[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 27 (Thursday, February 11, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9055-9057]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02821]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-549-833]


Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From Thailand: Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2018-2019

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) finds that sales of 
citric acid and certain citrate salts (citric acid) from Thailand were 
made by COFCO Biochemical (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (COFCO) and Niran 
(Thailand) Co., Ltd. (Niran) at less than normal value (NV) during the 
period of review (POR) January 8, 2018, through June 30, 2019. We also 
find that Sunshine Biotech International Co., Ltd. (Sunshine) did not 
sell citric acid at less than NV during the POR.

DATES: Applicable February 11, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joy Zhang (COFCO), Katherine Sliney 
(Niran), or Jolanta Lawska (Sunshine), AD/CVD Operations, Office III, 
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 
20230; telephone: (202) 482-1168, (202) 482-2437, or (202) 482-8362, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 12, 2020, we published the Preliminary Results of this 
administrative review.\1\ We invited interested parties to comment on 
the Preliminary Results. We received case briefs from COFCO and 
Niran.\2\ We received a rebuttal brief from Archer Daniels Midland 
Company, Cargill Incorporated, and Tate & Lyle Ingredients Americas LLC 
(collectively, the petitioners).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Thailand: 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2018-
2019, 85 FR 48672 (August 12, 2020) (Preliminary Results).
    \2\ See COFCO's Letter, ``Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts 
from Thailand: Case Brief,'' dated September 11, 2020; see also 
Niran's Letter, ``Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from 
Thailand: Case Brief,'' dated September 11, 2020.
    \3\ See Petitioners' Letter, ``Citric Acid and Certain Citrate 
Salts from Thailand: Petitioners' Rebuttal Brief,'' dated September 
18, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 21, 2020, Commerce tolled all deadlines in administrative 
reviews by 60 days, thereby extending the deadline for these final 
results until January 19, 2021.\4\ On January 7, 2021, we extended the 
deadline for the final results of this review to February 16, 2021.\5\ 
A complete summary of the events that occurred since publication of the 
Preliminary Results may be found in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum.\6\ Commerce conducted this administrative review in 
accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Memorandum, ``Tolling of Deadlines for Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews,'' dated July 21, 2020.
    \5\ See Memorandum, ``Extension of Deadline for Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review--Citric Acid and Certain 
Citrate Salts from Thailand,'' dated January 7, 2021.
    \6\ See Memorandum, ``Decision Memorandum for the Final Results 
of 2018-2019 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on 
Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Thailand,'' dated 
concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and 
Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by this order includes all grades and 
granulation sizes of citric acid, sodium citrate, and potassium citrate 
in their unblended forms, whether dry or in solution, and regardless of 
packaging type. The scope also includes blends of citric acid, sodium 
citrate, and potassium citrate; as well as blends with other 
ingredients, such as sugar, where the unblended form(s) of citric acid, 
sodium citrate, and potassium citrate constitute 40 percent or more, by 
weight, of the blend.
    Citric acid and sodium citrate are classifiable under 2918.14.0000 
and 2918.15.1000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS), respectively. Potassium citrate and crude calcium citrate are 
classifiable under 2918.15.5000 and, if included in a mixture or blend, 
3824.99.9295 of the HTSUS. Blends that include citric acid, sodium 
citrate, and potassium citrate

[[Page 9056]]

are classifiable under 3824.99.9295 of the HTSUS. Although the HTSUS 
sub-headings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the 
written description of the merchandise is dispositive. For a full 
description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision 
Memorandum.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised by the parties in their case and rebuttal briefs 
are listed in the appendix to this notice and are addressed in the 
Issues and Decision Memorandum. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a 
public document and is on-file electronically via Enforcement and 
Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic 
Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at 
https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum 
and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are 
identical in content.
    We made no changes to the Preliminary Results.

Final Results of the Review

    The weighted-average dumping margins for the final results of this 
administrative review are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Weighted- average dumping
             Exporter/producer                    margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
COFCO Biochemical (Thailand) Co., Ltd.      0.76.
 (COFCO).
Niran (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (Niran)........  54.11.
Sunshine Biotech International Co., Ltd.    0.00 (de minimis).
 (Sunshine).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.212(b)(1), Commerce will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of 
this review.
    Since COFCO and Niran have weighted-average dumping margins above 
de minimis (i.e., greater than 0.5 percent), Commerce has calculated 
importer-specific ad valorem antidumping duty assessment rates. We 
calculated importer-specific antidumping duty assessment rates by 
aggregating the total amount of dumping calculated for the examined 
sales of each importer and dividing each of these amounts by the total 
sales value associated with those sales. We will instruct CBP to assess 
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review 
where an importer-specific assessment rate is not zero or de minimis. 
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate 
without regard to antidumping duties any entries for which the 
importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis.
    In accordance with our practice, for entries of subject merchandise 
during the POR for which a respondent did not know that the merchandise 
was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate 
such entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the 
intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.
    Consistent with its recent notice,\7\ Commerce intends to issue 
assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date 
of publication of the final results of this review in the Federal 
Register. If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of 
International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to 
liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request 
for a statutory injunction has expired (i.e., within 90 days of 
publication).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Notice of Discontinuation of Policy to Issue Liquidation 
Instructions After 15 Days in Applicable Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Proceedings, 86 FR 3995 (January 
15, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for 
all shipments of citric acid from Thailand entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the 
final results, as provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The 
cash deposit rate for the firms listed above will be equal to the 
dumping margins established in the final results of this review, except 
if the ultimate rates are de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 
351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rates will be zero; (2) 
for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this 
administrative review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, 
the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate 
published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding in 
which the producer or exporter participated; (3) if the exporter is not 
a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-
than-fair-value investigation but the producer is, then the cash 
deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently 
completed segment of the proceeding for the producer of the 
merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or 
exporters will continue to be 11.25 percent, the all-others rate 
established in the antidumping duty investigation.\8\ These cash 
deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until 
further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From Belgium, 
Colombia and Thailand: Antidumping Duty Orders, 83 FR 35214 (July 
25, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Importers

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply 
with this requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction 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/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.

Notification to Interested Parties

    We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1).

    Dated: February 5, 2021.
Christian Marsh,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix--List of Topics Discussed in the Final Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Discussion of the Issues
    Comment 1: Whether to Depart From the Standard Differences in 
Merchandise Test
    Comment 2: Whether Costs to Further Manufacture Byproducts 
Should Continue To Be Captured
    Comment 3: Whether to Depart From the Standard Differential 
Pricing Methodology

[[Page 9057]]

    Comment 4: Whether Compelling Reasons Exist To Make 
Modifications to the Existing Model-Match Criteria
    Comment 5: Whether To Make Adjustments To Exclude Shutdown 
Periods From Reported Costs
V. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2021-02821 Filed 2-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P