1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 73839-73842 [2013-29341]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 236 / Monday, December 9, 2013 / Notices
Postponement of the Preliminary
Determination
Section 703(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act), requires the
Department to issue the preliminary
determination in a countervailing duty
investigation within 65 days after the
date on which the Department initiated
the investigation. However, if the
petitioner makes a timely request for an
extension in accordance with 19 CFR
351.205(b)(2), section 703(c)(1)(A) of the
Act allows the Department to postpone
the preliminary determination until no
later than 130 days after the date on
which the administering authority
initiated the investigation.
On November 21, 2013, the Rebar
Trade Action Coalition and its
individual members, the petitioners in
this investigation, requested that the
deadline for the preliminary
determination in this case be extended
in accordance with 19 CFR
351.205(b)(2). Therefore, pursuant to
section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act, we are
fully extending the due date for the
preliminary determination. Because, as
noted above, the Department tolled the
original preliminary signature date to
account for the Federal Government
closure, the extension is effectively 65
days from the revised preliminary date
of December 16, 2013. As a result, the
deadline for completion of the
preliminary determination is now
February 19, 2014.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 703(c)(2) of the Act.
Dated: November 25, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2013–29336 Filed 12–6–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–570–999]
1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane From the
People’s Republic of China: Initiation
of Countervailing Duty Investigation
Enforcement & Compliance,
formerly Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce
DATES: Effective Date: December 9, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Katie Marksberry, Office V, AD/CVD
Operations, Enforcement & Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:03 Dec 06, 2013
Jkt 232001
73839
Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
202.482.7906.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petition’’ below).
The Petition
On October 22, 2013, the Department
of Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’)
received a countervailing duty (‘‘CVD’’)
petition concerning imports of 1,1,1,2
Tetrafluoroethane (‘‘tetrafluoroethane’’)
from the People’s Republic of China
(‘‘PRC’’), filed in proper form by
Mexichem Fluor, Inc. (‘‘Petitioner’’),
domestic producers of tetrafluoroethane.
The CVD petition was accompanied by
an antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’) petition
concerning imports of tetrafluoroethane
from the PRC.1 On October 25 and
November 6, 2013, the Department
requested additional information and
clarification of certain areas of the
Petition, and on October 29 and
November 8, 2013, respectively,
Petitioner filed a response to each
request.2 Additionally, on November 7,
2013, Petitioner filed a response to the
Department’s November 6, 2013, request
for additional information and
clarification of the scope of the
Petition.3
In accordance with section 702(b)(1)
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the ‘‘Act’’), Petitioners allege that
producers/exporters of tetrafluoroethane
in the PRC received countervailable
subsidies within the meaning of
sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, and
that imports from these producers/
exporters materially injure, or threaten
material injury to, an industry in the
United States.
The Department finds that Petitioners
filed this Petition on behalf of the
domestic industry because it is an
interested party as defined in section
771(9)(C) of the Act, and Petitioners
have demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the CVD
investigation that it is requesting the
Department to initiate (see
The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is
January 1, 2012 through December 31,
2012, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.204(b)(2).
1 See ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping
and Countervailing Duties on 1,1,1,2
Tetrafluoroethane from the People’s Republic of
China, dated October 22, 2013 (hereafter referred to
as the ‘‘Petition’’).
2 See Petitioner’s October 29, 2013, filing titled,
‘‘1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the People’s
Republic of China: Response to CVD Issues
Deficiency Questionnaire,’’; see also Petitioner’s
October 29, 2013, filing titled, ‘‘1,1,1,2Tetrafluoroethane from the People’s Republic of
China: Response to General Issues Supplemental
Questionnaire’’ (‘‘General Issues Supplement’’), and
Petitioner’s November 8, 2013, filing, titled
‘‘1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the People’s
Republic of China: Response to Second
Antidumping Supplemental Questionnaire’’.
3 See Petitioner’s November 7, 2013, filing titled,
‘‘1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the People’s
Republic of China: Response to Scope
Questionnaire,’’.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Period of Investigation
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this
investigation is tetrafluoroethane from
the PRC. For a full description of the
scope of the investigation, please see the
‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ in the
appendix to this notice.
Comments on the Scope of the
Investigation
During our review of the Petition, we
solicited information from Petitioners to
ensure that the proposed scope language
is an accurate reflection of the products
for which the domestic industry is
seeking relief. Moreover, as discussed in
the preamble to the Department’s
regulations 4, we are setting aside a
period for interested parties to raise
issues regarding product coverage. The
Department encourages all interested
parties to submit such comments by
December 22, 2013, which is 20
calendar days from the signature date of
this notice. All comments must be filed
on the record of the CVD investigation,
as well as the concurrent AD
investigation.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department
must be filed electronically using
Enforcement & Compliance’s
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System
(‘‘IA ACCESS’’). An electronically filed
document must be received successfully
in its entirety by the Department’s
electronic records system, IA ACCESS,
by 5 p.m. on the due date. Documents
excepted from the electronic submission
requirements must be filed manually
(i.e., in paper form) with the
Enforcement & Compliance’s APO/
Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street
and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped
with the date and time of receipt by the
deadline established by the
Department.5
4 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties;
Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
5 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1). Information on help using
IA ACCESS can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.
gov/help.aspx and a handbook can be found at
https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/Handbook
%20on%20Electronic%20Filing%20Procedures.
pdf.
E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM
09DEN1
73840
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 236 / Monday, December 9, 2013 / Notices
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Consultations
Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of
the Act, on October 22, 2013, we invited
the Government of the PRC (‘‘GOC’’) for
consultations regarding the CVD
petition. On November 28, 2013, the
GOC filed written comments with the
Department with regard to the CVD
petition.6
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petition
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires
that a petition be filed on behalf of the
domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A)
of the Act provides that a petition meets
this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the
petition account for: (i) at least 25
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product; and (ii) more
than 50 percent of the production of the
domestic like product produced by that
portion of the industry expressing
support for, or opposition to, the
petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D)
of the Act provides that, if the petition
does not establish support of domestic
producers or workers accounting for
more than 50 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product,
the Department shall: (i) poll the
industry or rely on other information in
order to determine if there is support for
the petition, as required by
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine
industry support using a statistically
valid sampling method to poll the
industry.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines
the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a
whole of a domestic like product. Thus,
to determine whether a petition has the
requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to
producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The U.S.
International Trade Commission
(‘‘ITC’’), which is responsible for
determining whether ‘‘the domestic
industry’’ has been injured, must also
determine what constitutes a domestic
like product in order to define the
industry. While both the Department
and the ITC must apply the same
statutory definition regarding the
domestic like product,7 they do so for
different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In
addition, the Department’s
determination is subject to limitations of
time and information. Although this
6 See Memorandum to The File, from Katie
Marksberry, Case Analyst, Re: Countervailing Duty
Petition on 1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane from the
People’s Republic of China: Comments from the
Government of the People’s Republic of China
Regarding the Petition, dated December 2, 2013.
7 See section 771(10) of the Act.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:03 Dec 06, 2013
Jkt 232001
may result in different definitions of the
like product, such differences do not
render the decision of either agency
contrary to law.8
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the
domestic like product as ‘‘a product
which is like, or in the absence of like,
most similar in characteristics and uses
with, the article subject to an
investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the
reference point from which the
domestic like product analysis begins is
‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’
(i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to
be investigated, which normally will be
the scope as defined in the Petition).
With regard to the domestic like
product, Petitioner does not offer a
definition of domestic like product
distinct from the scope of the
investigation. Based on our analysis of
the information submitted on the
record, we have determined that
tetrafluoroethane, as defined in the
scope of the investigation, constitutes a
single domestic like product and we
have analyzed industry support in terms
of that domestic like product.9
On November 1, 2013, the Department
extended the initiation deadline by 20
days to poll the domestic industry in
accordance with section 702(c)(4)(D) of
the Act, because it was ‘‘not clear from
the Petitions whether the industry
support criteria have been met. . . .’’ 10
On November 7, 2013, we issued
polling questionnaires to all known
producers of tetrafluoroethane
identified in the Petition and by the ITC.
