Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78795 

40 Id., at 17. 41 Id., at 16. 42 Id., at 17. 43 Id. 

44 Id. 

45 Id. 

46 Id. Petitioner also provided a description of 

Malaysia’s relevant HTS numbers. Id., at Exhibit 7. 

47 Id.; see also Reztec Final Determination, 79 FR 

3345 and accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. Petitioner did not submit any 

Malaysian import statistics regarding imports of 

helical wires and border rods from the PRC. 

48 Id. 49 Id., at 7–17. 

1See Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Cased 

Pencils From the People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 

66909 (December 28, 1994). 

Malaysia under the relevant HTSUS 

subheadings.40 Petitioner states that 

prior to 2009, there were virtually no 

imports of uncovered innerspring units 

from Malaysia to the United States.41

However, according to the chart, subject 

imports from Malaysia to the United 

States have steadily increased: 185,917 

pieces were imported in 2009; 312,317 

pieces were imported in 2010; 344,388 

pieces were imported in 2011; 132,017 

pieces were imported in 2012; and 

52,051 pieces were imported in 2013.42

Petitioner claims that the lower overall 

entry quantities over the last two years 

are due to the previous 

anticircumvention inquiry filed by 

Petitioner in 2012.43 Petitioner notes 

that quantities of imports after 2012, 

while not as high as the immediately 

preceding years, are still significant 

compared to before the Order was in 

place.44

Furthermore, Petitioner contends that 

Malaysia’s official import statistics 

indicated that imports from the PRC of 

one of the key components in 

innerspring units (i.e., coils) have 

increased substantially since the Order 

was imposed.45 Petitioner provided a 

chart of import data related to 

Malaysia’s imports of coils from the PRC 

over the last several years, as well as the 

current year under HTS 7320.99.000 

(other springs and leaves for springs, of 

iron/steel, kilograms (‘‘kgs’’)). This chart 

shows an increase of imported coils 

from 2,995,519 kgs in 2007 to 

11,972,478 kgs in 2011, and a gradual 

decrease to 5,218,789 kgs for the current 

year.46 Again, Petitioner notes that 

imports have somewhat declined 

starting in 2012, which may be due to 

the Department’s determination in the 

previous anticircumvention inquiry 

filed by Petitioner.47 Nevertheless, 

Petitioner contends that imports of coils 

from the PRC remain higher than before 

the Order was in place.48

(2) Increase of Subject Imports From the 

PRC to Malaysia After the Investigation 

Initiation 

Petitioner did not provide any 

evidence regarding an increase in 

subject imports (i.e., completed 

uncovered innerspring units) from the 

PRC to Malaysia after the initiation of 

the investigation. However, as noted 

above, Petitioner provided information 

that imports of one of the key 

components of innerspring units from 

PRC to Malaysia increased significantly 

during this time. 

F. Whether Action Is Appropriate To 

Prevent Evasion of the Order 

Based on the information provided by 

Petitioner, and for the reasons provided 

in the analysis below, the Department 

determines that initiating an 

anticircumvention inquiry is 

appropriate to identify any potential 

evasion of the Order. 

Analysis of the Request 

Based on our analysis of Petitioner’s 

circumvention inquiry request, the 

Department determines that Petitioner 

has satisfied the criteria under section 

781(b)(1) of the Act to warrant an 

initiation of a formal circumvention 

inquiry.49 In accordance with section 

351.225(e) of the Department’s 

regulations, the Department finds that 

the issue of whether a product is 

included within the scope of an order 

cannot be determined based solely upon 

the application and the descriptions of 

the merchandise. Accordingly, the 

Department will notify by mail all 

parties on the Department’s scope 

service list of the initiation of a 

circumvention inquiry. 

In accordance with section 

351.225(l)(2) of the Department’s 

regulations, if the Department issues a 

preliminary affirmative determination, 

we will then instruct U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection to suspend 

liquidation and require a cash deposit of 

estimated duties on the merchandise. 

