82 FR 14876 - 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid From the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 55 (March 23, 2017)

The Department of Commerce (Department) determines that 1- Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid (HEDP) from the People's Republic of China (PRC) is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The final weighted- average dumping margins for the investigation on HEDP from the PRC are listed in the ``Final Determination Margins'' section of this notice.

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 55 (Thursday, March 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14876-14879]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05805]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-045]


1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid From the People's 
Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Department) determines that 1-
Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid (HEDP) from the People's 
Republic of China (PRC) is being, or is likely to be, sold in the 
United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The final weighted-
average dumping margins for the investigation on HEDP from the PRC are 
listed in the ``Final Determination Margins'' section of this notice.

DATES: Effective March 23, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Omar Qureshi or Kenneth Hawkins, AD/
CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution 
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5307 or (202) 
482-6491, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On November 4, 2016, the Department published its Preliminary 
Determination.\1\ We invited interested parties to comment on our 
Preliminary Determination of sales at LTFV. For a list of the parties 
that filed case and rebuttal briefs, see the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the 
People's Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Postponement of Final 
Determination, 81 FR 76916 (November 4, 2016) (Preliminary 
Determination) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
    \2\ See Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for 
Enforcement and Compliance, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 
Final Determination of the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of 1-
Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the People's Republic 
of China,'' dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision 
Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (POI) is July 1, 2015, through December 
31, 2015. This period corresponds to the two most recent fiscal 
quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition, which was 
January 2016.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation includes all grades 
of aqueous acidic (non-neutralized) concentrations of 1-
hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-diphosphonic acid (HEDP), also referred to as 
hydroxyethylidenendiphosphonic acid, hydroxyethanediphosphonic acid, 
acetodiphosphonic acid, and etidronic acid. The Chemical Abstract 
Service (CAS) registry number for HEDP is 2809-21-4.
    The merchandise subject to this investigation is currently 
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) at subheading 2931.90.9043. It may also enter under HTSUS 
subheadings 2811.19.6090 and 2931.90.9041. While HTSUS subheadings and 
the CAS registry number are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes only, the written description of the scope of this 
investigation is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    We addressed all issues raised by parties in case and rebuttal 
briefs in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\4\ The Appendix to this 
notice includes a list of the issues which the parties raised and to 
which the Department responded 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 http://access.trade.gov. The 
Issues and Decision Memorandum is available 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 is available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. 
The signed and electronic versions of

[[Page 14877]]

the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in December 2016, the 
Department conducted verification of the information submitted by 
Shandong Taihe Chemical Co., Ltd. (Taihe), Nanjing University of 
Chemical Technology Changzhou Wujin Water Quality Stabilizer Factory 
and Nantong Uniphos Chemicals Co., Ltd. (collectively, WW Group) for 
use in the final determination. We issued our verification reports on 
January 19, 2017.\5\ The Department used standard verification 
procedures, including examination of relevant accounting and production 
records and original source documents provided by respondents.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See the Department's two memoranda regarding: ``Verification 
of the Questionnaire Responses of Shandong Taihe Chemical Co., Ltd. 
in the Antidumping Investigation of HEDP from the People's Republic 
of China'' (January 19, 2017) (Taihe Verification Report); and 
``Verification of the Questionnaire Responses of the WW Group in the 
Antidumping Investigation of 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic 
Acid (``HEDP'') from the People's Republic of China'' (January 19, 
2017) (WW Group's Verification Report).
    \5\ Id.
    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on the Department's verifications of Taihe and WW Group, we 
made changes from the Preliminary Determination. For WW Group, the 
Department classified the company's joint-product as a co-product. 
Additionally, we made a change to the calculation of inventory carrying 
costs and irrecoverable value-added tax.
    For Taihe, the Department did not use a net realizable value 
calculation in Taihe's margin calculation. Additionally, for Taihe, we 
included inventory carrying costs for all sales where warehousing 
expenses were reported. The Department also included indirect selling 
expenses in Taihe's margin calculation.
    The Department also made the necessary calculation adjustment to 
international freight, domestic brokerage, and domestic inland freight 
where the expenses are calculated on a gross weight basis for both 
Taihe and WW Group. Lastly, the Department made the necessary 
calculation adjustment for marine insurance surrogate value for Taihe 
and WW Group.