We requested that each company
complete the polling questionnaire and
certify its response by the due date
specified in the cover letter to the
questionnaire.11
Our analysis of the data we received
in the polling questionnaire responses
8 See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp.
2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd.
v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988),
aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
9 See Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the
People’s Republic of China (‘‘Initiation Checklist’’),
at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for
the Petitions Covering 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane
from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘Attachment
II’’). This checklist is dated concurrently with this
notice and on file electronically via IA ACCESS.
Access to documents filed via IA ACCESS is also
available in the Central Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’),
Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce
building.
10 See Notice of Extension of the Deadline for
Determining the Adequacy of the Antidumping
Duty and Countervailing Duty Petitions: 1,1,1,2Tetrafluoroethane From the People’s Republic of
China, 78 FR 66894, 66895 (November 7, 2013).
11 For a detailed discussion of the responses
received, see Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
The polling questionnaire and questionnaire
responses are on file electronically via IA ACCESS
and can also be accessed through the CRU.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
indicates that the domestic producers of
tetrafluoroethane who support the
Petition account for at least 25 percent
of the total production of the domestic
like product and more than 50 percent
of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the
industry expressing support for, or
opposition to, the Petition.12
Accordingly, the Department
determines that the industry support
requirements of section 702(c)(4)(A) of
the Act have been met. Therefore, the
Department determines that Petitioner
filed this Petition on behalf of the
domestic industry because it is an
interested party as defined in section
771(9)(C) of the Act and it has
demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the
countervailing duty investigation that it
is requesting the Department initiate.13
Injury Test
Because the PRC is a ‘‘Subsidies
Agreement Country’’ within the
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act,
section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to
this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC
must determine whether imports of the
subject merchandise from the PRC
materially injure, or threaten material
injury to, a U.S. industry.
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
Petitioner alleges that imports of the
subject merchandise are benefitting
from countervailable subsidies and that
such imports are causing, or threaten to
cause, material injury to the U.S.
industry producing the domestic like
product. Petitioner alleges that subject
imports exceed the negligibility
threshold provided for under section
771(24)(A) of the Act.14
Petitioner contends that the industry’s
injured condition is illustrated by
reduced market share; underselling and
price depression or suppression; lost
sales and revenues; decline in U.S.
sales; and decline in financial
performance.15 We have assessed the
allegations and supporting evidence
regarding material injury, threat of
material injury, and causation, and we
have determined that these allegations
are properly supported by adequate
evidence and meet the statutory
requirements for initiation.16
12 See
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
13 Id.
14 See General Issues Supplement, at 5–6 and
Exhibit 5.
15 See Volume I of the Petition, at 4–13 and
Exhibits I–5 and I–8 through I–10; see also General
Issues Supplement, at 5–6 and Exhibits 4 and 5.
16 See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III,
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material
E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM
09DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 236 / Monday, December 9, 2013 / Notices
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Initiation of Countervailing Duty
Investigation
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires
the Department to initiate a CVD
proceeding whenever an interested
party files a CVD petition on behalf of
an industry that: (1) alleges the elements
necessary for an imposition of a duty
under section 701(a) of the Act; and (2)
is accompanied by information
reasonably available to the petitioners
supporting the allegations.
The Department has examined the
Petition on tetrafluoroethane from the
PRC and finds that it complies with the
requirements of section 702(b)(1) of the
Act. Therefore, in accordance with
section 702(b)(1) of the Act, we are
initiating a CVD investigation to
determine whether producers/exporters
of tetrafluoroethane in the PRC receive
countervailable subsidies. For a
discussion of evidence supporting our
initiation determination, see the CVD
Initiation Checklist which accompanies
this notice.
Based on our review of the Petition,
we find that there is sufficient
information to initiate a CVD
investigation of six alleged programs.
For the other three programs alleged by
Petitioners, we have determined that the
requirements for initiation have not
been met. For a full discussion of the
basis for our decision to initiate or not
initiate on each program, see the CVD
Initiation Checklist.
Respondent Selection
For this investigation, the Department
intends to select respondents based on
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(‘‘CBP’’) data for U.S. imports during the
POI (i.e., calendar year 2012) under the
following Harmonized Tariff Schedule
of the United States numbers:
2903.39.2020. We intend to release the
CBP data under Administrative
Protective Order (‘‘APO’’) to all parties
with access to information protected by
APO within five days of the
announcement of the initiation of this
investigation. Interested parties may
submit comments regarding the CBP
data and respondent selection within
seven calendar days of release of this
data. We intend to make our decision
regarding respondent selection within
20 days of publication of this Federal
Register notice.
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit
applications for disclosure under APO
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b).
Injury and Causation for the Petitions Covering
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the People’s
Republic of China.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:03 Dec 06, 2013
Jkt 232001
Instructions for filing such applications
may be found on the Department’s Web
site at https://enforcement.trade.gov/
apo/.
Distribution of Copies of the CVD
Petition
In accordance with section
702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), a copy of the public version
of the Petition has been provided to the
representatives of the GOC. Because of
the particularly large number of
producers/exporters identified in the
Petition, the Department considers the
service of the public version of the
petition to the foreign producers/
exporters satisfied by the delivery of the
public version to the GOC, consistent
with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We have notified the ITC of our
initiation, as required by section 702(d)
of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine,
within 45 days after the date on which
the Petition was filed, whether there is
a reasonable indication that imports of
subsidized tetrafluoroethane from the
PRC materially injure, or threaten
material injury to, a U.S. industry.17 A
negative ITC determination will result
in the investigation being terminated.18
Otherwise, the investigation will
proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
Submission of Factual Information
On April 10, 2013, the Department
published Definition of Factual
Information and Time Limits for
Submission of Factual Information:
Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10,
2013), which modified two regulations
related to AD and CVD proceedings: the
definition of factual information (19
CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits
for the submission of factual
information (19 CFR 351.301). The final
rule identifies five categories of factual
information in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21),
which are summarized as follows: (i)
evidence submitted in response to
questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted
in support of allegations; (iii) publicly
available information to value factors
under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure
the adequacy of remuneration under 19
CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed
on the record by the Department; and (v)
evidence other than factual information
described in (i)–(iv). The final rule
requires any party, when submitting
17 See
18 See
PO 00000
section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
73841
factual information, to specify under
which subsection of 19 CFR
351.102(b)(21) the information is being
submitted and, if the information is
submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct
factual information already on the
record, to provide an explanation
identifying the information already on
the record that the factual information
seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. The
final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301
so that, rather than providing general
time limits, there are specific time limits
based on the type of factual information
being submitted. These modifications
are effective for all proceeding segments
initiated on or after May 10, 2013, and
thus are applicable to this investigation.
Please review the final rule, available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/
1304frn/2013–08227.txt, prior to
submitting factual information in these
investigations.
Revised Extension of Time Limits
Regulation
On September 20, 2013, the
Department modified its regulation
concerning the extension of time limits
for submissions in AD and CVD
proceedings.19 The modification
clarifies that parties may request an
extension of time limits before a time
limit established under Part 351 expires,
or as otherwise specified by the
Secretary. In general, an extension
request will be considered untimely if it
is filed after the time limit established
under Part 351 expires. For submissions
which are due from multiple parties
simultaneously, an extension request
will be considered untimely if it is filed
after 10:00 a.m. on the due date.
Examples include, but are not limited
to: (1) Case and rebuttal briefs, filed
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309; (2) factual
information to value factors under
section 19 CFR 351.408(c), or to
measure the adequacy of remuneration
under section 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2),
filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)
and rebuttal, clarification and correction
filed pursuant to 19 CFR
351.301(c)(3)(iv); (3) comments
concerning the selection of a surrogate
country and surrogate values and
rebuttal; (4) comments concerning CBP
data; and (5) quantity and value
questionnaires. Under certain
circumstances, the Department may
elect to specify a different time limit by
which extension requests will be
considered untimely for submissions
which are due from multiple parties
simultaneously. In such a case, the
Department will inform parties in the
19 See Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78
FR 57790 (September 20, 2013).
