[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 236 (Monday, December 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73839-73842]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29341]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-999]


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

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

DATES: Effective Date: December 9, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katie Marksberry, Office V, AD/CVD 
Operations, Enforcement & Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202.482.7906.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petition

    On October 22, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the 
``Department'') received a countervailing duty (``CVD'') petition 
concerning imports of 1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane (``tetrafluoroethane'') 
from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''), filed in proper form by 
Mexichem Fluor, Inc. (``Petitioner''), domestic producers of 
tetrafluoroethane. The CVD petition was accompanied by an antidumping 
duty (``AD'') petition concerning imports of tetrafluoroethane from the 
PRC.\1\ On October 25 and November 6, 2013, the Department requested 
additional information and clarification of certain areas of the 
Petition, and on October 29 and November 8, 2013, respectively, 
Petitioner filed a response to each request.\2\ Additionally, on 
November 7, 2013, Petitioner filed a response to the Department's 
November 6, 2013, request for additional information and clarification 
of the scope of the Petition.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties on 1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane from the People's 
Republic of China, dated October 22, 2013 (hereafter referred to as 
the ``Petition'').
    \2\ See Petitioner's October 29, 2013, filing titled, ``1,1,1,2-
Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China: Response to 
CVD Issues Deficiency Questionnaire,''; see also Petitioner's 
October 29, 2013, filing titled, ``1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from 
the People's Republic of China: Response to General Issues 
Supplemental Questionnaire'' (``General Issues Supplement''), and 
Petitioner's November 8, 2013, filing, titled ``1,1,1,2-
Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China: Response to 
Second Antidumping Supplemental Questionnaire''.
    \3\ See Petitioner's November 7, 2013, filing titled, ``1,1,1,2-
Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China: Response to 
Scope Questionnaire,''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the ``Act''), Petitioners allege that producers/exporters of 
tetrafluoroethane in the PRC received countervailable subsidies within 
the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, and that imports 
from these producers/exporters materially injure, or threaten material 
injury to, an industry in the United States.
    The Department finds that Petitioners filed this Petition on behalf 
of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined 
in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and Petitioners have demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that 
it is requesting the Department to initiate (see ``Determination of 
Industry Support for the Petition'' below).

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (``POI'') is January 1, 2012 through 
December 31, 2012, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is tetrafluoroethane from 
the PRC. For a full description of the scope of the investigation, 
please see the ``Scope of Investigation'' in the appendix to this 
notice.

Comments on the Scope of the Investigation

    During our review of the Petition, we solicited information from 
Petitioners to ensure that the proposed scope language is an accurate 
reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking 
relief. Moreover, as discussed in the preamble to the Department's 
regulations \4\, we are setting aside a period for interested parties 
to raise issues regarding product coverage. The Department encourages 
all interested parties to submit such comments by December 22, 2013, 
which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. All 
comments must be filed on the record of the CVD investigation, as well 
as the concurrent AD investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement & Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS''). An 
electronically filed document must be received successfully in its 
entirety by the Department's electronic records system, IA ACCESS, by 5 
p.m. on the due date. Documents excepted from the electronic submission 
requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the 
Enforcement & Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S. Department 
of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the deadline 
established by the Department.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1). Information on help using IA ACCESS 
can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook 
can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filing%20Procedures.pdf.

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

[[Page 73840]]

