76302 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 2014 / Notices 

4See Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the 

Republic of Korea: Initiation of Changed 

Circumstances Review, 79 FR 49285 (August 20, 

2014) (Initiation Notice). 

5See Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 62596; see also 

PDM at 2–7. 

6See Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 62596–97. 

7Toray did not request a hearing, but informed 

the Department of its intent to participate if another 

interested party requested such a hearing. See Letter 

from Toray, ‘‘Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from 

the Republic of Korea: Request to Participate in 

Hearing’’ (November 19, 2014). 

8For a complete discussion of the Department’s 

findings, see generally PDM, which is herein 

incorporated by reference and adopted by this 

notice. 

9See Notice of Amended Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain 

Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea, 69 FR 67891, 

67891 (November 22, 2004) (providing weightedaverage dumping margin for Woongjin’s 

predecessor, Seahan Industries, Inc.); see also 

Notice of Final Results of Changed Circumstances 

Antidumping Duty Review: Certain Polyester Staple 

Fiber from the Republic of Korea, 73 FR 49168 

(August 20, 2008) (finding Woongjin as successorin-interest to Seahan Industries, Inc.). 

1See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from 

Finland: Notice of Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012– 

2013, 79 FR 48119 (August 15, 2014) (Preliminary 

Results), and the accompanying Decision 

Memorandum (Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum). 

2See ‘‘Letter in Lieu of Case Brief’’ from CP Kelco, 

regarding ‘‘Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from 

Finland,’’ dated September 15, 2014. 

3The Petitioner in this proceeding is Ashand 

Specialty Ingredients, a division of Hercules 

Incorporated. 

CCR.4 On October 20, 2014, the 

Department published the Preliminary 

Results, in which it preliminarily 

determined that Toray is the successorin-interest to Woongjin.5 The 

Department invited interested parties to 

comment on the Preliminary Results.6

No interested party commented on the 

Preliminary Results or requested a 

hearing.7

Scope of the Order 

The product covered by the order is 

certain PSF. Certain PSF is defined as 

synthetic staple fibers, not carded, 

combed or otherwise processed for 

spinning, of polyesters measuring 3.3 

decitex (3 denier, inclusive) or more in 

diameter. This merchandise is cut to 

lengths varying from one inch (25 mm) 

to five inches (127 mm). The 

merchandise subject to the order may be 

coated, usually with a silicon or other 

finish, or not coated. PSF is generally 

used as stuffing in sleeping bags, 

mattresses, ski jackets, comforters, 

cushions, pillows, and furniture. 

Merchandise of less than 3.3 decitex 

(less than 3 denier) currently classifiable 

in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 

the United States (HTSUS) at 

subheading 5503.20.0020 is specifically 

excluded from the order. Also 

specifically excluded from the order are 

PSF of 10 to 18 denier that are cut to 

lengths of 6 to 8 inches (fibers used in 

the manufacture of carpeting). In 

addition, low-melt PSF is excluded from 

the order. Low-melt PSF is defined as a 

bi-component fiber with an outer sheath 

that melts at a significantly lower 

temperature than its inner core. 

The merchandise subject to this order 

is classified in the HTSUS at 

subheadings 5503.20.0040 and 

5503.20.0060. Although the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of these orders is 

dispositive. 

Final Results of Changed 

Circumstances Review 

Because no interested party 

commented on the Preliminary Results 

and there is no other information or 

evidence on the record that calls into 

question the Department’s Preliminary 

Results, the Department adopts the 

reasoning and findings of fact in the 

Preliminary Results as the final results 

of the review.8 Thus, the Department 

continues to find that Toray is the 

successor-in-interest to Woongjin for the 

purpose of determining antidumping 

duty liability. 

Instructions to U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection 

As a result of this determination, the 

Department finds that entries of subject 

merchandise exported by Toray should 

enter the United States at the cash 

deposit rate assigned to Woongjin in the 

most recently completed administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on PSF from Korea, which is 2.13 

percent ad valorem.9 Consequently, the 

Department will instruct U.S Customs 

and Border Protection to collect 

estimated antidumping duties for all 

shipments of subject merchandise 

exported by Toray and entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after the publication 

date of this notice in the Federal 

Register at the cash deposit rate 

currently in effect for Woongjin. This 

cash deposit requirement shall remain 

in effect until further notice. 

Notifications 

This notice serves as a 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 351.306. 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 terms of an APO is a 

sanctionable violation. 

This notice is published in 

accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 

777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216(e). 

Dated: December 12, 2014. 

Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2014–29921 Filed 12–19–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–405–803] 

Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From 

Finland: Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review; 2012– 

2013 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On August 15, 2014, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published the Preliminary 

Results of the 2012–2013 administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on Purified Carboxymethylcellulose 

from Finland.1 This review covers one 

respondent, CP Kelco Oy (CP Kelco). 

For these final results of review, we 

continue to find that sales of the subject 

merchandise by CP Kelco have not been 

made at prices below normal value 

(NV). 

