82 FR 1321 - Sulfanilic Acid From India and the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited Fourth Sunset Reviews of Antidumping Duty Orders

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 3 (January 5, 2017)

Page Range		1321-1322
FR Document		2016-31993

As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department of Commerce (``Department'') finds that revocation of the antidumping duty (``AD'') orders would be likely to lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping at the dumping margins identified in the ``Final Results of Reviews'' section of this notice.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 3 (Thursday, January 5, 2017)

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 3 (Thursday, January 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1321-1322]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31993]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-815, A-533-806]


Sulfanilic Acid From India and the People's Republic of China: 
Final Results of Expedited Fourth Sunset Reviews of Antidumping Duty 
Orders

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

SUMMARY: As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department of 
Commerce (``Department'') finds that revocation of the antidumping duty 
(``AD'') orders would be likely to lead to the continuation or 
recurrence of dumping at the dumping margins identified in the ``Final 
Results of Reviews'' section of this notice.

DATES: Effective January 5, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mandy Mallott, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6430.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On September 1, 2016, the Department published the notice of 
initiation of the fourth sunset reviews of the AD Orders \1\ on 
sulfanilic acid from India and the People's Republic of China 
(``PRC''), pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``the Act'').\2\ On September 14, 2016, Nation Ford Chemical 
Company (``Petitioner'') notified the Department of its intent to 
participate within the 15-day period specified in section 
351.218(d)(1)(i) of the Department's regulations. Archroma, U.S., Inc. 
(``Archroma'') claimed interested-party status under section 771(9)(A) 
of the Act as a domestic importer of subject merchandise to the United 
States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Antidumping Duty Order: Sulfanilic Acid from India, 58 
FR 12025 (March 2, 1993) (``India Order''), and Antidumping Duty 
Order: Sulfanilic Acid from the People's Republic from China, 57 FR 
37524 (August 19, 1992) (``PRC Order'') (collectively, ``Orders'').
    \2\ See Initiation of Five-Year (``Sunset'') Reviews, 81 FR 
60386 (September 1, 2016) (``Notice of Initiation'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 30, 2016, the Department received from Petitioner 
complete substantive responses to the Notice of Initiation, with 
respect to both of the Orders, within the 30-day period specified in 19 
CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).\3\ Also on September 30, 2016 the Department 
received a response from Archroma, which the Department determined did 
not adequately meet the requirements of a substantive response under 19 
CFR 351.218(d)-(e).\4\ Specifically, Archroma failed to address and/or 
provide additional information required of a respondent interested 
party pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(iii), nor did it demonstrate 
whether the substantive submission is eligible to be considered 
adequate pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(A).\5\ No other 
interested parties submitted substantive responses. As a result, 
pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the Department has conducted expedited (120-
day) sunset reviews of the AD orders on sulfanilic acid from India and 
the PRC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Submissions from Petitioner to the Department, 
``Sulfanilic Acid from the People's Republic of China/Petitioner's 
Substantive Response'' (``PRC Substantive Response''), and 
``Sulfanilic Acid from India/Petitioner's Substantive Response'' 
(``India Substantive Response''), each dated September 30, 2016.
    \4\ See Submissions from Archroma to the Department, both titled 
``Sulfanilic Acid from India and China: Archroma's Substantive 
Response to Notice of Initiation,'' each dated September 30, 2016. 
See letter from the Department to Archroma, ``Sunset Reviews of 
Sulfanilic Acid from the People's Republic of China and India,'' 
dated October 24, 2016.
    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Orders

    Imports covered by the antidumping duty orders are all grades of 
sulfanilic acid, which include technical (or crude) sulfanilic acid, 
refined (or purified) sulfanilic acid and sodium salt of sulfanilic 
acid.
    Sulfanilic acid is a synthetic organic chemical produced from the 
direct sulfonation of aniline with sulfuric acid. Sulfanilic acid is 
used as a raw material in the production of optical brighteners, food 
colors, specialty dyes, and concrete additives. The principal 
differences between the grades are the undesirable quantities of 
residual aniline and alkali insoluble materials present in the 
sulfanilic acid. All grades are available as dry, free flowing powders.
    Technical sulfanilic acid, classifiable under the subheading 
2921.42.22 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (``HTS''), contains 96 
percent minimum sulfanilic acid, 1.0 percent maximum aniline, and 1.0 
percent maximum alkali insoluble materials. Refined sulfanilic acid, 
also classifiable under the subheading 2921.42.22 of the HTS, contains 
98 percent minimum sulfanilic acid, 0.5 percent maximum aniline and 
0.25 percent maximum alkali insoluble materials.

