Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Changed Circumstances Review, 58104-58106 [2024-15683]

Download as PDF 58104 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 137 / Wednesday, July 17, 2024 / Notices ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 (‘‘McGonigal’’), was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. 371. Specifically, McGonigal was convicted of conspiring to violate U.S. sanctions against Russia by going to work for a Russian oligarch whom he once investigated. As a result of his conviction, the Court sentenced McGonigal to 50 months in prison, three years of supervised release, a $100 special assessment and a fine of $40,000. Pursuant to section 1760(e) of the Export Control Reform Act (‘‘ECRA’’),1 the export privileges of any person who has been convicted of certain offenses, including, but not limited to, 18 U.S.C. 371, may be denied for a period of up to ten (10) years from the date of his/her conviction. 50 U.S.C. 4819(e). In addition, any Bureau of Industry and Security (‘‘BIS’’) licenses or other authorizations issued under ECRA, in which the person had an interest at the time of the conviction, may be revoked. Id. BIS received notice of McGonigal’s conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. 371. As provided in section 766.25 of the Export Administration Regulations (‘‘EAR’’ or the ‘‘Regulations’’), BIS provided notice and opportunity for McGonigal to make a written submission to BIS. 15 CFR 766.25.2 BIS has not received a written submission from McGonigal. Based upon my review of the record and consultations with BIS’s Office of Exporter Services, including its Director, and the facts available to BIS, I have decided to deny McGonigal’s export privileges under the Regulations for a period of 10 years from the date of McGonigal’s conviction. The Office of Exporter Services has also decided to revoke any BIS-issued licenses in which McGonigal had an interest at the time of his conviction.3 Accordingly, it is hereby ordered: First, from the date of this Order until December 14, 2033, Charles McGonigal, with a last known address of 175 W. 13th Street, Apt. 8G, New York, NY, 10011, and when acting for or on his behalf, his successors, assigns, employees, agents or representatives (’’ the Denied Person’’), may not directly or indirectly participate in any way in any transaction involving any commodity, software or technology (hereinafter 1 ECRA was enacted on August 13, 2018, as part of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, and as amended is codified at 50 U.S.C. 4801–4852. 2 The Regulations are currently codified in the Code of Federal Regulations at 15 CFR parts 730– 774 (2024). 3 The Director, Office of Export Enforcement, is the authorizing official for issuance of denial orders pursuant to amendments to the Regulations (85 FR 73411, November 18, 2020). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:21 Jul 16, 2024 Jkt 262001 collectively referred to as ‘‘item’’) exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, including, but not limited to: A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, license exception, or export control document; B. Carrying on negotiations concerning, or ordering, buying, receiving, using, selling, delivering, storing, disposing of, forwarding, transporting, financing, or otherwise servicing in any way, any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, or engaging in any other activity subject to the Regulations; or C. Benefitting in any way from any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, or from any other activity subject to the Regulations. Second, no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the following: A. Export, reexport, or transfer (incountry) to or on behalf of the Denied Person any item subject to the Regulations; B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted acquisition by the Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or control of any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States, including financing or other support activities related to a transaction whereby the Denied Person acquires or attempts to acquire such ownership, possession or control; C. Take any action to acquire from or to facilitate the acquisition or attempted acquisition from the Denied Person of any item subject to the Regulations that has been exported from the United States; D. Obtain from the Denied Person in the United States any item subject to the Regulations with knowledge or reason to know that the item will be, or is intended to be, exported from the United States; or E. Engage in any transaction to service any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person, or service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person if such service involves the use of any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States. For purposes of this paragraph, servicing means installation, maintenance, repair, modification or testing. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Third, pursuant to Section 1760(e) of ECRA and sections 766.23 and 766.25 of the Regulations, any other person, firm, corporation, or business organization related to McGonigal by ownership, control, position of responsibility, affiliation, or other connection in the conduct of trade or business may also be made subject to the provisions of this Order in order to prevent evasion of this Order. Fourth, in accordance with part 756 of the Regulations, McGonigal may file an appeal of this Order with the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security. The appeal must be filed within 45 days from the date of this Order and must comply with the provisions of part 756 of the Regulations. Fifth, a copy of this Order shall be delivered to McGonigal and shall be published in the Federal Register. Sixth, this Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect until December 14, 2033. John Sonderman, Director, Office of Export Enforcement. [FR Doc. 2024–15637 Filed 7–16–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DT–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–836] Glycine From the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Changed Circumstances Review Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. AGENCY: In response to a request for a changed circumstances review (CCR) from Salvi Chemical Industries Limited (Salvi), the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) is initiating a CCR of the antidumping duty (AD) order on glycine from the People’s Republic of China (China). SUMMARY: DATES: Applicable July 17, 2024. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tyler Weinhold, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1121. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On March 29, 1995 Commerce published the order in the Federal E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 137 / Wednesday, July 17, 2024 / Notices ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 Register.1 On December 10, 2012, Commerce published an affirmative determination of circumvention of the Order, finding that glycine processed in India by Salvi and AICO Laboratories India Ltd. (AICO), using Chinese-origin inputs (e.g., crude or technical-grade glycine), and exported to the United States from India is circumventing the Order on glycine from China.2 Commerce determined that the processing of Chinese-origin technical grade or crude glycine, including but not limited to AAA–97TE, ACAA97TE, sodium glycinate and glycine slurry, does not substantially transform it into glycine of Indian origin and therefore such glycine remains Chinese in origin and therefore within the scope of the Order.3 In its Final Circumvention Determination, Commerce instituted a countrywide certification mechanism for all imports of glycine from India, to ensure that subject merchandise does not enter the United States as glycine from India.4 Commerce adopted the certification requirement to ensure that merchandise meeting the Final Circumvention Determination is properly identified as merchandise subject to the Order.5 Commerce applied this certification to all imports of glycine from India, with the exception of AICO and Salvi, because Commerce determined that glycine produced by AICO and Salvi was circumventing the Order, and therefore subject to the suspension of liquidation of entries and cash deposits of estimated antidumping duties at the rates established under the Order on glycine from China.6 On April 10, 2024, Salvi requested that Commerce conduct a CCR pertaining to the Final Circumvention Determination pursuant to Section 751(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.216(b) to find that glycine imports to United States from India are fully manufactured in India.7 In its submission, Salvi asserts that Commerce should allow Salvi to participate in the certification process, should determine that glycine produced by Salvi is not 1 See Antidumping Duty Order: Glycine from the People’s Republic of China, 60 FR 16116 (March 29, 1995) (Order). 2 See Glycine from the People’s Republic of China: Final Partial Affirmative Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 73426 (December 10, 2012) (Final Circumvention Determination). 3 Id. 77 FR at 73427. 4 Id. 5 Id. 6 Id. 7 See Salvi’s Letter, ‘‘Request for Changed Circumstances Review,’’ dated April 10, 2024 (Salvi’s CCR Request). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:21 Jul 16, 2024 Jkt 262001 produced from Chinese-origin raw material, and should not subject Salvi’s imports of glycine to cash deposit requirements under the Order on glycine from China.8 Salvi claims that the raw materials it used to produce glycine in recent years 9 are outside the scope of the Order, irrespective of country of origin.10 Moreover, Salvi claims that all of the raw materials used in its production of glycine in recent years have been procured from Indian sources.11 Salvi also notes that the certification process established by Commerce and the requirement that Indian-produced glycine not include any Chinese origin materials was established prior to the issuance of an order against glycine from India.12 Salvi insists that a product can be subject to only a single antidumping duty order.13 Therefore, Salvi insists that once the order was issued on glycine from India, the circumstances pertinent to the Final Circumvention Determination changed significantly.14 Scope of the Order The product covered by the Order is glycine, which is a free-flowing crystalline material, like salt or sugar. Glycine is produced at varying levels of purity and is used as a sweetener/taste enhancer, a buffering agent, reabsorbable amino acid, chemical intermediate, and a metal complexing agent. This Order includes glycine of all purity levels. Glycine is currently classified under subheading 2922.49.43 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).15 Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under the Order is dispositive. Scope of the Final Circumvention Determination 16 The product covered by Final Circumvention Determination is glycine, 8 Id. 9 In Salvi’s CCR Request, Salvi provided evidence relevant to it 2021–2021 and 2022–2023 fiscal years to demonstrate that it sourced Indian-produced non-glycine inputs from suppliers in India. 10 See Salvi’s CCR Request at 4–6. 11 Id. at 6–8. 12 Id. at 2. 13 Id. 14 Id. 15 In separate scope rulings, Commerce determined that: (a) D(-) Phenylglycine Ethyl Dane Salt is outside the scope of the Order, and (b) Chinese glycine exported from India remains the same class or kind of merchandise as the Chinaorigin glycine imported into India. See Notice of Scope Rulings and Anticircumvention Inquiries, 62 FR 62288 (November 21, 1997); and Final Circumvention Determination, 77 FR at 73427, respectively. 16 See Final Circumvention Determination, 77 FR at 73427. PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 58105 as described in the ‘‘Scope of the Order’’ section, above, which is exported from India, but processed using Chineseorigin inputs (e.g., crude or technicalgrade glycine). The Final Circumvention Determination covers glycine produced by AICO, Paras, and Salvi. Salvi and Paras stated on the record of the circumvention proceeding that they also self-produce glycine from Indian-origin inputs. The focus of the circumvention proceeding was to determine whether glycine that is: (1) manufactured in China; (2) processed by AICO, Paras, or Salvi in India; and (3) then exported to the United States as Indian-origin glycine constitutes circumvention of the Order under section 781(b) of the Act. Initiation of Changed Circumstances Review Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216(d), Commerce will conduct a CCR upon receipt of information concerning, or a request from an interested party for a review of an AD or CVD order that shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review of the order.17 The information submitted by Salvi supporting its claim that Salvi produced glycine during fiscal years 2021–2022 and 2022–2023 using Indian-origin inputs exclusively, and has not exported glycine to the United States that was processed or produced using Chinese-origin subject merchandise inputs during these fiscal years, demonstrates changed circumstance sufficient to initiate a review.18 Commerce may issue a questionnaire requesting additional information from Salvi for this CCR regarding its purchases and imports (including purchases of glycine inputs and subject glycine), its production facilities, its glycine production, its sales and exports, its affiliations (including affiliations with glycine suppliers, importers, producers, exporters, and trading companies) and other relevant aspects of its glycine and glycine input related business operations and will publish in the Federal Register a notice of preliminary results in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4) and (c)(3)(i). All information submitted may be subject to verification. Failure to allow full and complete verification of any information submitted may affect Commerce’s consideration of that information. Commerce will set forth its preliminary factual and legal conclusions in that notice and a description of any action proposed based on those results. Pursuant to 19 17 See 18 See E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 19 CFR 351.216(c). 