DATES: Effective Date: December 22, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael J. Heaney or Robert James, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement 

and Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482–4475 or (202) 482– 

0649, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On August 15, 2014, the Department 

published the Preliminary Results. We 

invited parties to comment on the 

Preliminary Results. In response, we 

received a comment from CP Kelco on 

September 15, 2014.2 Petitioner 3 did 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 2014 / Notices 76303 

4For a full description of the scope of the order, 

see Memorandum from Richard Weible, Director, 

Office VI, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary, 

Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Results of the 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Purified 

Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland; 2012–2013’’ 

(Issues and Decision Memorandum), which is dated 

concurrently with these final results and 

incorporated herein by reference. 

5On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and 

Compliance’s AD and CVD Centralized Electronice 

Service System (‘‘IA ACCESS’’) to AD and CVD 

Centralized Electronice Service System 

(‘‘ACCESS’’). The Web site location was changed 

from http://iaacess.trade.gov to http://

access.trade.gov. The Final Rule changing the 

references to the Regulations can be found at 79 FR 

69046 (November 20, 2014). 

6See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of 

the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and 

Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty 

Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101, 8102 

(February 14, 2012) (Final Modification). 

7For a full discussion of this clarification, see 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 

(May 6, 2003). 

8See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order; Purified 

Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland, Mexico, the 

Netherlands and Sweden, 70 FR 39734 (July 11, 

2005). 

not submit comments on the 

Preliminary Results. 

Period of Review 

The period of review (POR) is July 1, 

2012, through June 30, 2013. 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise covered by this 

order is all purified 

carboxymethylcellulose (CMC).4 The 

merchandise subject to this order is 

classified in the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 

at subheading 3912.3100. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised by interested parties 

in this review 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).5

ACCESS is available to registered users 

at https://access.trade.gov and available 

to all parties in the Central Records 

Unit, room 7046 of the main Department 

of Commerce building. In addition, a 

complete version of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum can be accessed 

directly on the internet at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed 

Issues and Decision Memorandum and 

electronic versions of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum are identical in 

content. A list of the issue raised is 

attached to this notice as Appendix I. 

We have analyzed all interested party 

comments. Based on our analysis of the 

comments received, the margin in the 

final results is unchanged from that 

presented in the Preliminary Results. 

Final Results of Review 

We determine that the following 

dumping margin exists for the period 

July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2013: 

Manufacturer/exporter 

Weightedaverage dumping 

margin 

(percentage) 

CP Kelco Oy .................................................................................................................................................................................. 0.00 

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) 

and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department 

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. Because CP Kelco’s weighted 

average dumping margin is zero, in 

accordance with the Final Modification, 

we will instruct CBP to liquidate the 

appropriate entries without regard to 

antidumping duties.6 For entries of 

subject merchandise during the POR 

produced by CP Kelco Oy for which it 

did not know its merchandise was 

destined for the United States, we will 

instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed 

entries at the all-others rate if there is no 

rate for the intermediate company(ies) 

involved in the transaction.7

We intend to issue assessment 

instructions to CBP 15 days after the 

date of publication of these final results 

of review. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of the final results of this 

administrative review for all shipments 

of the subject merchandise entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after the publication 

date of these final results, consistent 

with section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The 

cash deposit rate for CP Kelco will be 

0.00 percent, the weighted average 

dumping margin established in the final 

results of this administrative review; (2) 

if the exporter is not a firm covered in 

this review, but was covered in a 

previous review or the original less than 

fair value (LTFV) investigation, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be the 

company-specific rate published for the 

most recent period; (3) if the exporter is 

not a firm covered in this review, a prior 

review, or the original LTFV 

investigation, but the manufacturer is, 

the cash deposit rate will be the rate 

established for the most recent period 

for the manufacturer of the 

merchandise; and (4) if neither the 

exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm 

covered in this or any previous review 

conducted by the Department, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be 6.65 

percent, which is the all-others rate 

established in the LTFV investigation.8

These cash deposit requirements, when 

imposed, shall remain in effect until 

further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice also serves as a final 

reminder to importers of their 

responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 

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 the Secretary’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 orders (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the return or 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305, 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 terms of an APO is a violation 

which is subject to sanction. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
76304 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 2014 / Notices 

1See Antidumping Duty Order: Fresh Garlic From 

the People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 59209 

(November 16, 1994) (Order). See also Fresh Garlic 

From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results 

and Rescission, In Part, of Twelfth New Shipper 

Reviews, 73 FR 56550 (September 29, 2008). 

2See id. 

3The petitioners are the Fresh Garlic Producers 

Association and its individual members: 

Christopher Ranch L.L.C., The Garlic Company, 

Valley Garlic, and Vessey and Company, Inc. 

4See, e.g., Certain Activated Carbon From the 

People’s Republic of China: Notice of Initiation of 

Changed Circumstances Review, 74 FR 19934, 

19935 (April 30, 2009). 