E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM
09DEN1
73842
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 236 / Monday, December 9, 2013 / Notices
letter or memorandum setting forth the
deadline (including a specified time) by
which extension requests must be filed
to be considered timely. This
modification also requires that an
extension request must be made in a
separate, stand-alone submission, and
clarifies the circumstances under which
the Department will grant untimelyfiled requests for the extension of time
limits. These modifications are effective
for all segments initiated on or after
October 21, 2013. Review Extension of
Time Limits; Final Rule, available at
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-201309-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to
submitting factual information in this
segment.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual
information in an AD or CVD
proceeding must certify to the accuracy
and completeness of that information.20
Parties are hereby reminded that revised
certification requirements are in effect
for company/government officials as
well as their representatives in all AD or
CVD investigations or proceedings
initiated on or after August 16, 2013,
including this investigation.21 The
formats for the revised certifications are
provided at the end of the Final Rule.
The Department intends to reject factual
submissions if the submitting party does
not comply with the revised
certification requirements.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: December 2, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement &
Compliance.
Appendix
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigation
The product subject to this investigation is
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane, R–134a, or its
chemical equivalent, regardless of form, type,
or purity level. The chemical formula for
1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane is CF3-CH2F, and
the Chemical Abstracts Service (‘‘CAS’’)
registry number is CAS 811–97–2.
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane is sold under a
number of trade names including Klea 134a
and Zephex 134a (Mexichem Fluor);
Genetron 134a (Honeywell); Suva 134a,
Dymel 134a, and Dymel P134a (DuPont);
Solkane 134a (Solvay); and Forane 134a
(Arkema). Generically, 1,1,1,2tetrafluoroethane has been sold as
Fluorocarbon 134a, R–134a, HFC–134a, HF
A–134a, Refrigerant 134a, and UN3159.
20 See
section 782(b) of the Act.
Certification of Factual Information To
Import Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July
17, 2013) (‘‘Final Rule’’).
21 See
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:03 Dec 06, 2013
Jkt 232001
Merchandise covered by the scope of this
investigation is currently classified in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (‘‘HTSUS’’) at subheading
2903.39.2020. Although the HTSUS
subheading and CAS registry number are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the
scope is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2013–29341 Filed 12–6–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XC959
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; North Pacific
Groundfish and Halibut Observer
Program Standard Ex-Vessel Prices
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notification of standard exvessel prices.
AGENCY:
NMFS publishes standard exvessel prices for groundfish and halibut
for the calculation of the observer fee
under the North Pacific Groundfish and
Halibut Observer Program (Observer
Program). This notice is intended to
provide information to vessel owners,
processors, registered buyers, and other
participants about the standard exvessel prices that will be used to
calculate the observer fee liability for
landings of groundfish and halibut
made in 2014. NMFS will send invoices
to processors and registered buyers
subject to the fee by January 15, 2015.
Fees are due to NMFS on or before
February 15, 2015.
DATES: Effective January 1, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general questions about the observer fee
and standard ex-vessel prices, contact
Michael Camacho at 907–586–7471. For
questions about the fee billing process,
contact Troie Zuniga, Fee Coordinator,
907–586–7105.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Background
The Observer Program deploys
NMFS-certified observers (observers)
who obtain information necessary for
the conservation and management of the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI)
and Gulf of Alaska (GOA) groundfish
and halibut fisheries. Fishery managers
use information collected by observers
to monitor quotas, manage groundfish
and prohibited species catch, and
document and reduce fishery
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
interactions with protected resources.
Scientists use observer-collected
information for stock assessments and
marine ecosystem research.
In 2012, the North Pacific Fishery
Management Council restructured the
Observer Program under Amendment 86
to the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area and
Amendment 76 to the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Gulf of Alaska (Amendments 86/76).
The final rule implementing
Amendments 86/76 added a new
funding and deployment system for
observer coverage in the groundfish and
halibut fisheries off Alaska that allows
NMFS to determine when and where to
deploy observers according to
management and conservation needs.
The final rule was published in the
Federal Register on November 21, 2012
(77 FR 70062). Regulations
implementing the Observer Program are
set forth at 50 CFR part 679, subpart E.
Restructuring divided the Observer
Program into two observer coverage
categories—partial and full. All
groundfish and halibut vessels and
processors are included in one of these
two categories. The partial observer
coverage category includes vessels and
processors that are not required to have
an observer at all times; the full observer
coverage category includes vessels and
processors required to have all of their
fishing and processing operations off
Alaska observed. Vessels and processors
in the full coverage category arrange and
pay for observer services from a
permitted observer provider. Observer
coverage for the partial coverage
category is funded through a system of
fees based on the ex-vessel value of
groundfish and halibut. The proposed
rule for Amendments 86/76 (77 FR
23326; April 18, 2012) provides a
detailed explanation of the vessels and
processors in the partial coverage
category, the landings subject to the
observer fee, and the process for
calculating standard ex-vessel prices.