19 CFR 351.216(d). 17JYN1 58106 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 137 / Wednesday, July 17, 2024 / Notices CFR 221(b)(4)(ii), interested parties will have an opportunity to comment on the preliminary results. Unless extended, Commerce will issue the final results of these CCRs in accordance with the time limits in 19 CFR 351.216(e). Notification to Interested Parties This initiation notice is published in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216(b), and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3). Dated: July 10, 2024. Scot Fullerton, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. [FR Doc. 2024–15683 Filed 7–16–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–175, C–489–854] Certain Brake Drums From the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of Türkiye: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Applicable July 10, 2024. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nathan James (the People’s Republic of China (China)), and Kyle Clahane (Republic of Türkiye (Türkiye)), AD/ CVD Operations, Offices V and III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–5305, and (202) 482–5449, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 AGENCY: The Petitions On June 20, 2024, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) received countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of certain brake drums (brake drums), from China and Türkiye filed in proper form on behalf of Webb Wheel Products, Inc. (the petitioner), a U.S. producer of brake drums.1 The CVD petitions were accompanied by antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of brake drums from China and Türkiye.2 Between June 24 and July 5, 2024, Commerce requested supplemental 1 See Petitioner’s Letters, ‘‘Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions on Behalf of Webb Wheel Products Inc.,’’ dated June 20, 2024 (Petitions). 2 See, generally, Petitions. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:21 Jul 16, 2024 Jkt 262001 information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions.3 Between June 28 and July 8, 2024, the petitioner filed timely responses to these requests for additional information.4 In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that the Government of China (GOC) and the Government of Türkiye (GOT) (collectively, Governments) are providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of brake drums from China and Türkiye, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic industry producing brake drums 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 CVD investigations, the Petitions were accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its allegations. Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the requested CVD investigations.5 Periods of Investigation Because the Petitions were filed on June 20, 2024, the periods of investigation for the China and Türkiye CVD investigations are January 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023.6 3 See Commerce’s Letters, ‘‘Supplemental Questionnaire,’’ dated June 24, 2024 (General Issues Questionnaire); ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Brake Drums from the Republic of Türkiye: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated June 24, 2024; ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Brake Drums from China: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated June 25, 2024; and ‘‘Supplemental Questions,’’ dated July 5, 2024; see also Memoranda, ‘‘Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,’’ dated July 2, 2024 (July 2, 2024, Memorandum). 4 See Petitioner’s Letters, ‘‘Supplemental Questionnaire Response, Volume I,’’ dated June 28, 2024 (General Issues Supplement); ‘‘Certain Brake Drums from Türkiye: Supplemental Questionnaire Response, Volume V,’’ dated July 1, 2024; ‘‘Certain Brake Drums from the People’s Republic of China: Supplemental Questionnaire Response,’’ dated July 2, 2024; ‘‘Supplemental Questionnaire Response, Volume I,’’ dated July 5, 2024 (Second General Issues Supplement); and ‘‘Supplemental Questionnaire Response, Volume I,’’ dated July 8, 2024 (Industry Support Supplement). 5 See section on ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions,’’ infra. 6 See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2). PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Scope of the Investigations The products covered by these investigations are brake drums from China and Türkiye. For a full description of the scope of these investigations, see the appendix to this notice. Comments on the Scope of the Investigations Between June 24 and July 2, 2024, Commerce requested information and clarification from the petitioner regarding the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions is an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.7 Between June 28 and July 5, 2024, the petitioner provided clarifications and revised the scope.8 The description of merchandise covered by these investigations, as shown 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 (i.e., 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, all such factual information should be limited to public information.10 To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that scope comments be submitted by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on July 30, 2024, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice.11 Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on August 9, 2024, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline. Commerce requests that any factual information that parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during that time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may be relevant, the party must contact Commerce and request permission to 7 See General Issues Questionnaire; see also July 2 Memorandum. 8 See First General Issues Supplement at 1–2 and Exhibit I–S1–3; and Second General Issues Supplement at 1–2. 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)(1). E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 137 (Wednesday, July 17, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58104-58106]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-15683]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-836]


Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of 
Changed Circumstances Review

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

SUMMARY: In response to a request for a changed circumstances review 
(CCR) from Salvi Chemical Industries Limited (Salvi), the U.S. 
Department of Commerce (Commerce) is initiating a CCR of the 
antidumping duty (AD) order on glycine from the People's Republic of 
China (China).

DATES: Applicable July 17, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tyler Weinhold, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1121.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 29, 1995 Commerce published the order in the Federal

[[Page 58105]]

Register.\1\ On December 10, 2012, Commerce published an affirmative 
determination of circumvention of the Order, finding that glycine 
processed in India by Salvi and AICO Laboratories India Ltd. (AICO), 
using Chinese-origin inputs (e.g., crude or technical-grade glycine), 
and exported to the United States from India is circumventing the Order 
on glycine from China.\2\ Commerce determined that the processing of 
Chinese-origin technical grade or crude glycine, including but not 
limited to AAA-97TE, ACAA97TE, sodium glycinate and glycine slurry, 
does not substantially transform it into glycine of Indian origin and 
therefore such glycine remains Chinese in origin and therefore within 
the scope of the Order.\3\ In its Final Circumvention Determination, 
Commerce instituted a countrywide certification mechanism for all 
imports of glycine from India, to ensure that subject merchandise does 
not enter the United States as glycine from India.\4\ Commerce adopted 
the certification requirement to ensure that merchandise meeting the 
Final Circumvention Determination is properly identified as merchandise 
subject to the Order.\5\ Commerce applied this certification to all 
imports of glycine from India, with the exception of AICO and Salvi, 
because Commerce determined that glycine produced by AICO and Salvi was 
circumventing the Order, and therefore subject to the suspension of 
liquidation of entries and cash deposits of estimated antidumping 
duties at the rates established under the Order on glycine from 
China.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Antidumping Duty Order: Glycine from the People's 
Republic of China, 60 FR 16116 (March 29, 1995) (Order).
    \2\ See Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Final 
Partial Affirmative Determination of Circumvention of the 
Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 73426 (December 10, 2012) (Final 
Circumvention Determination).
    \3\ Id. 77 FR at 73427.
    \4\ Id.
    \5\ Id.
    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 10, 2024, Salvi requested that Commerce conduct a CCR 
pertaining to the Final Circumvention Determination pursuant to Section 
751(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, (the Act), and 19 CFR 
351.216(b) to find that glycine imports to United States from India are 
fully manufactured in India.\7\ In its submission, Salvi asserts that 
Commerce should allow Salvi to participate in the certification 
process, should determine that glycine produced by Salvi is not 
produced from Chinese-origin raw material, and should not subject 
Salvi's imports of glycine to cash deposit requirements under the Order 
on glycine from China.\8\ Salvi claims that the raw materials it used 
to produce glycine in recent years \9\ are outside the scope of the 
Order, irrespective of country of origin.\10\ Moreover, Salvi claims 
that all of the raw materials used in its production of glycine in 
recent years have been procured from Indian sources.\11\ Salvi also 
notes that the certification process established by Commerce and the 
requirement that Indian-produced glycine not include any Chinese origin 
materials was established prior to the issuance of an order against 
glycine from India.\12\ Salvi insists that a product can be subject to 
only a single antidumping duty order.\13\ Therefore, Salvi insists that 
once the order was issued on glycine from India, the circumstances 
pertinent to the Final Circumvention Determination changed 
significantly.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Salvi's Letter, ``Request for Changed Circumstances 
Review,'' dated April 10, 2024 (Salvi's CCR Request).
    \8\ Id.
    \9\ In Salvi's CCR Request, Salvi provided evidence relevant to 
it 2021-2021 and 2022-2023 fiscal years to demonstrate that it 
sourced Indian-produced non-glycine inputs from suppliers in India.
    \10\ See Salvi's CCR Request at 4-6.
    \11\ Id. at 6-8.
    \12\ Id. at 2.
    \13\ Id.
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The product covered by the Order is glycine, which is a free-
flowing crystalline material, like salt or sugar. Glycine is produced 
at varying levels of purity and is used as a sweetener/taste enhancer, 
a buffering agent, reabsorbable amino acid, chemical intermediate, and 
a metal complexing agent. This Order includes glycine of all purity 
levels. Glycine is currently classified under subheading 2922.49.43 of 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).\15\ 
Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs 
purposes, the written description of the merchandise under the Order is 
dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ In separate scope rulings, Commerce determined that: (a) 
D(-) Phenylglycine Ethyl Dane Salt is outside the scope of the 
Order, and (b) Chinese glycine exported from India remains the same 
class or kind of merchandise as the China-origin glycine imported 
into India. See Notice of Scope Rulings and Anticircumvention 
Inquiries, 62 FR 62288 (November 21, 1997); and Final Circumvention 
Determination, 77 FR at 73427, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Final Circumvention Determination ¹⁶
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Final Circumvention Determination, 77 FR at 73427.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The product covered by Final Circumvention Determination is 
glycine, as described in the ``Scope of the Order'' section, above, 
which is exported from India, but processed using Chinese-origin inputs 
(e.g., crude or technical-grade glycine). The Final Circumvention 
Determination covers glycine produced by AICO, Paras, and Salvi. Salvi 
and Paras stated on the record of the circumvention proceeding that 
they also self-produce glycine from Indian-origin inputs. The focus of 
the circumvention proceeding was to determine whether glycine that is: 
(1) manufactured in China; (2) processed by AICO, Paras, or Salvi in 
India; and (3) then exported to the United States as Indian-origin 
glycine constitutes circumvention of the Order under section 781(b) of 
the Act.

Initiation of Changed Circumstances Review

    Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216(d), 
Commerce will conduct a CCR upon receipt of information concerning, or 
a request from an interested party for a review of an AD or CVD order 
that shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review of the 
order.\17\ The information submitted by Salvi supporting its claim that 
Salvi produced glycine during fiscal years 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 
using Indian-origin inputs exclusively, and has not exported glycine to 
the United States that was processed or produced using Chinese-origin 
subject merchandise inputs during these fiscal years, demonstrates 
changed circumstance sufficient to initiate a review.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See 19 CFR 351.216(c).
    \18\ See 19 CFR 351.216(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce may issue a questionnaire requesting additional 
information from Salvi for this CCR regarding its purchases and imports 
(including purchases of glycine inputs and subject glycine), its 
production facilities, its glycine production, its sales and exports, 
its affiliations (including affiliations with glycine suppliers, 
importers, producers, exporters, and trading companies) and other 
relevant aspects of its glycine and glycine input related business 
operations and will publish in the Federal Register a notice of 
preliminary results in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4) and 
(c)(3)(i). All information submitted may be subject to verification. 
Failure to allow full and complete verification of any information 
submitted may affect Commerce's consideration of that information. 
Commerce will set forth its preliminary factual and legal conclusions 
in that notice and a description of any action proposed based on those 
results. Pursuant to 19

[[Page 58106]]

CFR 221(b)(4)(ii), interested parties will have an opportunity to 
comment on the preliminary results. Unless extended, Commerce will 
issue the final results of these CCRs in accordance with the time 
limits in 19 CFR 351.216(e).

Notification to Interested Parties

    This initiation notice is published in accordance with sections 
751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216(b), and 19 CFR 
351.221(c)(3).

    Dated: July 10, 2024.
Scot Fullerton,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2024-15683 Filed 7-16-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.