PRC-Wide Entity

    As explained in the Preliminary Determination, we are applying a 
rate based entirely on adverse facts available (AFA) to the PRC-wide 
entity. The Department did not receive timely responses to its quantity 
and value (Q&V) questionnaire or separate rate applications from 
certain PRC exporters and/or producers of subject merchandise that were 
named in the petition and to which the Department issued Q&V 
questionnaires.\7\ As these non-responsive PRC companies did not 
demonstrate that they are eligible for separate rate status, the 
Department continues to consider them to be part of the PRC-wide 
entity. Further, because these non-responsive companies withheld 
requested information, significantly impeded the proceeding, and failed 
to cooperate to the best of their abilities, we are basing the PRC-wide 
entity rate on AFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Preliminary Determination, and accompanying Preliminary 
Decision Memorandum at 16-17 (Separate Rate).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRC-Wide Rate

    In selecting the AFA rate for the PRC-wide entity, the Department's 
practice is to select a rate that is sufficiently adverse to ensure 
that the uncooperative party does not obtain a more favorable result by 
failing to cooperate than if it had fully cooperated.\8\ Specifically, 
it is the Department's practice to select, as an AFA rate, the higher 
of: (a) The highest dumping margin alleged in the petition; or, (b) the 
highest calculated dumping margin of any respondent in the 
investigation.\9\ As AFA, the Department has assigned to the PRC-wide 
entity the rate of 184.01 percent, which is the highest calculated 
dumping margin of any respondent in the investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: 
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, 69 FR 77216 (December 
27, 2004), unchanged in Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, 
70 FR 28279 (May 17, 2005).
    \9\ See, e.g., Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from 
the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value, 77 FR 17436, 17438 (March 26, 2012); Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled 
Flat-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel Products from the People's Republic 
of China, 65 FR 34660 (May 31, 2000), and accompanying Issues and 
Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Non-Selected Separate Rate

    In calculating rates for non-individually investigated respondents 
in the context of non-market economy cases, the Department looks to 
section 735(c)(5)(A)-(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, (as amended) (the 
Act), which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate 
in an investigation. Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the 
estimated all-others rate shall be equivalent to the weighted average 
of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins calculated for 
exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any 
margins that are zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts 
available. Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act provides that where all 
individually investigated exporters or producers receive rates that are 
zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts available, then the 
Department may use ``any reasonable method'' to establish the all-
others rate for those companies not individually investigated.
    Apart from the mandatory respondents in this investigation, two 
other PRC exporters of the subject merchandise during the POI 
established entitlement to a separate rate.\10\ Thus, separate rates 
are being assigned in this segment to Jianghai Environmental Protection 
Co., Ltd. (Jianghai) and Henan Qingshuiyuan Technology Co., Ltd. 
(Qingshuiyuan). There currently exist no individually investigated 
respondents that have failed to cooperate in this investigation, and 
there are no zero or de minimis margins. Therefore, we are continuing 
to determine the separate rate for non-selected companies (Jianghai and 
Qingshuiyuan) based on a weighted average of the calculated rates 
determined for the mandatory respondents,\11\ in accordance with 
section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Preliminary Decision.
    \11\ We have calculated (A) a weighted-average of the dumping 
margins calculated for the mandatory respondents; (B) a simple 
average of the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory 
respondents; and (C) a weighted-average of the dumping margins 
calculated for the mandatory respondents using each company's 
publicly-ranged values for the merchandise under consideration. We 
compared (B) and (C) to (A) and selected the rate closest to (A). 
Accordingly, we selected (C) as the most appropriate rate for all 
other companies. See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France, 
Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final Results of Changed-
Circumstances Review, and Revocation of an Order in Part, 75 FR 
53661, 53663 (September 1, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Determination

    The Department determines that the estimated final weighted-average 
dumping margins are as follows:

[[Page 14878]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Weighted-average
                  Producer                              Exporter              dumping margin   Cash deposit rate
                                                                                (percent)           (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nanjing University of Chemical Technology    Nanjing University of                     184.01             184.01
 Changzhou Wujin Water Quality Stabilizer     Chemical Technology
 Factory.                                     Changzhou Wujin Water
                                              Quality Stabilizer Factory
                                              and Nantong Uniphos
                                              Chemicals Co., Ltd.
Shandong Taihe Water Treatment Technologies  Shandong Taihe Chemicals Co.,             167.58             167.28
 Co., Ltd.                                    Ltd.
Henan Qingshuiyuan Technology Co., Ltd.....  Henan Qingshuiyuan Technology             179.76             179.46
                                              Co., Ltd.
Jianghai Environmental Protection Co., Ltd.  Jianghai Environmental                    179.76             179.46
                                              Protection Co., Ltd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    PRC-Wide Entity........................  .............................             184.01             184.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    We intend to disclose to parties the calculations performed in this 
proceeding within five days of any public announcement of this notice 
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will 
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to 
suspend liquidation of all entries of HEDP from the PRC, as described 
in the ``Scope of the Investigation'' section, entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after November 4, 2016, the date 
of publication of the Preliminary Determination notice in the Federal 
Register.
    Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act, the Department 
will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit \12\ equal to the weighted-
average amount by which NV exceeds U.S. price as follows: (1) The cash 
deposit rate for the exporter/producer combination listed in the table 
above will be the rate identified for that combination in the table; 
(2) for all combinations of PRC exporters/producers of merchandise 
under consideration that have not received their own separate rate 
above, the cash-deposit rate will be the cash deposit rate established 
for the PRC-wide entity; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of the 
merchandise under consideration which have not received their own 
separate rate above, the cash-deposit rate will be the cash deposit 
rate applicable to the PRC exporter/producer combination that supplied 
that non-PRC exporter. These suspension of liquidation instructions 
will remain in effect until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of 
Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 
(October 3, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We normally adjust antidumping duty cash deposit rates by the 
amount of export subsidies, where appropriate. In the companion CVD 
investigation, we have found that the WW Group did not receive export 
subsidies.\13\ Therefore, no offset to the WW Group's cash deposit rate 
for export subsidies is necessary.\14\ With respect to Taihe, because 
its countervailing duty rate in the companion investigation included an 
amount for export subsidies, an offset of 0.30 percent will be made to 
its cash deposit rate.\15\ With respect to the separate-rate companies, 
we find that an export subsidy adjustment of 0.30 percent to the cash 
deposit rate is warranted because this is the export subsidy rate 
included in the countervailing duty ``all others'' rate to which the 
separate-rate companies are subject. For the PRC-wide entity, which 
received an adverse facts available rate in this preliminary 
determination, as an extension of the adverse inference found necessary 
pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act, the Department has not adjusted 
the PRC-wide entity's AD cash deposit rate by the lowest export subsidy 
rate determined for any party in the companion CVD proceeding, because 
the lowest export subsidy rate determined in the companion CVD 
proceeding is 0.00 percent.\16\ \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation of 1-
Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid from the People's Republic 
of China: Final Affirmative Determination and Alignment of Final 
Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, filed 
concurrently with this notice.
    \14\ Id.
    \15\ Id.
    \16\ See, e.g., Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires 
from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value; Preliminary Affirmative Determination 
of Critical Circumstances; In Part and Postponement of Final 
Determination, 80 FR 4250 (January 27, 2015), and accompanying 
Issues and Decision Memorandum at 35.
    \17\ See HEDP CVD Prelim at 81 FR 62085.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act, we normally adjust 
preliminary cash deposit rates for estimated domestic subsidy pass-
through, where appropriate. However, in this case there is no basis to 
grant a domestic subsidy pass-through adjustment.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 28-29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we notified the 
International Trade Commission (ITC) of the final affirmative 
determination of sales at LTFV. As the Department's final determination 
is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the 
ITC will determine, within 45 days, whether the domestic industry in 
the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material 
injury, by reason of imports of HEDP for sale from the PRC, or sales 
(or the likelihood of sales) for importation, of HEDP from the PRC. If 
the ITC determines that such injury does not exist, this proceeding 
will be terminated and all securities posted will be refunded or 
canceled. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the 
Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to 
assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties 
on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the 
suspension of liquidation.

Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    This notice also serves as a reminder to the parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of propriety information disclosed under APO 
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written notification of 
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 determination is issued and published in accordance with 
sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.


[[Page 14879]]


    Dated: March 20, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix--Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Period of Investigation
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. Scope Comments
VI. Changes Since the Preliminary Determination
VII. List of Issues
VIII. Discussion of Comments
    General Issues:
    Comment 1: Selection of Surrogate Country
    Comment 2: Selection of Surrogate Final Ratios and Use of 
CYDSA's Financial Statement
    Comment 3: Treatment of Joint Product
    Comment 4: Treatment of Water
    Comment 5: Net Versus Gross Weight
    Comment 6: Surrogate Value for Marine Insurance
    Comment 7: Recalculating Marine Insurance by Using Gross Unit 
Price
    Comment 8: Consideration of FOPs as Overhead
    Comment 9: Partial Rejection of Petitioner's SV Submissions
    Comment 10: Selection of Voluntary Respondent
    Comment 11: Surrogate Value for Ocean Freight
    Comment 12: Converting Expense for INVCARU
    Comment 13: Surrogate Value for PCl3
    Comment 14: Adjustment of Import Statistics
    Company-Specific Issues: Taihe
    Comment 15: Taihe's Movement Expenses
    Company-Specific Issues: WW Group
    Comment 16: Conversion Calculation for Water Surrogate Value
    Comment 17: Adjustment of Irrecoverable VAT
IX. Conclusion

[FR Doc. 2017-05805 Filed 3-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P