This notice summarizes that
information.
Landings Subject to Observer Coverage
Fee
The objective of the observer fee
assessment is to levy a fee on all
landings accruing against a Federal total
allowable catch (TAC) for groundfish or
a commercial halibut quota made by
vessels that are subject to Federal
regulations and not included in the full
coverage category. Therefore, a fee is
only assessed on landings of groundfish
from vessels designated on a Federal
Fisheries Permit (FFP) or from vessels
E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM
09DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 236 (Monday, December 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73839-73842]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29341]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-570-999]
1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane From the People's Republic of China:
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation
AGENCY: Enforcement & Compliance, formerly Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce
DATES: Effective Date: December 9, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katie Marksberry, Office V, AD/CVD
Operations, Enforcement & Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202.482.7906.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On October 22, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the
``Department'') received a countervailing duty (``CVD'') petition
concerning imports of 1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane (``tetrafluoroethane'')
from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''), filed in proper form by
Mexichem Fluor, Inc. (``Petitioner''), domestic producers of
tetrafluoroethane. The CVD petition was accompanied by an antidumping
duty (``AD'') petition concerning imports of tetrafluoroethane from the
PRC.\1\ On October 25 and November 6, 2013, the Department requested
additional information and clarification of certain areas of the
Petition, and on October 29 and November 8, 2013, respectively,
Petitioner filed a response to each request.\2\ Additionally, on
November 7, 2013, Petitioner filed a response to the Department's
November 6, 2013, request for additional information and clarification
of the scope of the Petition.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties on 1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane from the People's
Republic of China, dated October 22, 2013 (hereafter referred to as
the ``Petition'').
\2\ See Petitioner's October 29, 2013, filing titled, ``1,1,1,2-
Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China: Response to
CVD Issues Deficiency Questionnaire,''; see also Petitioner's
October 29, 2013, filing titled, ``1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from
the People's Republic of China: Response to General Issues
Supplemental Questionnaire'' (``General Issues Supplement''), and
Petitioner's November 8, 2013, filing, titled ``1,1,1,2-
Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China: Response to
Second Antidumping Supplemental Questionnaire''.
\3\ See Petitioner's November 7, 2013, filing titled, ``1,1,1,2-
Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China: Response to
Scope Questionnaire,''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the ``Act''), Petitioners allege that producers/exporters of
tetrafluoroethane in the PRC received countervailable subsidies within
the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, and that imports
from these producers/exporters materially injure, or threaten material
injury to, an industry in the United States.
The Department finds that Petitioners filed this Petition on behalf
of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined
in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and Petitioners have demonstrated
sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that
it is requesting the Department to initiate (see ``Determination of
Industry Support for the Petition'' below).
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (``POI'') is January 1, 2012 through
December 31, 2012, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this investigation is tetrafluoroethane from
the PRC. For a full description of the scope of the investigation,
please see the ``Scope of Investigation'' in the appendix to this
notice.
Comments on the Scope of the Investigation
During our review of the Petition, we solicited information from
Petitioners to ensure that the proposed scope language is an accurate
reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking
relief. Moreover, as discussed in the preamble to the Department's
regulations \4\, we are setting aside a period for interested parties
to raise issues regarding product coverage. The Department encourages
all interested parties to submit such comments by December 22, 2013,
which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. All
comments must be filed on the record of the CVD investigation, as well
as the concurrent AD investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically
using Enforcement & Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS''). An
electronically filed document must be received successfully in its
entirety by the Department's electronic records system, IA ACCESS, by 5
p.m. on the due date. Documents excepted from the electronic submission
requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the
Enforcement & Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the deadline
established by the Department.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1). Information on help using IA ACCESS
can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook
can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filing%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73840]]
Consultations
Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, on October 22,
2013, we invited the Government of the PRC (``GOC'') for consultations
regarding the CVD petition. On November 28, 2013, the GOC filed written
comments with the Department with regard to the CVD petition.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Memorandum to The File, from Katie Marksberry, Case
Analyst, Re: Countervailing Duty Petition on 1,1,1,2
Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China: Comments from
the Government of the People's Republic of China Regarding the
Petition, dated December 2, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Determination of Industry Support for the Petition
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department
shall: (i) poll the industry or rely on other information in order to
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a
statistically valid sampling method to poll the industry.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The U.S. International Trade Commission
(``ITC''), which is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic
industry'' has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a
domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the
Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition
regarding the domestic like product,\7\ they do so for different
purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In
addition, the Department's determination is subject to limitations of
time and information. Although this may result in different definitions
of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of
either agency contrary to law.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\8\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F.
