1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 73832-73837 [2013-29344]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 236 (Monday, December 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73832-73837]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29344]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-998]


1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane From the People's Republic of China: 
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation

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

DATES: Effective Date: December 9, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frances Veith or Joshua Startup at 
(202) 482-4295, (202) 482-5260, respectively, AD/CVD Operations, Office 
V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 73833]]

The Petition

    On October 22, 2013, the Department of Commerce (``Department'') 
received an antidumping duty (``AD'') petition concerning imports of 
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (``tetrafluoroethane'') from the People's 
Republic of China (``PRC'') filed in proper form on behalf of Mexichem 
Fluor, Inc. (``Petitioner'').\1\ Petitioner is a domestic producer of 
tetrafluoroethane. 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\ 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 Duties on 
Imports of 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of 
China,'' dated October 22, 2013 (``Petition'').
    \2\ See Petitioner's October 29, 2013, filing titled, ``1,1,1,2-
Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China: Response to 
Antidumping Supplemental Questionnaire,'' (``AD Supplement to the 
Petition''); 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 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``the Act''), Petitioner alleges that imports of 
tetrafluoroethane from the 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 Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or 
threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, 
consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petition is 
accompanied by information reasonably available to Petitioner in 
support of its allegations.
    The Department finds that Petitioner filed this Petition on behalf 
of the domestic industry because Petitioner is an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also finds that 
Petitioner has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to 
the initiation of the AD investigation that Petitioner is 
requesting.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petitions'' section, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), because the Petition was filed on 
October 22, 2013, the period of investigation (``POI'') is April 1, 
2013, through September 30, 2013.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is tetrafluoroethane from 
the PRC.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Appendix I of this notice for a full description of the 
scope of this investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on the Scope of the Investigation

    During our review of the Petition, we discussed the scope with 
Petitioner to ensure that it is an accurate reflection of the product 
for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as 
discussed in the preamble to the regulations,\7\ 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 23, 2013, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time.\8\ All 
comments must be filed on the record of the AD investigation, as well 
as the concurrent PRC countervailing duty (``CVD'') investigation. The 
period of scope comments is intended to provide the Department with 
ample opportunity to consider all comments and to consult with parties 
prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \8\ Scope comments are typically due 20 calendar days from the 
signature date of this notice, which in this case falls on a Sunday. 
Department practice dictates that where a deadline falls on a 
weekend or federal holiday, the appropriate deadline is the next 
business day. See Notice of Clarification: Application of ``Next 
Business Day'' Rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines 
Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533, 24533 
(May 10, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on the Product Characteristics for Antidumping Duty 
Questionnaire

    The Department requests comments from interested parties regarding 
the appropriate physical characteristics of tetrafluoroethane to be 
reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaire. This 
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics 
of the subject merchandise in order to report the relevant factors and 
costs of production accurately, as well as to develop appropriate 
product-comparison criteria.
    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that 
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of 
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to 
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product 
characteristics and (2) product-comparison criteria. We note that it is 
not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-
comparison criteria. We base product-comparison criteria on meaningful 
commercial differences among products. In other words, while there may 
be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers to 
describe tetrafluoroethane, it may be that only a select few product 
characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical 
characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the 
order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching 
products. Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important 
physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics 
last.
    In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in 
developing and issuing the AD questionnaire, we must receive comments 
on product characteristics by December 23, 2013. Rebuttal comments must 
be received by December 30, 2013. All comments and submissions to the 
Department must be filed electronically using Enforcement and 
Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic 
Service System (IA ACCESS).

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using IA ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received 
successfully in its entirety by 5:00 p.m. on the due date.\9\ Documents 
excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed 
manually (i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement and 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 noted above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(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

[[Page 73834]]

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 732(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,\10\ 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.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \11\ 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.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China (``AD 
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 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, because it was ``not clear from the 
Petitions whether the industry support criteria have been met . . . .'' 
\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 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.\14\ The questionnaire stated that, if a company 
did not take a position with respect to the Petition (either support, 
oppose, or no opinion), we would presume the company has no opinion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For a detailed discussion of the responses received, see AD 
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 received in the polling questionnaire 
responses indicates that the domestic producers of tetrafluoroethane 
which 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.\15\ 
Accordingly, the Department determines that the industry support 
requirements of section 732(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 AD 
investigation that it is requesting the Department initiate.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See AD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
    \16\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    Petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic 
like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with 
material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise 
sold at less than normal value (``NV''). In addition, Petitioner 
alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold 
provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 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.\18\ 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.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 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.
    \19\ See AD 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegation of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

    The following is a description of the allegation of sales at less 
than fair value upon which the Department has based its decision to 
initiate investigations of imports of tetrafluoroethane from the PRC. 
The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. 
price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the AD Initiation 
Checklist.