5See, e.g., Notice of Initiation of Antidumping 

Duty Changed Circumstances Review: Certain 

Forged Stainless Steel Flanges From India, 71 FR 

327 (January 4, 2006). 

6See, e.g., Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon 

From Norway; Final Results of Changed 

The Department is issuing and 

publishing this notice in accordance 

with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of 

the Act. 

Dated: December 12, 2014. 

Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary, Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

Appendix I 

List of Topics Discussed in the 

Accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Scope of the Order 

IV. Discussion Of Issues 

a. Inclusion in Margin Program of Export 

Price Sales Invoiced Prior to the POR 

and Entered During the POR 

V. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2014–29924 Filed 12–19–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–831] 

Fresh Garlic From the People’s 

Republic of China: Initiation of 

Changed Circumstances Review of 

Jining Yongjia Trade Co., Ltd. and 

Jinxiang County Shanfu Frozen Co., 

Ltd. 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) has received 

information sufficient to warrant 

initiation of a changed circumstances 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on fresh garlic from the People’s 

Republic of China (PRC). Based upon a 

request filed by Jining Yongjia Trade 

Co., Ltd. (Yongjia), an exporter of fresh 

garlic to the United States, the 

Department is initiating a changed 

circumstances review to determine 

whether Yongjia’s supplier, Jinxiang 

County Shanfu Frozen Co., Ltd. (Shanfu 

II), is the successor-in-interest of the 

producer/supplier of Yongjia with the 

same name, Shanfu (Shanfu I), 

examined in Yongjia’s new shipper 

review of this order.1

DATES: Effective Date: December 22, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Hilary E. Sadler, Esq., at (202) 482–4340 

or Mark Hoadley at (202) 482–3148, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office VII, 

Enforcement & Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On November 16, 1994, the 

Department published notice of the 

Order in the Federal Register.2 On 

October 8, 2014, Yongjia requested that 

the Department conduct a changed 

circumstances review pursuant to 

section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (the Act), 19 CFR 

351.216 and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3), to 

determine that its supplier, Shanfu II, is 

the successor-in-interest to the supplier 

of the same name which the Department 

examined in Yongjia’s new shipper 

review for purposes of this antidumping 

duty order. In its request, Yongjia stated 

that changes in ownership in Shanfu I 

had taken place, and provided business 

licenses before and after the change in 

ownership, a tax payment notice, a 

marriage license, and information on the 

company’s ownership and customers 

before and after the ownership change. 

On November 5, 2014, the petitioners 3

submitted comments opposing this 

initiation. 

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by the order are 

all grades of garlic, whole or separated 

into constituent cloves, whether or not 

peeled, fresh, chilled, frozen, water or 

other neutral substance, but not 

prepared or preserved by the addition of 

other ingredients or heat processing. 

The differences between grades are 

based on color, size, sheathing, and 

level of decay. The scope of the order 

does not include the following: (a) 

Garlic that has been mechanically 

harvested and that is primarily, but not 

exclusively, destined for non-fresh use; 

or (b) garlic that has been specially 

prepared and cultivated prior to 

planting and then harvested and 

otherwise prepared for use as seed. The 

subject merchandise is used principally 

as a food product and for seasoning. The 

subject garlic is currently classifiable 

under subheadings: 0703.20.0000, 

0703.20.0010, 0703.20.0015, 

0703.20.0020, 0703.20.0090, 

0710.80.7060, 0710.80.9750, 

0711.90.6000, 0711.90.6500, 

2005.90.9500, 2005.90.9700, and 

2005.99.9700, of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). 

Although the HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, our written description of the 

scope of the order is dispositive. In 

order to be excluded from the order, 

garlic entered under the HTSUS 

subheadings listed above that is (1) 

mechanically harvested and primarily, 

but not exclusively, destined for nonfresh use or (2) specially prepared and 

cultivated prior to planting and then 

harvested and otherwise prepared for 

use as seed must be accompanied by 

declarations to U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection to that effect. 

Initiation of Changed Circumstances 

Review 

Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the 

Act, the Department will conduct a 

changed circumstances review upon 

receipt of information concerning, or a 

request from an interested party for a 

review of, an antidumping duty order 

which shows changed circumstances 

sufficient to warrant a review of the 

order. In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.216(d), the Department has 

determined that the information 

submitted by Yongjia constitutes 

sufficient evidence to conduct a 

changed circumstances review of the 

Order. 

In a changed circumstances review 

involving a successor-in-interest 

determination, the Department typically 

examines several factors including, but 

not limited to, changes in: (1) 

Management; (2) production facilities; 

(3) supplier relationships; and (4) 

customer base.4 While no single factor 

or combination of factors will 

necessarily be dispositive, the 

Department generally will consider the 

new company to be the successor to the 

predecessor if the resulting operations 

are essentially the same as those of the 

predecessor company.5 Thus, if the 

record demonstrates that, with respect 

to the production and sale of the subject 

merchandise, the new company 

operates as the same business entity as 

the predecessor company, the 

Department may assign the new 

company the cash deposit rate of its 

predecessor.6


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES