Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin From Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 48977-48982 [2017-22931]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices
Dated: October 16, 2017.
Christopher A. McLean,
Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
responses to these requests on October
3, 2017.4
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
[FR Doc. 2017–22857 Filed 10–20–17; 8:45 am]
Act), the petitioners allege that imports
BILLING CODE P
of PET resin from Brazil, Indonesia,
Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan are being,
or are likely to be, sold in the United
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
States at less than fair value, within the
meaning of section 731 of the Act, and
International Trade Administration
that such imports are materially
[A–351–852, A–560–832, A–580–896, A–535– injuring, or threatening material injury
905, A–583–862]
to, the domestic industry producing PET
resin in the United States. Consistent
Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin
with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the
From Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of Petitions are accompanied by
Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan: Initiation information reasonably available to the
of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations petitioners to support their allegations.
The Department finds that the
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance,
petitioners filed these Petitions on
International Trade Administration,
behalf of the domestic industry because
Department of Commerce.
the petitioners are interested parties as
DATES: Applicable October 16, 2017.
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The Department also finds that the
Gene Calvert at (202) 482–3586
petitioners demonstrated sufficient
(Indonesia, Korea, and Pakistan) or Jun
industry support with respect to
Jack Zhao at (202) 482–1396 (Brazil and initiation of the AD investigations that
Taiwan), Office VII, AD/CVD
the petitioners are requesting.5
Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties
Administration, Department of
on Imports of Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate
Resin from the Republic of Korea: Supplemental
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
Questions,’’ September 29, 2017; Letter from the
NW., Washington, DC 20230.
Department, ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain
The Petitions
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
On September 26, 2017, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) received antidumping duty
(AD) petitions concerning imports of
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) resin
from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan,
and Taiwan, filed in proper form on
behalf of DAK Americas LLC, Indorama
Ventures USA, Inc. (Indorama), M&G
Polymers USA, LLC, and Nan Ya
Plastics Corporation, America
(collectively, the petitioners).1 The
petitioners are domestic producers of
PET resin.2
On September 29, 2017, the
Department requested supplemental
information pertaining to certain areas
of the Petitions.3 The petitioners filed
1 See Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Polyester (sic)
Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia,
the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan—
Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties,’’
September 26, 2017 (the Petitions). Indorama is not
a petitioner with respect to the Indonesia petition.
See Volume I of the Petitions, at 1.
2 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 1.
3 See Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from
Brazil: Supplemental Questions,’’ September 29,
2017; see also Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petition
for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on
Imports of Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate
Resin from Indonesia: Supplemental Questions,’’
September 29, 2017; Letter from the Department,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:08 Oct 20, 2017
Jkt 244001
Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Pakistan:
Supplemental Questions,’’ September 29, 2017;
Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from
Taiwan: Supplemental Questions,’’ September 29,
2017; and Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petitions for
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports
of Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from
Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Pakistan,
and Taiwan,’’ September 29, 2017.
4 See Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Polyethylene
Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia,
the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan—
Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume I Relating to
General Issues,’’ October 3, 2017 (General Issues
Supplement); see also Letter from the petitioners,
‘‘Polyethylene Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from
Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Pakistan,
and Taiwan—Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume II
Relating to Brazil Antidumping Duties,’’ October 3,
2017; Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Polyethylene
Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia,
the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan—
Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume III Relating to
Indonesia Antidumping Duties,’’ October 3, 2017;
Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Polyethylene
Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia,
the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan—
Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume IV Relating to
the Republic of Korea Antidumping Duties,’’
October 3, 2017; Letter from the petitioners,
‘‘Polyethylene Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from
Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Pakistan,
and Taiwan—Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume V
Relating to Pakistan Antidumping Duties,’’ October
3, 2017; Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Polyethylene
Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia,
the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan—
Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume VI Relating to
Taiwan Antidumping Duties,’’ October 3, 2017.
5 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions’’ section below.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48977
Period of Investigations
Because the Petitions were filed on
September 26, 2017, the period of
investigation (POI) for all investigations
is July 1, 2016, through June 30, 2017,
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these
investigations is PET resin from Brazil,
Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan.
For a full description of the scope of
these investigations, see the ‘‘Scope of
the Investigations’’ in the Appendix to
this notice.
Comments on Scope of the
Investigations
As discussed in the preamble to the
Department’s regulations,6 we are
setting aside a period for interested
parties to raise issues regarding product
coverage (i.e., scope). The Department
will consider all comments received
from interested parties and, if necessary,
will consult with interested parties
regarding scope prior to the issuance of
the preliminary determinations. All
factual information included in scope
comments should be limited to public
information.7 To facilitate preparation
of its questionnaires, the Department
requests that interested parties submit
all such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern
Time (ET) on November 6, 2017, which
is the first business day 20 calendar
days from the signature date of this
notice.8 Any rebuttal comments, which
may include factual information, must
be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on November
16, 2017, which is 10 calendar days
from the initial comment deadline.9
The Department requests that any
factual information the parties consider
relevant to the scope of the
investigations be submitted during this
time period. However, if a party
subsequently finds that additional
factual information pertaining to the
scope of the investigations may be
relevant, the party may contact the
Department and request permission to
submit the additional information. All
such comments must be filed on the
record of each concurrent AD
investigation.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department
must be electronically filed using
Enforcement and Compliance’s
Antidumping Duty and Countervailing
6 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties,
Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
7 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual
information’’).
8 See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
9 See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
48978
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices
Duty Centralized Electronic Service
System (ACCESS).10 An electronically
filed document must be received
successfully in its entirety by the time
and date it is due. Documents exempted
from the electronic submission
requirements must be filed manually
(i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement
and Compliance’s APO/Dockets Unit,
Room 18022, Department of Commerce,
1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped
with the date and time of receipt by the
applicable deadlines.
Comments on Product Characteristics
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
The Department will provide
interested parties an opportunity to
comment on the appropriate physical
characteristics of PET resin to be
reported in response to the
Department’s questionnaires. This
information will be used to identify the
key physical characteristics of the
merchandise under consideration in
order to accurately report the relevant
costs of production, as well as 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, parties may provide
comments regarding 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,
although there may be some physical
product characteristics utilized by
manufacturers to describe PET resin, it
may be that only a select few product
characteristics take commercially
meaningful physical characteristics into
account. Interested parties may also
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
10 For details of the Department’s electronic filing
requirements, which went into effect on August 5,
2011, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures;
Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR
39263 (July 6, 2011), and Enforcement and
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System
Name, 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014).
Additional information on using ACCESS can be
found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx, and a
handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/
help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling
%20Procedures.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:08 Oct 20, 2017
Jkt 244001
and the least important characteristics
last.
For the Department to consider the
suggestions of interested parties in
developing and issuing the AD
questionnaires, all product
characteristics comments must be filed
by 5:00 p.m. ET on November 6, 2017.
Any rebuttal comments must be filed by
5:00 p.m. ET on November 16, 2017. As
explained above, all comments and
submissions to the Department must be
electronically filed, via ACCESS, on the
records of the concurrent Brazil,
Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan
investigations.
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions
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
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 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,11 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
11 See
PO 00000
section 771(10) of the Act.
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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.12
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 a petition).
With regard to the domestic like
product, the petitioner does not offer a
definition of the domestic like product
distinct from the scope of the
investigations. Based on our analysis of
the information submitted on the
record, we have determined that PET
resin, as defined in the scope,
constitutes a single domestic like
product, and we have analyzed industry
support in terms of that domestic like
product.13
In determining whether the
petitioners have standing under section
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered
the industry support data contained in
the Petitions with reference to the
domestic like product as defined in the
‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ in the
Appendix to this notice. The petitioners
provided their 2016 production of the
domestic like product, and compared
this to the estimated total production of
12 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)).
13 For a discussion of the domestic like product
analysis as applied to these cases and information
regarding industry support, see Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Polyethylene
Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Brazil (Brazil AD
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, ‘‘Analysis of
Industry Support for the Antidumping Duty
Petitions Covering Polyethylene Terephthalate
Resin (PET Resin) from Brazil, Indonesia, the
Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan’’
(Attachment II); see also Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Polyethylene
Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Indonesia’’
(Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment
II; see also Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Polyethylene Terephthalate
(PET) Resin from the Republic of Korea (Korea AD
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; see also
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Resin
from Pakistan (Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II; see also Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Polyethylene
Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Taiwan (Taiwan
AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These
checklists are dated concurrently with this notice
and on file electronically via ACCESS. Access to
documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the
Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main
Department of Commerce building.
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
the domestic like product for the entire
domestic industry.14 We relied on data
the petitioners provided for purposes of
measuring industry support.15
Our review of the data provided in the
Petitions, General Issues Supplement,
and other information readily available
to the Department indicates that the
petitioner has established industry
support for the Petitions.16 First, the
Petitions established support from
domestic producers (or workers)
accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like
product and, as such, the Department is
not required to take further action in
order to evaluate industry support (e.g.,
polling).17 Second, the domestic
producers (or workers) have met the
statutory criteria for industry support
under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act
because the domestic producers (or
workers) who support the Petitions
account for at least 25 percent of the
total production of the domestic like
product.18 Finally, the domestic
producers (or workers) have met the
statutory criteria for industry support
under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act
because the domestic producers (or
workers) who support the Petitions
account for 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 Petitions.19 Accordingly, the
Department determines that the
Petitions were filed on behalf of the
domestic industry within the meaning
of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
The Department finds that the
petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf
of the domestic industry because they
are interested parties as defined in
section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and that the
petitioners have demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the AD
investigations that they are requesting
the Department to initiate.20
14 See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit GEN–
2; see also General Issues Supplement, at Exhibit
GEN–S2.
15 Id. For further discussion, see Brazil AD
Initiation Checklist, Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, Pakistan
AD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
16 See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist, Indonesia
AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation
Checklist, Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist, and
Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
17 See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also
Brazil AD Initiation Checklist, Indonesia AD
Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist,
Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
18 See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist, Indonesia
AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation
Checklist, Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist, and
Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
19 Id.
20 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:08 Oct 20, 2017
Jkt 244001
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
The petitioners allege 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, the petitioners
allege that subject imports exceed the
negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.21
The petitioners contend that the
industry’s injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share;
underselling and price suppression or
depression; lost sales and revenues;
declines in production, capacity
utilization, and U.S. shipments; and
declines in financial performance.22 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.23
Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value
The following is a description of the
allegations of sales at less than fair value
upon which the Department based its
decision to initiate AD investigations of
imports of PET resin from Brazil,
Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan.
The sources of data for the deductions
and adjustments relating to U.S. price
and NV are discussed in greater detail
in the country-specific initiation
checklists.
Export Price
For all countries addressed in the
Petitions, the petitioners based the U.S.
price on export price (EP), using (1)
average unit values (AUVs) of publicly
available import data and (2) price
quotes for PET resin produced in, and
exported from, the relevant countries
and offered for sale or actually sold in
the United States.24 Where applicable,
21 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 16–17 and
Exhibit GEN–8.
22 Id., at 13–32 and Exhibits GEN–5 and GEN–7
through GEN–12.
23 See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and
Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the
Antidumping Duty Petitions Covering Polyethylene
Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia,
the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan
(Attachment III); Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist,
at Attachment III; Korea AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment III; Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment III; and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist,
at Attachment III.