This circumvention inquiry covers 

Goldon. If, within sufficient time, the 

Department receives a formal request 

from an interested party regarding 

potential circumvention of the Order by 

other Malaysian companies, we will 

consider conducting additional 

inquiries concurrently. 

The Department will establish a 

schedule for questionnaires and 

comments on the issues. In accordance 

with section 351.225(f)(5) of the 

Department’s regulations, the 

Department intends to issue its final 

determination within 300 days of the 

date of publication of this initiation, in 

accordance with section 781(f) of the 

Act. This notice is published in 

accordance with section 351.225(f) of 

the Department’s regulations. 

Dated: December 22, 2014. 

Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30658 Filed 12–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–827] 

Certain Cased Pencils From the 

People’s Republic of China: 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review and Partial 

Rescission; 2012–2013 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Department) is conducting an 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on certain 

cased pencils (pencils) from the 

People’s Republic of China (PRC).1 The 

period of review (POR) is December 1, 

2012, through November 30, 2013. This 

review covers two exporters of subject 

merchandise, Shandong Rongxin Import 

& Export Co., Ltd. (Rongxin) and 

Shanghai Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. 

(SFTC). 

We preliminarily determine that 

Rongxin is not eligible for a separate 

rate, and, thus, remains part of the PRCwide entity. In addition, we are 

rescinding the review with respect to 

SFTC. If these preliminary results are 

adopted in our final results of review, 

we will instruct U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) to assess 

antidumping duties on all appropriate 

entries of subject merchandise during 

the POR. Interested parties are invited to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 31, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mary Kolberg, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce, 14th Street 

and Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–1785. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to the order 

includes certain cased pencils from the 

PRC. The subject merchandise is 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

78796 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 

2See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy 

Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance, ‘‘Decision Memorandum for 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and Partial Rescission: 

Certain Cased Pencils from the People’s Republic of 

China; 2012–2013,’’ dated concurrently with and 

hereby adopted by this notice (Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum). 

3See letter from SFTC, ‘‘Withdrawal of Request: 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Cased Pencils 

from the PRC,’’ dated March 3, 2014. 

4On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and 

Compliance changed the name of Enforcement and 

Compliance’s AD and CVD Centralized Electronic 

Service System (IA ACCESS) to AD and CVD 

Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). 

The Web site location was changed from http://

iaaccess.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). 

5As noted, Rongxin is not eligible for a separate 

rate. 

6See 19 CFR 351.224(b). 

7See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii). 

8See 19 CFR 351.309(d). 

9See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2). 

10See 19 CFR 351.303(b). 

11See 19 CFR 351.310(c). 

12See 19 CFR 351.310(d). 

13See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 

14See Antidumping Proceeding: Calculation of 

the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and 

Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty 

Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8103 

(February 14, 2012) (Final Modification for 

Reviews). 

15See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). 

16For a full discussion of this practice, see NonMarket Economy Antidumping Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694, 

65694–95 (October 24, 2011). 

currently classifiable under Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States 

(HTSUS) subheading 9609.1010. 

Although the HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the written product 

description is dispositive. A full 

description of the scope of the order is 

contained in the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum, dated concurrently with 

and hereby adopted by this notice.2

Partial Rescission of Review 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the 

Secretary will rescind an administrative 

review, in whole or in part, if a party 

that requested the review withdraws the 

request within 90 days of the date of 

publication of the Initiation Notice. On 

March 3, 2014, SFTC timely withdrew 

its request for a review of its exports.3

Accordingly, the Department is 

rescinding this administrative review 

with respect to SFTC. 

Methodology 

The Department is conducting this 

review in accordance with section 

751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (the Act). However, as we 

have preliminarily determined that 

Rongxin is not eligible for a separate 

rate, the Department has not calculated 

a margin for these preliminary results. 

For a full description of the analysis 

underlying our conclusions, see the 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 

The Preliminary 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).4

ACCESS is available to registered users 

at http://access.trade.gov and in the 

Central Records Unit, Room 7046 of the 

main Department of Commerce 

building. In addition, a complete 

version of the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum can be accessed directly 

on the Internet at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum and 

the electronic versions of the 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum are 

identical in content. 