Export Price

    Petitioner calculated export price (``EP'') based on one price 
quote for Chinese tetrafluoroethane provided by a domestic distributor 
of PRC chemical products, as identified in affidavits regarding U.S. 
price.\20\ Based on the price quote's delivery terms, Petitioner 
deducted from this price the charges and expenses associated with 
exporting and delivering the product to the U.S.

[[Page 73835]]

customer (e.g., insurance and freight, U.S. duty and U.S inland 
freight).\21\ Petitioner made no other adjustments.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See AD Initiation Checklist at 6; see also Volume II of the 
Petition, at 4 and Exhibit II-7; see also AD Supplement to the 
Petition, at 2-3 and Exhibit 5.
    \21\ Id.
    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    Petitioner claims that the PRC is a non-market economy (``NME'') 
country, and that this designation remains in effect as of the date of 
this Petition.\23\ The presumption of NME status for the PRC has not 
been revoked by the Department and, therefore, in accordance with 
section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, remains in effect for purposes of the 
initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, the NV of the product 
for the investigation is appropriately based on factors of production 
valued in a surrogate market-economy country in accordance with section 
773(c) of the Act. In the course of this investigation, all parties 
will have the opportunity to provide relevant information related to 
the issues of the PRC's NME status and granting of separate rates to 
individual exporters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Volume II of the Petition at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioner contends that Thailand is the appropriate surrogate 
country for the PRC because: (1) It is at a level of economic 
development comparable to that of the PRC, (2) it is a significant 
producer of comparable merchandise relative to the tetrafluoroethane 
that is the subject of the petition, and (3) the data available from 
Thailand for valuing factors of production are available and 
reliable.\24\ Based on the information provided by Petitioner, we 
conclude that it is appropriate to use Thailand as a surrogate country 
for initiation purposes.\25\ After initiation of this investigation, 
interested parties will have the opportunity to submit comments 
regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly 
available information to value factors of production (FOPs) within 30 
days before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id. at 1-3 and Exhibits II-3 through and II-6.
    \25\ See AD Initiation Checklist.
    \26\ See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i). Note that this is the revised 
regulation published on April 10, 2013. See https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2013-title19-vol3/html/CFR-2013-title19-vol3.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioner calculated NV using the Department's NME methodology as 
required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C) and 19 CFR 351.408. In 
calculating NV, Petitioner based the quantity of each of the inputs 
used to manufacture the subject merchandise on its own consumption 
experience which, Petitioner contends, to the best of its knowledge, is 
similar to the consumption of PRC producers.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Volume II of the Petition at 2 and Exhibits II-2 and 
II-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioner valued the factors of production using reasonably 
available, public surrogate country data, specifically, Thai import 
data from the Global Trade Atlas (``GTA'') for the period February 
through July 2013, the most recent six-month period for which data were 
available.\28\ Petitioner excluded all import values from countries 
previously determined by the Department to maintain broadly available, 
non-industry-specific export subsidies and from countries previously 
determined by the Department to be NME countries. Further, Petitioner 
made currency conversions, where applicable, based on the POI-average 
Thai Baht/U.S. dollar exchange rates.\29\ The Department determines 
that the surrogate values used by Petitioner are reasonably available 
and, thus, are acceptable for purposes of initiation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Volume II of the Petition at 3 and Exhibit II-3.
    \29\ See Volume II of the Petition at Exhibit II-4; see also AD 
Supplement to the Petition at 4-5 and Exhibit 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioner determined direct materials costs from Thai import data 
from the GTA.\30\ Petitioner applied certain conversion factors to 
align the units of measure with its own factors of production.\31\ 
Petitioner calculated financial ratios (i.e., factory overhead 
expenses, selling, general, and administrative (``SG&A'') expenses, and 
profit) based on the most recent audited financial statements of Thai 
Central Chemical Public Company Limited, a Thai manufacturer of 
comparable merchandise (i.e., chemical fertilizers).\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Volume II of the Petition at Exhibit II-3.
    \31\ Id. at Exhibit II-2.
    \32\ See AD Supplement to Petition at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by Petitioner, there is reason to 
believe that imports of tetrafluoroethane from the PRC are being, or 
are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. 
Based on comparisons of EP to NV in accordance with section 773(c) of 
the Act, Petitioner calculated the estimated dumping margin to be 
198.52 percent with respect to imports of tetrafluoroethane from the 
PRC.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Id. at Exhibit 6, AD Margin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation

    Based on our examination of the Petition on tetrafluoroethane from 
the PRC, the Department finds that the petition meets the requirements 
of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an AD 
investigation to determine whether imports of tetrafluoroethane from 
the PRC are being, or likely to be, sold in the United States at less 
than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 
19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will issue our preliminary 
determination no later than 140 days after the publication date of this 
initiation.

Respondent Selection and Quantity and Value Questionnaire

    In accordance with our standard practice for respondent selection 
in AD investigations involving NME countries, we intend to issue 
quantity and value questionnaires to each potential respondent, and 
will base respondent selection on the responses received. In addition, 
the Department will post the quantity and value questionnaire along 
with the filing instructions on the Enforcement and Compliance Web site 
(https://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp). Exporters and producers of 
tetrafluoroethane from the PRC that do not receive quantity and value 
questionnaires via mail may still submit a quantity and value response, 
and can obtain a copy from the Enforcement and Compliance Web site. The 
quantity and value questionnaire must be submitted by all PRC 
exporters/producers by no later than December 16, 2013. All quantity 
and value questionnaires must be filed electronically using IA ACCESS.

Separate Rates

    In order to obtain separate rate status in an NME AD investigation, 
exporters and producers must submit a separate rate application.\34\ 
The specific requirements for submitting the separate rate application 
in the PRC investigation are outlined in detail in the application 
itself, which will be available on the Department's Web site at https://trade.gov/enforcement/ia-highlights-and-news.html on the date of 
publication of this initiation notice in the Federal Register. The 
separate rate application will be due 60 days after the publication of 
this initiation notice. For exporters and producers who submit a 
separate rate status application and have been selected as mandatory 
respondents, these exporters and producers will no longer be eligible 
for

[[Page 73836]]

consideration for separate rate status unless they respond to all parts 
of the Department's AD questionnaire as mandatory respondents. The 
Department requires that the PRC respondents submit a response to the 
separate rate application by the deadline referenced above in order to 
receive consideration for separate rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and 
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation 
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005) (Separate 
Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin), available on the Department's 
Web site at https://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use of Combination Rates

    The Department will calculate combination rates for certain 
respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME 
investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin 
states:

    {w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate 
rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will 
now assign in its NME investigations will be specific to those 
producers that supplied the exporter during the period of 
investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the 
exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise 
to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both 
to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated 
separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms 
receiving the weighted-average of the individually calculated rates. 
This practice is referred to as the application of ``combination 
rates'' because such rates apply to specific combinations of 
exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned 
to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the 
firm in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter 
during the period of investigation.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin at 6 
(emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petition have been 
provided to the Government of the PRC via IA ACCESS. 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 to be satisfied by the 
provision of the public versions of the Petition to the Government of 
the PRC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

International Trade Commission Notification

    We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
732(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 tetrafluoroethane from the PRC are 
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. 
industry.\36\ A negative ITC determination will result in the 
investigation being terminated; otherwise, this investigation will 
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See section 733(a) 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: (1) The definition of 
factual information (19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and (2) 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 for this investigation.

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. 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 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.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\37\ 
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,

[[Page 73837]]

including this investigation.\38\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \38\ See Certifications of Factual Information To Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (``Final Rule'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the 
Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 
22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in this investigation should 
ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the 
filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.

    Dated: December 2, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

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. 2013-29344 Filed 12-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P