24 See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also
Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD Initiation
Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48979
the petitioners made adjustments to the
U.S. price for movement and other
expenses, consistent with the terms of
sale.25
Normal Value
For all countries addressed in the
Petitions, the petitioners provided home
market price information obtained
through market research for PET resin
produced, and offered for sale, in each
country.26 For all countries, the
petitioners provided market researcher
declarations to support the price
information.27 Where applicable, the
petitioners made deductions for
movement expenses, consistent with the
terms of sale.28
For all countries included in the
Petitions, the petitioners provided
information that sales of PET resin in
each respective home market were made
at prices below the cost of production
(COP).29 With respect to Brazil and
Indonesia, the petitioners calculated NV
based on home market prices as well as
on constructed value (CV).30 With
respect to Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan,
the petitioners calculated NV based only
on CV.31 For further discussion of COP
and NV based on CV, see the ‘‘Normal
Value Based on CV’’ section of this
notice.32
25 Id.
26 See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also
Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD Initiation
Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
27 See Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Certain
Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Brazil—
Petitioners’ Foreign Market Research Report,’’
September 27, 2017; see also Letter from the
petitioners, ‘‘Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate
Resin from Indonesia—Petitioners’ Foreign Market
Research Report,’’ September 27, 2017; Letter from
the petitioners, ‘‘Certain Polyethylene
Terephthalate Resin from the Republic of Korea—
Petitioners’ Foreign Market Research Report,’’
September 27, 2017; Letter from the petitioners,
‘‘Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from
Pakistan—Petitioners’ Foreign Market Research
Report,’’ September 27, 2017; Letter from the
petitioners, ‘‘Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate
Resin from Taiwan—Petitioners’ Foreign Market
Research Report,’’ September 27, 2017.
28 See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also
Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD Initiation
Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
29 Id.
30 See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also
Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist.
31 See Korea AD Initiation Checklist; see also
Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist; and Taiwan AD
Initiation Checklist.
32 In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade
Preferences Extension Act of 2015, amending
section 773(b)(2) of the Act, in all investigations,
the Department will request information necessary
to calculate the CV and COP to determine whether
there are reasonable grounds to believe or suspect
that sales of the foreign like product have been
made at prices that represent less than the COP of
the product. The Department no longer requires a
COP allegation to conduct this analysis.
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
48980
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices
Fair Value Comparisons
Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the
Act, COP consists of the cost of
manufacturing (COM), selling, general,
and administrative (SG&A) expenses,
financial expenses, and packing
expenses. For Brazil, Indonesia, Korea,
Pakistan, and Taiwan, the petitioners
calculated the COM based on the input
factors of production and usage rates
from U.S. producers of PET resin.33 For
Brazil, Indonesia, Korea and Taiwan,
the input factors of production were
valued using publicly available data on
costs specific to Brazil, Indonesia, Korea
and Taiwan.34 Specifically, the prices
for raw material and packing inputs
were based on Brazilian, Indonesian,
Korean and Taiwanese publicly
available import/export data.35 For
Pakistan, because publicly-available
information concerning the cost of
certain raw materials, nitrogen, and
packing inputs in Pakistan was not
reasonably available to the petitioners,
the petitioners based their raw material
and packing input cost calculations on
their own experiences.36 For all five
countries, labor and energy costs were
valued using publicly available sources
from those countries.37 The petitioners
calculated factory overhead, SG&A, and
financial expenses based on the
experience of Brazilian, Indonesian,
Korean, Pakistani, and Taiwanese
producers of comparable
merchandise.38
For all five countries, because certain
home market prices fell below the COP,
pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b),
and 773(e) of the Act, as noted above,
the petitioners calculated NVs based on
CV.39 Pursuant to section 773(e) of the
Act, CV consists of the COM, SG&A
expenses, financial expenses, packing
expenses, and profit. The petitioners
calculated CV using the same average
COM, SG&A expenses, financial
expenses, and packing expenses that
were used to calculate the COP.40 The
petitioners relied on the financial
statements of the same producers that
they used for calculating factory
overhead, SG&A expenses, and financial
expenses to calculate the profit rates.41
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Normal Value Based on CV
Based on the data provided by the
petitioners, there is reason to believe
that imports of PET resin from Brazil,
Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value.
Based on comparisons of EP to NV,
pursuant to sections 772 and 773 of the
Act, the estimated dumping margins for
PET resin from each of the countries
included in the Petitions and covered by
this initiation notice are: (1) 18.76
percent to 115.87 percent for Brazil,42
(2) 8.49 percent to 53.50 percent for
Indonesia,43 (3) 55.74 percent and
101.41 percent for Korea,44 (4) 25.03
percent and 43.40 percent for
Pakistan,45 and (5) 14.67 percent and
45.00 percent for Taiwan.46
33 See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also
Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD Initiation
Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
34 Id.
35 Id.
36 Id.
37 Id.
38 Id.
39 Id.
40 Id.
41 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:08 Oct 20, 2017
Jkt 244001
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value
Investigations
Based upon the examination of the
Petitions, we find that the Petitions
meet the requirements of section 732 of
the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD
investigations to determine whether or
not imports of PET resin from Brazil,
Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan
are being, or are 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 make our
preliminary determinations no later
than 140 days after the date of this
initiation.
Numerous amendments to the AD and
countervailing duty (CVD) laws were
made under the Trade Preferences
Extension Act of 2015.47 The 2015 law
does not specify dates of application for
those amendments. On August 6, 2015,
the Department published an
interpretative rule, in which it
announced the applicability dates for
each amendment to the Act, except for
amendments contained in section 771(7)
of the Act, which relate to
determinations of material injury by the
ITC.48 The amendments to sections
771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are
applicable to all determinations made
on or after August 6, 2015, and,
42 See
Brazil AD Initiation Checklist.
Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist.
44 See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
45 See Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist.
46 See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
47 See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015,
Public Law 114–27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
48 See Dates of Application of Amendments to the
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws Made
by the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, 80
FR 46793 (August 6, 2015).
43 See
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
therefore, apply to these AD
investigations.49
Respondent Selection
The petitioners named five companies
in Brazil, seven companies in Indonesia,
16 companies in Korea, two companies
in Pakistan, and eight companies in
Taiwan as producers and/or exporters of
PET resin.50 Following standard
practice in AD investigations involving
market economy countries, in the event
the Department determines that the
number of companies for any of the
countries identified above is large, the
Department intends to review U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
data for U.S. imports of PET resin
during the respective POIs under the
appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule
of the United States subheadings, and if
the Department determines that it
cannot individually examine each
company based upon the Department’s
resources, then it will select
respondents based on that CBP data. We
intend to release CBP data under
Administrative Protective Order (APO)
to all parties with access to information
protected by APO within five business
days of the announcement of the
initiation of these investigations.
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.
Interested parties may submit
comments regarding the CBP data and
respondent selection by 5:00 p.m. ET on
the seventh calendar day after
placement of the CBP data on the
records of these investigations.
Interested parties wishing to submit
rebuttal comments should submit those
comments five calendar days after the
deadline for initial comments.
With respect to Pakistan, although the
Department normally relies on import
data from CBP to determine whether to
select a limited number of producers/
exporters for individual examination in
AD investigations, the petitioners
identified only two companies as
producers/exporters of PET resin from
Pakistan: Novatex Limited and Pakistan
Synthetics Limited. The petitioners
relied on information from a
subscription database of import
shipments, additional research of
publicly-available sources, and the
petitioners’ foreign market research
report as support for their claim that
49 Id. at 46794–46795. The 2015 amendments may
be found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114thcongress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
50 See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit
GEN–4.
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices
there are only two producers/exporters
of PET resin in Pakstan.51 We currently
know of no additional producers/
exporters of PET resin from Pakistan.
Accordingly, the Department intends to
examine the producers/exporters
identified in the petition for the
investigation. Parties wishing to
comment on respondent selection must
do so within five days of the publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.
Comments must be electronically
filed via ACCESS. An electronically
filed document must be successfully
received, in its entirety, by ACCESS no
later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the relevant
date noted above. If respondent
selection is necessary, we intend to
make our decisions regarding
respondent selection, based on
comments received from interested
parties and our analysis of the record
information, within 20 days of
publication of this notice.
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section
732(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version
of the Petitions have been provided to
the governments of Brazil, Indonesia,
Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan via
ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we
will attempt to provide a copy of the
public version of the Petitions to each
exporter named in the Petitions, as
provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We will notify the ITC of our
initiation, as required by section 732(d)
of the Act.
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Preliminary Determinations by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine,
within 45 days after the date on which
the Petitions were filed, whether there
is a reasonable indication that imports
of PET resin from Brazil, Indonesia,
Korea, Pakistan, and/or Taiwan are
materially injuring or threatening
material injury to a U.S. industry. A
negative ITC determination for any
country will result in the investigation
being terminated with respect to that
country. Otherwise, these investigations
will proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
Submission of Factual Information
Factual information is defined in 19
CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence
submitted in response to questionnaires,
(ii) evidence submitted in support of
51 See
Volume I of the Petitions, at 13, and Exhibit
GEN–4, See also letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Re:
Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from
Pakistan—Petitioners’ Foreign Market Research
Report,’’ dated September 27, 2017.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:08 Oct 20, 2017
Jkt 244001
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). Section 351.301(b)
of the Department’s regulations requires
any party 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.52 Time limits for the
submission of factual information are
addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which
provides specific time limits based on
the type of factual information being
submitted. Interested parties should
review the regulations prior to
submitting factual information in these
investigations.
Extensions of Time Limits
Parties may request an extension of
time limits before the expiration of a
time limit established under 19 CFR
351.301 or as otherwise specified by the
Secretary. In general, an extension
request will be considered untimely if it
is filed after the expiration of the time
limit established under 19 CFR 351.301.
For submissions that are due from
multiple parties simultaneously, an
extension request will be considered
untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET
on the due date. Under certain
circumstances, we may elect to specify
a different time limit by which
extension requests will be considered
untimely for such submissions and, in
such a case, will inform parties in the
letter or memorandum setting forth the
deadline (i.e., include a time by which
extension requests must be filed to be
considered timely). An extension
request must be made in a separate,
stand-alone submission. We will grant
untimely filed requests for the extension
of time limits only under limited
circumstances. Parties should review
Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78
FR 57790 (September 20, 2013),
available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/201322853.htm, prior to submitting factual
information in these investigations.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual
information in an AD or CVD
52 See
PO 00000
19 CFR 351.301(b).
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48981
proceeding must certify to the accuracy
and completeness of that information.53
Parties are hereby reminded that revised
certification requirements are in effect
for company and government officials,
as well as their representatives.
Investigations initiated on the basis of
petitions filed on or after August 16,
2013, and other segments of any AD or
CVD proceedings initiated on or after
August 16, 2013, should use the formats
for the revised certifications provided at
the end of the Final Rule.54 The
Department will reject factual
submissions if the submitting party does
not comply with applicable revised
certification requirements.
Notification to Interested Parties
As noted above, 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 these investigations should ensure
that they meet the requirements of these
procedures (e.g., filing of letters of
appearance, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.103(d)).
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i)
of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: October 16, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations
performing the non-exclusive functions and
duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix—Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise covered by these
investigations is polyethylene terephthalate
(PET) resin having an intrinsic viscosity of at
least 70, but not more than 88, milliliters per
gram (0.70 to 0.88 deciliters per gram). The
scope includes blends of virgin PET resin
and recycled PET resin containing 50 percent
or more virgin PET resin content by weight,
provided such blends meet the intrinsic
viscosity requirements above. The scope
includes all PET resin meeting the above
specifications regardless of additives
introduced in the manufacturing process.
The merchandise subject to these
investigations is properly classified under
subheadings 3907.61.0000 and 3907.69.0000
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS
53 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); see also frequently asked
questions regarding the Final Rule, available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_
info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
54 See
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
48982
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices
subheadings are provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written
description of the merchandise covered by
these investigations is dispositive.
towers from the PRC.3 On May 31, 2017,
the petitioner timely withdrew its
request for an administrative review of
all 56 companies for which it had
requested a review.4
[FR Doc. 2017–22931 Filed 10–20–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Rescission of Review
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–981]
Utility Scale Wind Towers From the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2016–2017
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is rescinding its
administrative review of utility scale
wind towers (wind towers) from the
People’s Republic of China (PRC) for the
period or review (POR) February 1,
2016, through January 31, 2017, based
on the withdrawal of request for review.
DATES: Applicable October 23, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Trisha Tran, AD/CVD Operations, Office
IV, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4852.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
On February 8, 2017, the Department
published the notice of opportunity to
request an administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on wind towers
from the PRC for the above POR.1 On
February 28, 2017, in accordance with
section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR
351.213(b), the Department received a
timely request from the Wind Tower
Coalition (the petitioner) to conduct an
administrative review of this
antidumping duty order.2
Pursuant to this request, and in
accordance with 19 CFR
351.225(c)(1)(i), on April 10, 2017, the
Department published a notice of
initiation of an administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on wind
1 See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty, Order,
Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
to Request Administrative Review, 82 FR 9709
(February 8, 2017).
2 See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Utility Scale
Wind Towers from the People’s Republic of China:
Request for Administrative Review,’’ dated
February 28, 2017.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:08 Oct 20, 2017
Jkt 244001
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the
Department will rescind an
administrative review, in whole or in
part, if the party that requested a review
withdraws the request within 90 days of
the publication date of the notice of
initiation of the requested review. As
noted above, the petitioner withdrew its
request for review within 90 days of the
publication date of the Initiation Notice.
No other parties requested an
administrative review of the order.
Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding this
review on wind towers from the PRC in
its entirety.
Assessment
The Department will instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
assess antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries of wind towers from
the PRC. Antidumping duties shall be
assessed at rates equal to the cash
deposit of estimated antidumping duties
required at the time of entry, or
withdrawal from warehouse, for
consumption in accordance with 19
CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department
intends to issue appropriate assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after the
date of publication of this notice of
rescission of administrative review in
the Federal Register.
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers for whom this
review is being rescinded of their
responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this
review period. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
Secretary’s presumption that
reimbursement of the antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
3 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR
17188 (April 10, 2017).
4 See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Utility Scale
Wind Towers from the People’s Republic of China:
Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review,’’
dated May 31, 2017.
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: October 17, 2017.
James Maeder,
Senior Director performing the duties of
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2017–22932 Filed 10–20–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[Docket No.: 170413395–7395–02]
RIN 0625–XCO3
2017 Fee Schedule for National Travel
and Tourism Office for the Advance
Passenger Information System (APIS)/
I–92 Program, I–94 International
Arrivals Program, and Survey of
International Air Travelers Program
International Trade
Administration, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Final notice of implementation
of user fees.
AGENCY:
Notification to Importers
PO 00000
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective orders (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues
to govern business proprietary
information in this segment of the
proceeding. Timely written notification
of the return/destruction of APO
materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the regulations
and terms of an APO is a violation
which is subject to sanction.
This notice is published in
accordance with section 777(i)(1) of the
Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).
The International Trade
Administration (ITA) solicited public
feedback on its proposal to adjust the
National Travel & Tourism Office
(NTTO) 2017 I–94/APIS & SIAT data
user fees for three programs after
considering an independent cost study
which concluded that ITA is not fully
covering its costs for providing services
under the current fee structure. Federal
agencies are directed by Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
Circular A–25 to ensure they recoup
their costs when providing certain
services. The NTTO provides key
market intelligence to the government
and travel industry to help U.S.
businesses expand travel exports. ITA,
through the NTTO, will continue to
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 203 (Monday, October 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48977-48982]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22931]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-351-852, A-560-832, A-580-896, A-535-905, A-583-862]
Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin From Brazil, Indonesia, the
Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-
Value Investigations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable October 16, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gene Calvert at (202) 482-3586
(Indonesia, Korea, and Pakistan) or Jun Jack Zhao at (202) 482-1396
(Brazil and Taiwan), Office VII, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce,
1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On September 26, 2017, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) resin from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea,
Pakistan, and Taiwan, filed in proper form on behalf of DAK Americas
LLC, Indorama Ventures USA, Inc. (Indorama), M&G Polymers USA, LLC, and
Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, America (collectively, the
petitioners).\1\ The petitioners are domestic producers of PET
resin.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Letter from the petitioners, ``Polyester (sic)
Terephthalate (``PET'') Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic
of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan--Petition for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties,'' September 26, 2017 (the Petitions). Indorama
is not a petitioner with respect to the Indonesia petition. See
Volume I of the Petitions, at 1.
\2\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 29, 2017, the Department requested supplemental
information pertaining to certain areas of the Petitions.\3\ The
petitioners filed responses to these requests on October 3, 2017.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Letter from the Department, ``Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Polyethylene
Terephthalate Resin from Brazil: Supplemental Questions,'' September
29, 2017; see also Letter from the Department, ``Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Polyethylene
Terephthalate Resin from Indonesia: Supplemental Questions,''
September 29, 2017; Letter from the Department, ``Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Polyethylene
Terephthalate Resin from the Republic of Korea: Supplemental
Questions,'' September 29, 2017; Letter from the Department,
``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Pakistan: Supplemental
Questions,'' September 29, 2017; Letter from the Department,
``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Taiwan: Supplemental
Questions,'' September 29, 2017; and Letter from the Department,
``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, the
Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan,'' September 29, 2017.
\4\ See Letter from the petitioners, ``Polyethylene
Terephthalate (``PET'') Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic
of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan--Petitioners' Amendment to Volume I
Relating to General Issues,'' October 3, 2017 (General Issues
Supplement); see also Letter from the petitioners, ``Polyethylene
Terephthalate (``PET'') Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic
of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan--Petitioners' Amendment to Volume II
Relating to Brazil Antidumping Duties,'' October 3, 2017; Letter
from the petitioners, ``Polyethylene Terephthalate (``PET'') Resin
from Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and
Taiwan--Petitioners' Amendment to Volume III Relating to Indonesia
Antidumping Duties,'' October 3, 2017; Letter from the petitioners,
``Polyethylene Terephthalate (``PET'') Resin from Brazil, Indonesia,
the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan--Petitioners' Amendment
to Volume IV Relating to the Republic of Korea Antidumping Duties,''
October 3, 2017; Letter from the petitioners, ``Polyethylene
Terephthalate (``PET'') Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic
of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan--Petitioners' Amendment to Volume V
Relating to Pakistan Antidumping Duties,'' October 3, 2017; Letter
from the petitioners, ``Polyethylene Terephthalate (``PET'') Resin
from Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and
Taiwan--Petitioners' Amendment to Volume VI Relating to Taiwan
Antidumping Duties,'' October 3, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of PET resin
from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan 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, the domestic
industry producing PET resin in the United States. Consistent with
section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by
information reasonably available to the petitioners to support their
allegations.
The Department finds that the petitioners filed these Petitions on
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested
parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also
finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support
with respect to initiation of the AD investigations that the
petitioners are requesting.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the
Petitions'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigations
Because the Petitions were filed on September 26, 2017, the period
of investigation (POI) for all investigations is July 1, 2016, through
June 30, 2017, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these investigations is PET resin from
Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan. For a full description
of the scope of these investigations, see the ``Scope of the
Investigations'' in the Appendix to this notice.
Comments on Scope of the Investigations
As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,\6\ we
are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues
regarding product coverage (i.e., scope). The Department will consider
all comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will
consult with interested parties regarding scope prior to the issuance
of the preliminary determinations. All factual information included in
scope comments should be limited to public information.\7\ To
facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, the Department requests
that interested parties submit all such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern
Time (ET) on November 6, 2017, which is the first business day 20
calendar days from the signature date of this notice.\8\ Any rebuttal
comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00
p.m. ET on November 16, 2017, which is 10 calendar days from the
initial comment deadline.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
\7\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual
information'').
\8\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
\9\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department requests that any factual information the parties
consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted
during this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that
additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the
investigations may be relevant, the party may contact the Department
and request permission to submit the additional information. All such
comments must be filed on the record of each concurrent AD
investigation.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department must be electronically filed
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing
[[Page 48978]]
Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\10\ An
electronically filed document must be received successfully in its
entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents exempted from the
electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in
paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room
18022, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by
the applicable deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ For details of the Department's electronic filing
requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011, see
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing
Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263
(July 6, 2011), and Enforcement and Compliance; Change of Electronic
Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014). Additional
information on using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx, and a handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on Product Characteristics
The Department will provide interested parties an opportunity to
comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of PET resin to be
reported in response to the Department's questionnaires. This
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics
of the merchandise under consideration in order to accurately report
the relevant costs of production, as well as 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, parties may provide comments
regarding 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,
although there may be some physical product characteristics utilized by
manufacturers to describe PET resin, it may be that only a select few
product characteristics take commercially meaningful physical
characteristics into account. Interested parties may also 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.
For the Department to consider the suggestions of interested
parties in developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product
characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on November 6,
2017. Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on November
16, 2017. As explained above, all comments and submissions to the
Department must be electronically filed, via ACCESS, on the records of
the concurrent Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan
investigations.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
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 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 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,\11\ 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.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\12\ 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 a
petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope
of the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information
submitted on the record, we have determined that PET resin, as defined
in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have
analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support,
see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist:
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Brazil (Brazil AD
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, ``Analysis of Industry
Support for the Antidumping Duty Petitions Covering Polyethylene
Terephthalate Resin (PET Resin) from Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic
of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan'' (Attachment II); see also
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Polyethylene
Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Indonesia'' (Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II; see also Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET)
Resin from the Republic of Korea (Korea AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II; see also Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Pakistan
(Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; see also
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Polyethylene
Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Taiwan (Taiwan AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are dated
concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS.
Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the
Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce
building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the Appendix to
this notice. The petitioners provided their 2016 production of the
domestic like product, and compared this to the estimated total
production of
[[Page 48979]]
the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.\14\ We
relied on data the petitioners provided for purposes of measuring
industry support.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit GEN-2; see also
General Issues Supplement, at Exhibit GEN-S2.
\15\ Id. For further discussion, see Brazil AD Initiation
Checklist, Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation
Checklist, Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, General Issues
Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department
indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the
Petitions.\16\ First, the Petitions established support from domestic
producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product and, as such, the Department is
not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry
support (e.g., polling).\17\ Second, the domestic producers (or
workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under
section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or
workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product.\18\ Finally, the
domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for
industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the
domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for
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 Petitions.\19\ Accordingly, the Department
determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic
industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist, Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, Pakistan AD Initiation
Checklist, and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\17\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also Brazil AD
Initiation Checklist, Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan
AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\18\ See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist, Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, Pakistan AD Initiation
Checklist, and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on
behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and that the petitioners have
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the AD
investigations that they are requesting the Department to initiate.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioners allege 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, the
petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 16-17 and Exhibit GEN-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price suppression
or depression; lost sales and revenues; declines in production,
capacity utilization, and U.S. shipments; and declines in financial
performance.\22\ 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.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Id., at 13-32 and Exhibits GEN-5 and GEN-7 through GEN-12.
\23\ See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III,
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and
Causation for the Antidumping Duty Petitions Covering Polyethylene
Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of
Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan (Attachment III); Indonesia AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; Korea AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment III; Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment III; and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment
III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less
than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to
initiate AD investigations of imports of PET resin from Brazil,
Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan. The sources of data for the
deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed
in greater detail in the country-specific initiation checklists.
Export Price
For all countries addressed in the Petitions, the petitioners based
the U.S. price on export price (EP), using (1) average unit values
(AUVs) of publicly available import data and (2) price quotes for PET
resin produced in, and exported from, the relevant countries and
offered for sale or actually sold in the United States.\24\ Where
applicable, the petitioners made adjustments to the U.S. price for
movement and other expenses, consistent with the terms of sale.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also Indonesia AD
Initiation Checklist; Korea AD Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD
Initiation Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
\25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value
For all countries addressed in the Petitions, the petitioners
provided home market price information obtained through market research
for PET resin produced, and offered for sale, in each country.\26\ For
all countries, the petitioners provided market researcher declarations
to support the price information.\27\ Where applicable, the petitioners
made deductions for movement expenses, consistent with the terms of
sale.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also Indonesia AD
Initiation Checklist; Korea AD Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD
Initiation Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
\27\ See Letter from the petitioners, ``Certain Polyethylene
Terephthalate Resin from Brazil--Petitioners' Foreign Market
Research Report,'' September 27, 2017; see also Letter from the
petitioners, ``Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from
Indonesia--Petitioners' Foreign Market Research Report,'' September
27, 2017; Letter from the petitioners, ``Certain Polyethylene
Terephthalate Resin from the Republic of Korea--Petitioners' Foreign
Market Research Report,'' September 27, 2017; Letter from the
petitioners, ``Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from
Pakistan--Petitioners' Foreign Market Research Report,'' September
27, 2017; Letter from the petitioners, ``Certain Polyethylene
Terephthalate Resin from Taiwan--Petitioners' Foreign Market
Research Report,'' September 27, 2017.
\28\ See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also Indonesia AD
Initiation Checklist; Korea AD Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD
Initiation Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For all countries included in the Petitions, the petitioners
provided information that sales of PET resin in each respective home
market were made at prices below the cost of production (COP).\29\ With
respect to Brazil and Indonesia, the petitioners calculated NV based on
home market prices as well as on constructed value (CV).\30\ With
respect to Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan, the petitioners calculated NV
based only on CV.\31\ For further discussion of COP and NV based on CV,
see the ``Normal Value Based on CV'' section of this notice.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Id.
\30\ See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also Indonesia AD
Initiation Checklist.
\31\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist; see also Pakistan AD
Initiation Checklist; and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
\32\ In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade Preferences
Extension Act of 2015, amending section 773(b)(2) of the Act, in all
investigations, the Department will request information necessary to
calculate the CV and COP to determine whether there are reasonable
grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product
have been made at prices that represent less than the COP of the
product. The Department no longer requires a COP allegation to
conduct this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48980]]
Normal Value Based on CV
Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost
of manufacturing (COM), selling, general, and administrative (SG&A)
expenses, financial expenses, and packing expenses. For Brazil,
Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan, the petitioners calculated the
COM based on the input factors of production and usage rates from U.S.
producers of PET resin.\33\ For Brazil, Indonesia, Korea and Taiwan,
the input factors of production were valued using publicly available
data on costs specific to Brazil, Indonesia, Korea and Taiwan.\34\
Specifically, the prices for raw material and packing inputs were based
on Brazilian, Indonesian, Korean and Taiwanese publicly available
import/export data.\35\ For Pakistan, because publicly-available
information concerning the cost of certain raw materials, nitrogen, and
packing inputs in Pakistan was not reasonably available to the
petitioners, the petitioners based their raw material and packing input
cost calculations on their own experiences.\36\ For all five countries,
labor and energy costs were valued using publicly available sources
from those countries.\37\ The petitioners calculated factory overhead,
SG&A, and financial expenses based on the experience of Brazilian,
Indonesian, Korean, Pakistani, and Taiwanese producers of comparable
merchandise.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also Indonesia AD
Initiation Checklist; Korea AD Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD
Initiation Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
\34\ Id.
\35\ Id.
\36\ Id.
\37\ Id.
\38\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For all five countries, because certain home market prices fell
below the COP, pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b), and 773(e) of
the Act, as noted above, the petitioners calculated NVs based on
CV.\39\ Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the COM,
SG&A expenses, financial expenses, packing expenses, and profit. The
petitioners calculated CV using the same average COM, SG&A expenses,
financial expenses, and packing expenses that were used to calculate
the COP.\40\ The petitioners relied on the financial statements of the
same producers that they used for calculating factory overhead, SG&A
expenses, and financial expenses to calculate the profit rates.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Id.
\40\ Id.