[[Page 1322]]

    Sodium salt (sodium sulfanilate), classifiable under the HTS 
subheading 2921.42.90, is a powder, granular or crystalline material 
which contains 75 percent minimum equivalent sulfanilic acid, 0.5 
percent maximum aniline based on the equivalent sulfanilic acid 
content, and 0.25 percent maximum alkali insoluble materials based on 
the equivalent sulfanilic acid content.
    Although the HTS subheadings are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes, our written description of the scope of these 
proceedings is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    A complete discussion of all issues raised with respect to these 
sunset reviews is provided in the accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice.\6\ The issues 
discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum include the likelihood 
of continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the 
margins of dumping likely to prevail if the Orders were revoked. 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 and 
to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main 
Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the 
Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See the Department's memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 
Compliance, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results 
of Expedited Fourth Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders on 
Sulfanilic Acid from India and the People's Republic of China,'' 
dated concurrently with this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Results of the Sunset Reviews

    Pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and 752(c)(1) and (3) of the Act, 
the Department determines that revocation of the AD orders on 
sulfanilic acid from India and the PRC would likely lead to a 
continuation or recurrence of dumping, and that the magnitude of the 
dumping margins likely to prevail would be weighted-average margins up 
to 71.09 percent for India, and up to 85.20 percent for the PRC.

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

    This notice also serves as the only 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. Timely 
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.
    We are issuing and publishing the results and notice in accordance 
with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.218(f)(4).

    Dated: December 29, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-31993 Filed 1-4-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

1322 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 3 / Thursday, January 5, 2017 / Notices

Sodium salt (sodium sulfanilate), Notification Regarding Administrative Background
classifiable under the HTS subheading Protective Orders On August 6, 2004, the Department
2921.42.90, is a powder, granular or This notice also serves as the only published the antidumping duty order
crystalline material which contains 75 reminder to parties subject to on floor standing, metal top ironing
percent minimum equivalent sulfanilic administrative protective orders tables and certain parts thereof.1 On
acid, 0.5 percent maximum aniline (‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility April 19, 2007, the Department
based on the equivalent sulfanilic acid concerning the return or destruction of published the amended final results of
content, and 0.25 percent maximum proprietary information disclosed under the February 3, 2004–July 31, 2005
alkali insoluble materials based on the APO in accordance with 19 CFR administrative review.2 On, March 18,
equivalent sulfanilic acid content. 351.305. Timely notification of the 2008, the Department published the
Although the HTS subheadings are return or destruction of APO materials final results of the August 1, 2005–July
provided for convenience and customs or conversion to judicial protective 31, 2006 administrative review.3
purposes, our written description of the order is hereby requested. Failure to Following the publication of the
scope of these proceedings is comply with the regulations and terms February 3, 2004–July 31, 2005
dispositive. of an APO is a violation which is subject Amended Final Results, and the August
Analysis of Comments Received to sanction. 1, 2005–July 31, 2006 Final Results,
We are issuing and publishing the Since Hardware filed lawsuits with the
A complete discussion of all issues results and notice in accordance with CIT challenging the Department’s final
raised with respect to these sunset sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of results of both the February 3, 2004–July
reviews is provided in the the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4). 31, 2005 and the August 1, 2005–July
accompanying Issues and Decision 31, 2006 administrative reviews. The
Memorandum, which is hereby adopted Dated: December 29, 2016.
United States and Since Hardware have
by this notice.6 The issues discussed in Paul Piquado,
entered into an agreement to settle the
the Issues and Decision Memorandum Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and outstanding litigation. The Court issued
include the likelihood of continuation Compliance.
its Judgment on December 8, 2016.4
or recurrence of dumping and the [FR Doc. 2016–31993 Filed 1–4–17; 8:45 am]
magnitude of the margins of dumping BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Assessment of Duties
likely to prevail if the Orders were Pursuant to the Court’s Judgment, the
revoked. The Issues and Decision Department shall instruct Customs and
Memorandum is a public document and DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Border Protection (CBP) to assess
is on file electronically via Enforcement antidumping duties on all shipments of
and Compliance’s Antidumping and International Trade Administration
floor-standing, metal-top ironing tables
Countervailing Duty Centralized [A–570–888] and certain parts thereof, from the PRC,
Electronic Service System (‘‘ACCESS’’). which were entered, or withdrawn from
ACCESS is available to registered users Floor-Standing, Metal-Top Ironing warehouse, for consumption during the
at https://access.trade.gov and to all Tables and Certain Parts Thereof From period February 3, 2004–July 31, 2005,
parties in the Central Records Unit, the People’s Republic of China: Notice and that were produced or exported by
Room B8024 of the main Department of of Amended Final Results of Since Hardware at a rate of 72.29
Commerce building. In addition, a Antidumping Duty Administrative percent. The Department shall also
complete version of the Issues and Reviews Pursuant to Settlement; 2004– instruct CBP to assess antidumping
Decision Memorandum can be accessed 2005 and 2006–2007 duties on all shipments of floor-
at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. standing, metal-top ironing tables and
The signed Issues and Decision AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance,
certain parts thereof, from the PRC,
Memorandum and the electronic International Trade Administration,
which were entered, or withdrawn from
version of the Issues and Decision Department of Commerce.
warehouse, for consumption during the
Memorandum are identical in content. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is amending the final 1 See Notice of Amended Final Determination of
Final Results of the Sunset Reviews results of the February 3, 2004–July 31, Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping
Pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and 2005 and August 1, 2005–July 31, 2006 Duty Order: Floor Standing, Metal-Top Ironing
752(c)(1) and (3) of the Act, the antidumping duty administrative Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from the People’s
reviews of floor-standing, metal-top Republic of China, 69 FR 47868 (August 6, 2004)
Department determines that revocation (Order).
of the AD orders on sulfanilic acid from ironing tables and certain parts thereof 2 See Floor-Standing, Metal-Top Ironing Tables

India and the PRC would likely lead to from the People’s Republic of China and Certain Parts Thereof from the People’s
a continuation or recurrence of (PRC) with respect to Since Hardware Republic of China: Final Results and Final
(Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. (Since Hardware) Rescission, In Part, of Antidumping Duty
dumping, and that the magnitude of the Administrative Review, 72 FR 13239 (Dep’t of
dumping margins likely to prevail pursuant to an agreement that settles the Commerce Mar. 21, 2007), amended by Notice of
would be weighted-average margins up related litigation. Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty
to 71.09 percent for India, and up to DATES: Effective January 5, 2017. Administrative Review: Floor Standing, Metal-Top
Ironing Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from the
85.20 percent for the PRC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: People’s Republic of China, 72 FR 19689 (April 19,
Michael J. Heaney or Erin Kearney, AD/ 2007) (February 3–2004–July 31, 2005 Amended
6 See the Department’s memorandum from CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement Final Results).
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES

3 See Floor Standing, Metal-Top Ironing Tables
Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for and Compliance, International Trade
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, and Certain Parts Thereof from the People’s
to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for
Administration, U.S. Department of Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping
Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Duty Administrative Review 73 FR 14437 (March
Memorandum for the Final Results of Expedited Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 18, 2008) August 1, 2005–July 31, 2006 Final
Fourth Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty telephone: (202) 482–4475 or (202) 482– Results).
Orders on Sulfanilic Acid from India and the 4 See Home Products International, Inc. v. United

People’s Republic of China,’’ dated concurrently
0167, respectively. States, Court Nos. 07–00123, 08–00094 (December
with this notice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 8, 2016).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:06 Jan 04, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05JAN1.SGM 05JAN1

Document Created: 2018-02-01 14:51:15
Document Modified: 2018-02-01 14:51:15

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Dates		Effective January 5, 2017.
Contact		Mandy Mallott, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6430.
FR Citation		82 FR 1321

82 FR 1321 - Sulfanilic Acid From India and the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited Fourth Sunset Reviews of Antidumping Duty Orders

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEInternational Trade Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 3 (January 5, 2017)

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration