[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 144 (Thursday, July 28, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page ]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-18314]
[Federal Register: July 28, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-570-836]
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Glycine From the
People's Republic of China
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 28, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Anne Osgood or David Boyland,
Office of Countervailing Investigations, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C., 20230 at (202)
482-0167 and (202) 482-0588, respectively.
INITIATION OF INVESTIGATION:
The Petition
On July 1, 1994, we received a petition in proper form filed by
Hampshire Chemical Corporation (``Hampshire'') and Chattem Inc.,
Chemicals Division (``Chattem'') (hereinafter ``petitioners'').
Petitioners filed a supplement to the petition on July 21, 1994.
In accordance with 19 CFR 353.12, petitioners allege that imports
of glycine, or aminoacetic acid, from the People's Republic of China
(``PRC'') are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at
less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), and that such imports are
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S.
industry.
Petitioners state that they have standing to file the petition
because Hampshire and Chattem are interested parties, as defined under
section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and are the only two U.S. producers of
glycine known to petitioners. If any interested party, as described
under paragraphs (C), (D), (E), or (F) of section 771(9) of the Act,
wishes to register support for, or opposition to, this petition, it
should file a written notification with the Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration.
Scope of Investigation
The product covered by this investigation is glycine which is a
free-flowing crystalline material, like salt or sugar. Glycine is
produced at varying levels of purity and is used as a sweetener/taste
enhancer, a buffering agent, reabsorbable amino acid, chemical
intermediate, and a metal complexing agent. Glycine is currently
classified under subheading 2922.49.4020 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). The scope of this
investigation includes glycine of all purity levels. Although the HTSUS
subheading is provided for convenience and Customs purposes, our
written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive.
United States Price and Foreign Market Value
Petitioners based United States Price (``USP'') on four price
quotes with various terms of sale and Bureau of Census import
statistics for glycine from the PRC. For purposes of this initiation,
we have relied on the 1994 price quotes (two of the four price quotes
provided) and on the Bureau of Census import statistics since they are
contemporaneous with the calculated foreign market value and more
proximate with the period of investigation. Petitioners deducted
foreign inland freight, ocean freight and marine insurance, and U.S.
inland freight from the price quotes to arrive at an ex-factory unit
value for imports. In using the import statistics, petitioners deducted
foreign inland freight from the value to arrive at an ex-factory unit
value.
Petitioners contend that the foreign market value (``FMV'') of
glycine subject to this investigation must be determined in accordance
with section 773(c) of the Act, which concerns nonmarket economy
(``NME'') countries. The Department has determined the PRC to be an
NME, within the meaning of section 771(18)(A) of the Act, in previous
cases (see e.g., Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Sebacic Acid from the PRC, May 31, 1994 (59 FR 28053)). In accordance
with 771(18)(C) of the Act, that determination continues to apply for
purposes of this initiation.
In the course of this investigation, parties will have the
opportunity to address this NME determination and provide relevant
information and argument on this issue. Consistent with section
773(c)(1)(B) of the Act (see Amendment to Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value and Amendment to Antidumping Duty Order:
Chrome-Plated Lug Nuts from the People's Republic of China, 57 FR 15052
(April 24, 1992)), parties will have the opportunity in this
investigation to submit comments on whether FMV should be based on
prices or costs.
In accordance with section 773(c) of the Act, FMV in NME cases is
based on NME producers' factors of production valued in a market
economy country. In this case, to determine FMV, petitioners relied on
the factors of production used by Chattem since Chattem's production
process is believed to be similar to the PRC producers' manufacturing
process.
In valuing the factors of production, petitioners used India and
Pakistan as surrogate countries. For purposes of this initiation, we
have accepted India and Pakistan as surrogates because their economies
are at a level of development comparable to the PRC's. (See Memorandum
to David L. Binder, Director-Division II, Office of Antidumping
Investigations from David P. Mueller, Director, Office of Policy, dated
August 1993, regarding non-market economy status and surrogate country
selection, on file in Room B-099 of the Department of Commerce.) Also,
there is evidence on the record that India is a producer of comparable
merchandise, as required by section 773(c)(4) of the Act. When cost
information was not available in either of these countries, petitioners
valued the factor using Chattem's own costs.
In accordance with section 773(c)(1)(B) of the Act, petitioners'
FMV consisted of the sum of values assigned to materials, labor,
energy, overhead, and packing. Petitioners adjusted certain factor
values for inflation and currency exchange rates. Pursuant to section
773(e)(1) of the Act, petitioners added to the labor and material
costs, and general expenses, the statutory minimum of eight percent for
profit.
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by petitioners, there is reason to
believe that glycine from the PRC is being, or is likely to be, sold at
less than fair value. The comparison of USP and FMV in the petition
indicates margins ranging from 86.43 percent to 155.89 percent. If it
becomes necessary at a later date to consider the petition as a source
of best information available (``BIA''), we may review these
calculation bases.
Initiation of Investigation
We have examined the petition on glycine and have found that it
meets the requirements of section 732(b) of the Act. Therefore, we are
initiating an antidumping duty investigation to determine whether
imports of glycine from the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in
the United States at less than fair value.
International Trade Commission (``ITC'') Notification
Section 732(d) of the Act requires us to notify the ITC of these
actions, and we have done so.
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will determine by August 15, 1994, whether there is a
reasonable indication that imports of glycine from the PRC are causing
material injury, or threaten to cause material injury, to a U.S.
industry. A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation
being terminated; otherwise, this investigation will proceed according
to statutory and regulatory time limits.
This notice is published pursuant to section 732(c)(2) of the Act
and 19 CFR 353.13(b).
Dated: July 21, 1994.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 94-18314 Filed 7-27-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