\41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to
believe that imports of PET resin from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea,
Pakistan, and Taiwan are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United
States at less than fair value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV,
pursuant to sections 772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping
margins for PET resin from each of the countries included in the
Petitions and covered by this initiation notice are: (1) 18.76 percent
to 115.87 percent for Brazil,\42\ (2) 8.49 percent to 53.50 percent for
Indonesia,\43\ (3) 55.74 percent and 101.41 percent for Korea,\44\ (4)
25.03 percent and 43.40 percent for Pakistan,\45\ and (5) 14.67 percent
and 45.00 percent for Taiwan.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist.
\43\ See Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist.
\44\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\45\ See Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist.
\46\ See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations
Based upon the examination of the Petitions, we find that the
Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore,
we are initiating AD investigations to determine whether or not imports
of PET resin from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan are
being, or are 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 make our preliminary
determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this
initiation.
Numerous amendments to the AD and countervailing duty (CVD) laws
were made under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015.\47\ The
2015 law does not specify dates of application for those amendments. On
August 6, 2015, the Department published an interpretative rule, in
which it announced the applicability dates for each amendment to the
Act, except for amendments contained in section 771(7) of the Act,
which relate to determinations of material injury by the ITC.\48\ The
amendments to sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are
applicable to all determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, and,
therefore, apply to these AD investigations.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
\48\ See Dates of Application of Amendments to the Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Laws Made by the Trade Preferences Extension
Act of 2015, 80 FR 46793 (August 6, 2015).
\49\ Id. at 46794-46795. The 2015 amendments may be found at
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Respondent Selection
The petitioners named five companies in Brazil, seven companies in
Indonesia, 16 companies in Korea, two companies in Pakistan, and eight
companies in Taiwan as producers and/or exporters of PET resin.\50\
Following standard practice in AD investigations involving market
economy countries, in the event the Department determines that the
number of companies for any of the countries identified above is large,
the Department intends to review U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) data for U.S. imports of PET resin during the respective POIs
under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
subheadings, and if the Department determines that it cannot
individually examine each company based upon the Department's
resources, then it will select respondents based on that CBP data. We
intend to release CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO)
to all parties with access to information protected by APO within five
business days of the announcement of the initiation of these
investigations. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit GEN-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties may submit comments regarding the CBP data and
respondent selection by 5:00 p.m. ET on the seventh calendar day after
placement of the CBP data on the records of these investigations.
Interested parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments should submit
those comments five calendar days after the deadline for initial
comments.
With respect to Pakistan, although the Department normally relies
on import data from CBP to determine whether to select a limited number
of producers/exporters for individual examination in AD investigations,
the petitioners identified only two companies as producers/exporters of
PET resin from Pakistan: Novatex Limited and Pakistan Synthetics
Limited. The petitioners relied on information from a subscription
database of import shipments, additional research of publicly-available
sources, and the petitioners' foreign market research report as support
for their claim that
[[Page 48981]]
there are only two producers/exporters of PET resin in Pakstan.\51\ We
currently know of no additional producers/exporters of PET resin from
Pakistan. Accordingly, the Department intends to examine the producers/
exporters identified in the petition for the investigation. Parties
wishing to comment on respondent selection must do so within five days
of the publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 13, and Exhibit GEN-4,
See also letter from the petitioners, ``Re: Certain Polyethylene
Terephthalate Resin from Pakistan--Petitioners' Foreign Market
Research Report,'' dated September 27, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments must be electronically filed via ACCESS. An electronically
filed document must be successfully received, in its entirety, by
ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the relevant date noted above. If
respondent selection is necessary, we intend to make our decisions
regarding respondent selection, based on comments received from
interested parties and our analysis of the record information, within
20 days of publication of this notice.
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been
provided to the governments of Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and
Taiwan via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to
provide a copy of the public version of the Petitions to each exporter
named in the Petitions, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determinations by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable
indication that imports of PET resin from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea,
Pakistan, and/or Taiwan are materially injuring or threatening material
injury to a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination for any country
will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that
country. Otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to
statutory and regulatory time limits.
Submission of Factual Information
Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (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). Section 351.301(b) of the
Department's regulations requires any party 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.\52\ Time limits for the submission of factual information are
addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based
on the type of factual information being submitted. Interested parties
should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information
in these investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extensions of Time Limits
Parties may request an extension of time limits before the
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301 or as
otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request
will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the
time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are
due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be
considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date.
Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time
limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for such
submissions and, in such a case, will inform parties in the letter or
memorandum setting forth the deadline (i.e., include a time by which
extension requests must be filed to be considered timely). An extension
request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission. We will
grant untimely filed requests for the extension of time limits only
under limited circumstances. Parties should review Extension of Time
Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior
to submitting factual information in these investigations.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\53\
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are
in effect for company and government officials, as well as their
representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of petitions
filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD
proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the
formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final
Rule.\54\ The Department will reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\54\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import
Administration during Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
As noted above, 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 these
investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements of these
procedures (e.g., filing of letters of appearance, in accordance with
19 CFR 351.103(d)).
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2)
and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: October 16, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix--Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise covered by these investigations is polyethylene
terephthalate (PET) resin having an intrinsic viscosity of at least
70, but not more than 88, milliliters per gram (0.70 to 0.88
deciliters per gram). The scope includes blends of virgin PET resin
and recycled PET resin containing 50 percent or more virgin PET
resin content by weight, provided such blends meet the intrinsic
viscosity requirements above. The scope includes all PET resin
meeting the above specifications regardless of additives introduced
in the manufacturing process.
The merchandise subject to these investigations is properly
classified under subheadings 3907.61.0000 and 3907.69.0000 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although
the HTSUS
[[Page 48982]]
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the merchandise covered by these
investigations is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2017-22931 Filed 10-20-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
