultations with the 
Governments of Thailand and India on April 5, 2018,\14\ and April 12, 
2018, respectively.\15\ As the Government of China did not request 
consultations prior to the initiation of this investigation, none were 
held.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Letter from Kathleen Marksberry, Program Manager, 
Office VIII, to the Embassy of China, ``Countervailing Duty Petition 
on Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Invitation for 
Consultations,'' dated March 28, 2018; Letter from Erin Kearney, 
Program Manager, Office VI, to the Embassy of India, 
``Countervailing Duty Petition on Glycine from India: Invitation for 
Consultations to Discuss the Countervailing Duty Petition,'' dated 
March 29, 2018; and Letter from Kathleen Marksberry, Program 
Manager, Office VIII, to the Royal Thai Embassy, ``Countervailing 
Duty Petition on Glycine from Thailand: Invitation for 
Consultations,'' dated March 28, 2018.
    \14\ See Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on Glycine 
from Thailand: Consultations with Officials from the Royal Thai 
Government,'' dated April 5, 2018.
    \15\ See Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on Glycine 
from India: Consultations with Officials from the Government of 
India,'' dated April 13, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(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 702(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,\16\ 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.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \17\ 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.\18\ 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.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 7.
    \19\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as 
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support, 
see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Glycine 
from the People's Republic of China (China CVD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petition Covering Glycine from 
the People's Republic of China, India, Japan, and Thailand 
(Attachment II); see also Countervailing Duty Investigation 
Initiation Checklist: Glycine from India (India CVD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II; see also Countervailing Duty 
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Glycine from Thailand (Thailand 
CVD 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 
702(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.\20\ 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.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2.
    \21\ Id., at 6; see also General Issues Supplement, at 8 and 
Exhibit GEN-S4. For further discussion, see China CVD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II; India CVD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II; and Thailand CVD 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.\22\ 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).\23\ Second, the domestic producers 
(or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under 
section 702(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.\24\ Finally, the 
domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for 
industry support under section 702(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.\25\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that 
the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the 
meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Id.
    \23\ Id.; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
    \24\ See China CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; India 
CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Thailand CVD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \25\ 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 CVD investigations that they are 
requesting that Commerce initiate.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because China, India, and Thailand are ``Subsidies Agreement 
Countries''

[[Page 18005]]

within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of 
the Act applies to these investigations. Accordingly, the ITC must 
determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from China, India, 
and Thailand materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. 
industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioners allege that imports of the subject merchandise are 
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are 
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry 
producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioners 
allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided 
for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\27\ In CVD petitions, section 
771(24)(B) of the Act provides that imports of subject merchandise from 
developing and least developed countries must exceed the negligibility 
threshold of four percent. The petitioners also demonstrate that 
subject imports from India and Thailand, which have been designated as 
least developed and developing countries under sections 771(36)(A) and 
771(36)(B) of the Act, respectively, exceed the negligibility threshold 
of four percent.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 38-39; see also General 
Issues Supplement, at 8 and Exhibit GEN-S5.
    \28\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\29\ 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.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 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.
    \30\ See China CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petition 
Covering Glycine from the People's Republic of China, India, Japan, 
and Thailand (Attachment III); see also India CVD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment III; see also Thailand CVD Initiation, at 
Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of CVD Investigations

    Based on the examination of the Petitions, we find that the 
Petitions meet the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore, 
we are initiating CVD investigations to determine whether imports of 
glycine from China, India, and Thailand benefit from countervailable 
subsidies conferred by the GOC, GOI, and RTG, respectively. In 
accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), 
unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later 
than 65 days after the date of this initiation.

China

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 21 of the 22 
alleged subsidy programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our 
decision to initiate on each program, see China CVD Initiation 
Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this 
investigation is available on ACCESS.

India

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 38 of the 40 
alleged subsidy programs.\31\ For a full discussion of the basis for 
our decision to initiate on each program, see India CVD Initiation 
Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this 
investigation is available on ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See India CVD Initiation Checklist for details on initiated 
sub-programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thailand

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on all ten 
alleged subsidy programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our 
decision to initiate on each program, see Thailand CVD Initiation 
Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this 
investigation is available on ACCESS.

Respondent Selection

    In the Petitions, the petitioners named 29 companies in China,\32\ 
ten companies in India,\33\ and one company in Thailand,\34\ as 
producers/exporters of glycine. Commerce intends to follow its standard 
practice in CVD investigations and calculate company-specific subsidy 
rates in these investigations. With respect to China and India, 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 mandatory 
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for 
U.S. imports of glycine from China and India during the POI under the 
appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers 
listed in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the Appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See Volume II of the Petitions, at Exhibit CC1; see also 
China CVD Supplement, at 18-19.
    \33\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 24-26.
    \34\ Id. at 28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 9 and 10, 2018, Commerce released CBP data from China and 
India, respectively, under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all 
parties with access to information protected by APO and indicated that 
interested parties wishing to comment regarding the CBP data and 
respondent selection must do so within three business days of the 
publication date of the notice of initiation of these CVD 
investigations.\35\ Commerce will not accept rebuttal comments 
regarding the CBP data or respondent selection. 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 http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See Memorandum, ``Glycine from the People's Republic of 
China Countervailing Duty Petition: Release of Customs Data from 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection,'' dated April 9, 2018; and 
Memorandum, ``Glycine from India Countervailing Duty Petition: 
Release of Customs Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,'' 
dated April 10, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although Commerce normally relies on import data from CBP to 
determine whether to select a limited number of producers/exporters for 
individual examination in CVD investigations, 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.\36\ 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 CVD 
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

[[Page 18006]]

business days of the publication of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 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 date 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 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public versions of the Petitions have been 
provided to the GOC, GOI, and RTG 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 
702(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 China, India, and Thailand are 
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. 
industry.\37\ A negative ITC determination for any country will result 
in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country.\38\ 
Otherwise, the investigations will proceed according to statutory and 
regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
    \38\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 \39\ 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.\40\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \40\ 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 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.\41\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\42\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \42\ 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 
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, 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 702 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 the 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 2922.49.4300. Sodium glycinate is classified in 
the HTSUS under 2922.49.8000. 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. 2018-08665 Filed 4-24-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P