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
Petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioner does not offer
a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of the
investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on
the record, we have determined that tetrafluoroethane, as defined in
the scope of the investigation, constitutes a single domestic like
product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic
like product.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist:
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China
(``Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry
Support for the Petitions Covering 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from
the People's Republic of China (``Attachment II''). This checklist
is dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically
via IA ACCESS. Access to documents filed via IA ACCESS is also
available in the Central Records Unit (``CRU''), Room 7046 of the
main Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 1, 2013, the Department extended the initiation
deadline by 20 days to poll the domestic industry in accordance with
section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act, because it was ``not clear from the
Petitions whether the industry support criteria have been met. . . .''
\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Notice of Extension of the Deadline for Determining the
Adequacy of the Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Petitions:
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane From the People's Republic of China, 78 FR
66894, 66895 (November 7, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 7, 2013, we issued polling questionnaires to all known
producers of tetrafluoroethane identified in the Petition and by the
ITC. We requested that each company complete the polling questionnaire
and certify its response by the due date specified in the cover letter
to the questionnaire.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ For a detailed discussion of the responses received, see
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. The polling questionnaire
and questionnaire responses are on file electronically via IA ACCESS
and can also be accessed through the CRU.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our analysis of the data we received in the polling questionnaire
responses indicates that the domestic producers of tetrafluoroethane
who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product and more than 50 percent of the
production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the
industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petition.\12\
Accordingly, the Department determines that the industry support
requirements of section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act have been met.
Therefore, the Department determines that Petitioner filed this
Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested
party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the
countervailing duty investigation that it is requesting the Department
initiate.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury Test
Because the PRC is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine
whether imports of the subject merchandise from the PRC materially
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
Petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry
producing the domestic like product. Petitioner alleges that subject
imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section
771(24)(A) of the Act.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See General Issues Supplement, at 5-6 and Exhibit 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price depression
or suppression; lost sales and revenues; decline in U.S. sales; and
decline in financial performance.\15\ We have assessed the allegations
and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material
injury, and causation, and we have determined that these allegations
are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory
requirements for initiation.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 4-13 and Exhibits I-5 and
I-8 through I-10; see also General Issues Supplement, at 5-6 and
Exhibits 4 and 5.
\16\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the
Petitions Covering 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the People's
Republic of China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73841]]
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a
CVD proceeding whenever an interested party files a CVD petition on
behalf of an industry that: (1) alleges the elements necessary for an
imposition of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act; and (2) is
accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners
supporting the allegations.
The Department has examined the Petition on tetrafluoroethane from
the PRC and finds that it complies with the requirements of section
702(b)(1) of the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 702(b)(1)
of the Act, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether
producers/exporters of tetrafluoroethane in the PRC receive
countervailable subsidies. For a discussion of evidence supporting our
initiation determination, see the CVD Initiation Checklist which
accompanies this notice.
Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of six alleged
programs. For the other three programs alleged by Petitioners, we have
determined that the requirements for initiation have not been met. For
a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not
initiate on each program, see the CVD Initiation Checklist.
Respondent Selection
For this investigation, the Department intends to select
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') data
for U.S. imports during the POI (i.e., calendar year 2012) under the
following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers:
2903.39.2020. We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative
Protective Order (``APO'') to all parties with access to information
protected by APO within five days of the announcement of the initiation
of this investigation. Interested parties may submit comments regarding
the CBP data and respondent selection within seven calendar days of
release of this data. We intend to make our decision regarding
respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this Federal
Register notice.
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such
applications may be found on the Department's Web site at https://enforcement.trade.gov/apo/.
Distribution of Copies of the CVD Petition
In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been
provided to the representatives of the GOC. Because of the particularly
large number of producers/exporters identified in the Petition, the
Department considers the service of the public version of the petition
to the foreign producers/exporters satisfied by the delivery of the
public version to the GOC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
702(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date
on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable
indication that imports of subsidized tetrafluoroethane from the PRC
materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.\17\
A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being
terminated.\18\ Otherwise, the investigation will proceed according to
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
\18\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submission of Factual Information
On April 10, 2013, the Department published Definition of Factual
Information and Time Limits for Submission of Factual Information:
Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 2013), which modified two
regulations related to AD and CVD proceedings: the definition of
factual information (19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits for
the submission of factual information (19 CFR 351.301). The final rule
identifies five categories of factual information in 19 CFR
351.102(b)(21), which are summarized as follows: (i) evidence submitted
in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of
allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors
under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration
under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by the
Department; and (v) evidence other than factual information described
in (i)-(iv). The final rule requires any party, when submitting factual
information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)
the information is being submitted and, if the information is submitted
to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the
record, to provide an explanation identifying the information already
on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or
correct. The final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301 so that, rather
than providing general time limits, there are specific time limits
based on the type of factual information being submitted. These
modifications are effective for all proceeding segments initiated on or
after May 10, 2013, and thus are applicable to this investigation.
Please review the final rule, available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to
submitting factual information in these investigations.
Revised Extension of Time Limits Regulation
On September 20, 2013, the Department modified its regulation
concerning the extension of time limits for submissions in AD and CVD
proceedings.\19\ The modification clarifies that parties may request an
extension of time limits before a time limit established under Part 351
expires, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an
extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the
time limit established under Part 351 expires. For submissions which
are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will
be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. on the due date.
Examples include, but are not limited to: (1) Case and rebuttal briefs,
filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309; (2) factual information to value
factors under section 19 CFR 351.408(c), or to measure the adequacy of
remuneration under section 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2), filed pursuant to 19
CFR 351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, clarification and correction filed
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(iv); (3) comments concerning the
selection of a surrogate country and surrogate values and rebuttal; (4)
comments concerning CBP data; and (5) quantity and value
questionnaires. Under certain circumstances, the Department may elect
to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be
considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties
simultaneously. In such a case, the Department will inform parties in
the
[[Page 73842]]
letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified
time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered
timely. This modification also requires that an extension request must
be made in a separate, stand-alone submission, and clarifies the
circumstances under which the Department will grant untimely-filed
requests for the extension of time limits. These modifications are
effective for all segments initiated on or after October 21, 2013.
Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to
submitting factual information in this segment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790
(September 20, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\20\
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are
in effect for company/government officials as well as their
representatives in all AD or CVD investigations or proceedings
initiated on or after August 16, 2013, including this
investigation.\21\ The formats for the revised certifications are
provided at the end of the Final Rule. The Department intends to reject
factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the
revised certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\21\ See Certification of Factual Information To Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (``Final Rule'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: December 2, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance.
Appendix
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigation
The product subject to this investigation is 1,1,1,2-
Tetrafluoroethane, R-134a, or its chemical equivalent, regardless of
form, type, or purity level. The chemical formula for 1,1,1,2-
tetrafluoroethane is CF3-CH2F, and the
Chemical Abstracts Service (``CAS'') registry number is CAS 811-97-
2.
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane is sold under a number of trade names
including Klea 134a and Zephex 134a (Mexichem Fluor); Genetron 134a
(Honeywell); Suva 134a, Dymel 134a, and Dymel P134a (DuPont);
Solkane 134a (Solvay); and Forane 134a (Arkema). Generically,
1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane has been sold as Fluorocarbon 134a, R-
134a, HFC-134a, HF A-134a, Refrigerant 134a, and UN3159.
Merchandise covered by the scope of this investigation is
currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (``HTSUS'') at subheading 2903.39.2020. Although the HTSUS
subheading and CAS registry number are provided for convenience and
customs purposes, the written description of the scope is
dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2013-29341 Filed 12-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