Preliminary Results of Review 

The Department preliminarily 

determines that the following weightedaverage dumping margins exist 5: 

Exporter 

Weightedaverage dumping 

margin 

(percent) 

PRC-wide Rate ............... 114.90 

Disclosure and Public Comment 

The Department intends to disclose to 

parties to this proceeding the 

preliminary separate rate analysis 

performed in reaching the preliminary 

results within five days of the date of 

publication of these preliminary 

results.6 Interested parties may submit 

case briefs no later than 30 days after 

the date of publication of the 

preliminary results.7 Rebuttals to case 

briefs may be filed no later than five 

days after the deadline for filing case 

briefs and all rebuttal comments must 

be limited to comments raised in the 

case briefs.8 Parties who submit case 

briefs or rebuttal briefs in this 

proceeding are encouraged to submit 

with each argument: (1) A statement of 

the issue; (2) a brief summary of the 

argument; and (3) a table of authorities.9

Case and rebuttal briefs must be filed 

electronically via ACCESS.10

Any interested party may request a 

hearing within 30 days of publication of 

this notice.11 Hearing requests should 

contain the following information: (1) 

The party’s name, address, and 

telephone number; (2) the number of 

participants; and (3) a list of the issues 

to be discussed. Oral presentations will 

be limited to issues raised in the briefs. 

If a request for a hearing is made, parties 

will be notified of the time and date for 

the hearing to be held at the U.S. 

Department of Commerce, 14th Street 

and Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230.12

The Department intends to issue the 

final results of this administrative 

review, including the results of its 

analysis of issues raised in any briefs, 

within 120 days of publication of these 

preliminary results, pursuant to section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. 

Assessment Rates 

Upon issuing the final results of 

review, the Department will determine, 

and CBP shall assess, antidumping 

duties on all appropriate entries covered 

by this review.13 The Department 

intends to issue appropriate assessment 

instructions directly to CBP 15 days 

after publication of the final results of 

review. 

If, in the course of this review, we 

reverse our determination and find that 

Rongxin is eligible for a separate rate, 

and Rongxin’s weighted-average 

dumping margin is above de minimis 

(i.e., 0.50 percent) in the final results of 

this review, we will calculate importerspecific (or customer-specific) ad 

valorem (or per-unit) assessment rates 

on the basis of the ratio of the total 

amount of dumping calculated for the 

importer’s examined sales and the total 

entered value (or quantity) of those sales 

in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.212(b)(1). Specifically, the 

Department will apply the assessment 

rate calculation method adopted in 

Final Modification for Reviews.14 Where 

an importer- (or customer-) specific ad 

valorem rate is zero or de minimis, we 

will instruct CBP to liquidate 

appropriate entries without regard to 

antidumping duties.15

On October 24, 2011, the Department 

announced a refinement to its 

assessment practice in NME cases.16

Pursuant to this refinement in practice, 

for entries that were not reported in the 

U.S. sales databases submitted by 

companies individually examined 

during this review, but that entered 

under the case number of that exporter, 

the Department will instruct CBP to 

liquidate such entries at the PRC-wide 

rate. In addition, if the Department 

determines that an exporter under 

review had no shipments of the subject 

merchandise, any suspended entries 

that entered under that exporter’s case 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices 78797 

17 Id. 

1For a complete description of the Scope of the 

Order, see ‘‘Decision Memorandum for the 

Preliminary Results of the 2013 Antidumping Duty 

New Shipper Review of Xanthan Gum from the 

People’s Republic of China,’’ from Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. 

Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance (‘‘Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum’’), dated concurrently with 

this notice. 

2See the memorandum from Brandon Farlander, 

International Trade Analyst, AD/CVD Operations 

Office IV to Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, AD/CVD 

Operations Office IV regarding ‘‘Xanthan Gum from 

the People’s Republic of China: Affiliation and 

Single Company Status’’ dated concurrently with 

this notice. 

number (i.e., at that exporter’s rate) will 

be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.17

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of the final results of this 

administrative review for shipments of 

the subject merchandise from the PRC 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date, as provided by 

sections 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The 

cash deposit rate for Rongxin will be 

that established in the final results of 

this review (except, if the rate is zero or 

de minimis, then zero cash deposit will 

be required); (2) for previously 

investigated or reviewed PRC and nonPRC exporters not listed above that 

received a separate rate in a prior 

segment of this proceeding, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be the 

existing exporter-specific rate; (3) for all 

PRC exporters of subject merchandise 

that have not been found to be entitled 

to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate 

will be that for the PRC-wide entity 

(114.90 percent); and (4) for all non-PRC 

exporters of subject merchandise which 

have not received their own rate, the 

cash deposit rate will be the rate 

applicable to the PRC exporter that 

supplied that non-PRC exporter. These 

cash deposit requirements, when 

imposed, shall remain in effect until 

further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice also serves as a 

preliminary 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 the 

Department’s presumption that 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping duties. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.221(b)(4). 

Dated: December 12, 2014. 

Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

Appendix I 

List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum 

1. Summary 

2. Background 

3. Scope of the Order 

4. Partial Rescission of Review 

5. Discussion of the Methodology 

a. Non-Market Economy Country 

b. Separate Rate 

6. Recommendation 

EDITORIAL NOTE: FR Doc. 2014–30755 

was originally supposed to publish in 

the issue of December 19, 2014, is 

correctly published in its entirety in the 

issue of December 31, 2014. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30755 Filed 12–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–985] 

Xanthan Gum From the People’s 

Republic of China: Preliminary Results 

of 2013 Antidumping Duty New 

Shipper Review 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(‘‘the Department’’) is conducting a new 

shipper review (‘‘NSR’’) of the 

antidumping duty order on xanthan 

gum from the People’s Republic of 

China (‘‘PRC’’). The NSR covers Meihua 

Group International Trading (Hong 

Kong) Limited, Langfang Meihua BioTechnology Co., Ltd., and Xinjiang 

Meihua Amino Acid Co., Ltd. 

(collectively, ‘‘Meihua’’). The period of 

review (‘‘POR’’) is July 19, 2013, 

through December 31, 2013. The 

Department preliminarily determines 

that Meihua has not made sales of 

subject merchandise at less than normal 

value. Interested parties are invited to 

comment on the preliminary results of 

this review. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 31, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brandon Farlander, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–0182. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Scope of the Order 

The scope of the order covers dry 

xanthan gum, whether or not coated or 

blended with other products. Further, 

xanthan gum is included in this order 

regardless of physical form, including, 

but not limited to, solutions, slurries, 

dry powders of any particle size, or 

unground fiber. Merchandise covered by 

the scope of this order is classified in 

the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

(‘‘HTS’’) of the United States at 

subheading 3913.90.20. This tariff 

classification is provided for 

convenience and customs purposes; 

however, the written description of the 

scope is dispositive.1

Preliminary Affiliation Determination 

Based on the evidence presented in 

Meihua’s questionnaire responses, we 

preliminarily find that Meihua Group 

International Trading (Hong Kong) 

Limited, Langfang Meihua BioTechnology Co., Ltd., and Xinjiang 

Meihua Amino Acid Co., Ltd. are 

affiliated, pursuant to section 771(33)(F) 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(‘‘the Act’’). In addition, based on the 

information presented in the 

questionnaire responses, we 

preliminarily find that Meihua Group 

International Trading (Hong Kong) 

Limited, Langfang Meihua BioTechnology Co., Ltd., and Xinjiang 

Meihua Amino Acid Co., Ltd. should be 

treated as a single company for the 

purposes of this review pursuant to 

section 19 CFR 351.401(f).2

Methodology 

The Department is conducting this 

review in accordance with section 

751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.214. The Department calculated 

export price in accordance with section 

772 of the Act. Because the PRC is a 

nonmarket economy (‘‘NME’’) within 

the meaning of section 771(18) of the 

Act, the Department calculated normal 

value in accordance with section 773(c) 

of the Act. For a full description of the 

methodology underlying our 

conclusions, see the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum, which is hereby 

adopted with this notice. The 

Preliminary 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES