and monkeys, evidence strongly supported the conclusion that saccharin does not cause cancer in humansand the FDA delisted saccharin and on December 21, 2000, President Clinton signed the SWEETESTAct, which removed the warning label on all products using saccharin. 16The large packaged-soft-drink manufacturers, such as Coca Cola and Pepsi, switched <strong>from</strong>saccharin to aspartame in their products that were bottled for retail sale in 1983, 6 years after the<strong>Saccharin</strong> Study and Labeling Act of 1977 requiring a warning label on products containing saccharintook effect. However, because of the limited shelf life of aspartame, the large packaged-soft-drinkmanufacturers continued to use saccharin in their products for use in beverage dispensing equipment.With the lifting of the warning label and the growing use of blends, petitioner states that food formulatorshave used saccharin with other sweeteners to create cost-effective taste profiles in products prepared forretail sale. 17 Adding saccharin to blends reduces the total cost of the sweetener product since mostsweeteners are more expensive than saccharin. 18 The amount of saccharin used in the blends varies <strong>from</strong>product to product depending on the desired food taste requirements. PMC stated that roughly 20 percentof its total sales of saccharin are used in products that contain blends. 19Manufacturing ProcessesTwo production processes are currently in use worldwide: the Maumee process, a continuousproductionmethod which was developed in the United States and is the only process used domestically,and the older Remsen-Fahlberg process, a batch-production method using different starting materials, 20that is the predominant method used worldwide. Both processes are used in <strong>China</strong>. The Maumee processwill be discussed presently.Beginning in 2007, PMC underwent a major renovation in their process for making saccharin.For that reason, the original Maumee process and its modifications will be discussed in some detail.During the Commission plant trip, the company representatives referred to the overall process of makingsaccharin as consisting of a “front end” and a “back end.” The front end refers to the chemical reactionsthat make the crude saccharin (irrespective of the process), and the back end refers to the process ofpurifying and crystallizing the crude product (irrespective of the process) 21 .The following discussion will refer primarily to the front end of the process used by PMC.“***.” 22The company stated that important advantages of the process (relative to the Remsen-Fahlbergprocess) included:15(...continued)Assessment Report, AFSSA, May 7, 2002, p. 12.16Hearing transcript of the final investigation, p. 20. The SWEETEST Act is an acronym for the <strong>Saccharin</strong>Warning Elimination via Environmental Testing Employing Science and Technology Act. See “Congress Gives<strong>Saccharin</strong> a Clean Bill of Health” press release of the Calorie Control Counsel obtained on line athttp://www.caloriecontrol.org/pr12-22-00.html dated December 22, 2000.17Hearing transcript of the final investigation, pp. 35-38.18Ibid., pp. 36 and 40.19Ibid., p. 51.20Ortho-toluene sulfonamide is the starting material for the Remsen-Fahlberg process. Hearing transcript, p. 21;petition, p. 4. The discussion of the Maumee process which follows will contain a flow chart of the Remsen-Fahlberg process.21Commission PMC Plant Trip, February 3, 2009. During the initial discussion, the company representativesdiscussed the chemical reactions (using a chemical flow chart, figure I-1) used to make saccharin by theRemsen-Fahlberg process, the Maumee process (and early modifications), and the latest Maumee modification.However, the plant tour followed the Maumee modification and its purification.22The actual chemical reactions for the Maumee process are as follows: ***.I-10
1. ***.2. ***.3. ***.Reengineered Maumee Process“***.” 23 “***.” 24 “***.” 25PMC noted that as with saccharin, MA was produced at the Cincinnati location. ***, which arethe chemicals used in the reactions found in figures I-1 and I-2. 26Figure I-1<strong>Saccharin</strong> chemistryFigure I-2<strong>Saccharin</strong> purification* * * * * * ** * * * * * *To put the manufacturing of MA and saccharin in perspective, the company noted “***.”“***.” 27 Chemical reactions that comprise the reengineered saccharin process <strong>from</strong> *** arepresented in figure I-3.Figure I-3Synthesis of saccharin <strong>from</strong> **** * * * * * *Interchangeability and Customer and Producer PerceptionsThe majority of U.S. producer and importer questionnaire respondents reported that the U.S.-produced product is always or frequently interchangeable with ***. With respect to customer andproducer perceptions, questionnaire respondents reported *** with regard to price. The U.S. product wasrated inferior to imports <strong>from</strong> <strong>China</strong> in terms of ***. More detailed information on interchangeability andcustomer and producer perceptions can be found in Part II of this report, Conditions of Competition in theU.S. Market.23***. (Commission staff telephone conversation with Customs National Import Specialist Richard Dunkel,April 14, 2009.)24PMC Responses to Plant trip Questions, attachment 1, p. 2.25PMC Responses to Plant trip Questions, question 2, p. 2.26Jim McKenna, PMC, Description of <strong>Saccharin</strong> Retooling, December 17, 2008.27PMC Responses to Plant Trip Questions, question 7, p. 5.I-11
- Page 1 and 2: Saccharin from ChinaInvestigation N
- Page 3: U.S. International Trade Commission
- Page 6 and 7: CONTENTSPagePart III: Condition of
- Page 9 and 10: VIEWS OF THE COMMISSIONBased on the
- Page 11 and 12: mouthwash. 14 By weight, it is abou
- Page 13 and 14: statement challenging PMC’s statu
- Page 15 and 16: Quantity and Type of Parts Sourced
- Page 17 and 18: IV.LIKELIHOOD OF CONTINUATION OR RE
- Page 19 and 20: B. Conditions of Competition and th
- Page 21 and 22: . Supply in the U.S. MarketAs in th
- Page 23 and 24: In the original determination, the
- Page 25 and 26: significant volumes of saccharin to
- Page 27 and 28: the domestic like product. 160 All
- Page 29: period, increasing from *** percent
- Page 32 and 33: injured or likely to be injured by
- Page 34 and 35: Table I-1--ContinuedSaccharin: Summ
- Page 36 and 37: Table I-2Saccharin: Administrative
- Page 38 and 39: U.S. Tariff TreatmentImports of thi
- Page 42 and 43: Channels of DistributionDuring the
- Page 44 and 45: Table I-8Saccharin: U.S. shipments
- Page 46 and 47: PMC sells saccharin ***, while mark
- Page 48 and 49: The combined quantity of purchases
- Page 50 and 51: Table II-5Saccharin: Interchangeabi
- Page 52 and 53: adjusting supply in response to pri
- Page 54 and 55: Changes in Character of Operations
- Page 56 and 57: PMC further described its reenginee
- Page 58 and 59: 2008, both of these forms of saccha
- Page 61 and 62: PART IV: U.S. IMPORTS, THE INDUSTRY
- Page 63 and 64: Table IV-2Saccharin: U.S. importers
- Page 65 and 66: The capacity, production, exports,
- Page 67 and 68: In order to protect the sugar indus
- Page 69 and 70: Table IV-7Saccharin: Global exports
- Page 71 and 72: Trade BalancesTable IV-9 contains G
- Page 73: Information concerning exports of s
- Page 76 and 77: Figure V-1Exchange rates: Index of
- Page 78 and 79: Table V-3Saccharin: Weighted-averag
- Page 81 and 82: 31504 Federal Register / Vol. 73, N
- Page 83 and 84: 31506 Federal Register / Vol. 73, N
- Page 85 and 86: 59604 Federal Register / Vol. 73, N
- Page 87 and 88: wilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES72
- Page 89: APPENDIX BCALENDAR OF PUBLIC HEARIN
- Page 92 and 93:
In Opposition to Continuation of th
- Page 95:
Table C-1Saccharin: Summary data co
- Page 99 and 100:
U.S. PRODUCERS COMMENTSThe Commissi
- Page 101 and 102:
***“***.”***“No.”***“No.
- Page 103 and 104:
DOC/ITC regulations. Their own prod
- Page 105 and 106:
***“*** could lower inventories b
- Page 107 and 108:
***“*** cannot comment on this, n
- Page 109:
The Commission requested foreign pr