Consultations

    Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, on October 22, 
2013, we invited the Government of the PRC (``GOC'') for consultations 
regarding the CVD petition. On November 28, 2013, the GOC filed written 
comments with the Department with regard to the CVD petition.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Memorandum to The File, from Katie Marksberry, Case 
Analyst, Re: Countervailing Duty Petition on 1,1,1,2 
Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China: Comments from 
the Government of the People's Republic of China Regarding the 
Petition, dated December 2, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department 
shall: (i) poll the industry or rely on other information in order to 
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by 
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a 
statistically valid sampling method to poll the industry.
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The U.S. International Trade Commission 
(``ITC''), which is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic 
industry'' has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a 
domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the 
Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition 
regarding the domestic like product,\7\ they do so for different 
purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In 
addition, the Department's determination is subject to limitations of 
time and information. Although this may result in different definitions 
of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of 
either agency contrary to law.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \8\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
Petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioner does not offer 
a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of the 
investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on 
the record, we have determined that tetrafluoroethane, as defined in 
the scope of the investigation, constitutes a single domestic like 
product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic 
like product.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China 
(``Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry 
Support for the Petitions Covering 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from 
the People's Republic of China (``Attachment II''). This checklist 
is dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically 
via IA ACCESS. Access to documents filed via IA ACCESS is also 
available in the Central Records Unit (``CRU''), Room 7046 of the 
main Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 1, 2013, the Department extended the initiation 
deadline by 20 days to poll the domestic industry in accordance with 
section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act, because it was ``not clear from the 
Petitions whether the industry support criteria have been met. . . .'' 
\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Notice of Extension of the Deadline for Determining the 
Adequacy of the Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Petitions: 
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane From the People's Republic of China, 78 FR 
66894, 66895 (November 7, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 7, 2013, we issued polling questionnaires to all known 
producers of tetrafluoroethane identified in the Petition and by the 
ITC. We requested that each company complete the polling questionnaire 
and certify its response by the due date specified in the cover letter 
to the questionnaire.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For a detailed discussion of the responses received, see 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. The polling questionnaire 
and questionnaire responses are on file electronically via IA ACCESS 
and can also be accessed through the CRU.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our analysis of the data we received in the polling questionnaire 
responses indicates that the domestic producers of tetrafluoroethane 
who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product and more than 50 percent of the 
production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the 
industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petition.\12\ 
Accordingly, the Department determines that the industry support 
requirements of section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act have been met. 
Therefore, the Department determines that Petitioner filed this 
Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested 
party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has 
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the 
countervailing duty investigation that it is requesting the Department 
initiate.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because the PRC is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the 
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act 
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine 
whether imports of the subject merchandise from the PRC materially 
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    Petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are 
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are 
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry 
producing the domestic like product. Petitioner alleges that subject 
imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 
771(24)(A) of the Act.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See General Issues Supplement, at 5-6 and Exhibit 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price depression 
or suppression; lost sales and revenues; decline in U.S. sales; and 
decline in financial performance.\15\ We have assessed the allegations 
and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material 
injury, and causation, and we have determined that these allegations 
are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory 
requirements for initiation.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 4-13 and Exhibits I-5 and 
I-8 through I-10; see also General Issues Supplement, at 5-6 and 
Exhibits 4 and 5.
    \16\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of 
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 
Petitions Covering 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the People's 
Republic of China.

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

[[Page 73841]]

Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a 
CVD proceeding whenever an interested party files a CVD petition on 
behalf of an industry that: (1) alleges the elements necessary for an 
imposition of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act; and (2) is 
accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners 
supporting the allegations.
    The Department has examined the Petition on tetrafluoroethane from 
the PRC and finds that it complies with the requirements of section 
702(b)(1) of the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 702(b)(1) 
of the Act, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether 
producers/exporters of tetrafluoroethane in the PRC receive 
countervailable subsidies. For a discussion of evidence supporting our 
initiation determination, see the CVD Initiation Checklist which 
accompanies this notice.
    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of six alleged 
programs. For the other three programs alleged by Petitioners, we have 
determined that the requirements for initiation have not been met. For 
a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not 
initiate on each program, see the CVD Initiation Checklist.

Respondent Selection

    For this investigation, the Department intends to select 
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') data 
for U.S. imports during the POI (i.e., calendar year 2012) under the 
following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers: 
2903.39.2020. We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative 
Protective Order (``APO'') to all parties with access to information 
protected by APO within five days of the announcement of the initiation 
of this investigation. Interested parties may submit comments regarding 
the CBP data and respondent selection within seven calendar days of 
release of this data. We intend to make our decision regarding 
respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this Federal 
Register notice.

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such 
applications may be found on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo/index.html.

Distribution of Copies of the CVD Petition

    In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been 
provided to the representatives of the GOC. Because of the particularly 
large number of producers/exporters identified in the Petition, the 
Department considers the service of the public version of the petition 
to the foreign producers/exporters satisfied by the delivery of the 
public version to the GOC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
702(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of subsidized tetrafluoroethane from the PRC 
materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.\17\ 
A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being 
terminated.\18\ Otherwise, the investigation will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
    \18\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    On April 10, 2013, the Department published Definition of Factual 
Information and Time Limits for Submission of Factual Information: 
Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 2013), which modified two 
regulations related to AD and CVD proceedings: the definition of 
factual information (19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits for 
the submission of factual information (19 CFR 351.301). The final rule 
identifies five categories of factual information in 19 CFR 
351.102(b)(21), which are summarized as follows: (i) evidence submitted 
in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of 
allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors 
under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration 
under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by the 
Department; and (v) evidence other than factual information described 
in (i)-(iv). The final rule requires any party, when submitting factual 
information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) 
the information is being submitted and, if the information is submitted 
to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the 
record, to provide an explanation identifying the information already 
on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or 
correct. The final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301 so that, rather 
than providing general time limits, there are specific time limits 
based on the type of factual information being submitted. These 
modifications are effective for all proceeding segments initiated on or 
after May 10, 2013, and thus are applicable to this investigation. 
Please review the final rule, available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to 
submitting factual information in these investigations.

Revised Extension of Time Limits Regulation

    On September 20, 2013, the Department modified its regulation 
concerning the extension of time limits for submissions in AD and CVD 
proceedings.\19\ The modification clarifies that parties may request an 
extension of time limits before a time limit established under Part 351 
expires, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an 
extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the 
time limit established under Part 351 expires. For submissions which 
are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will 
be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. on the due date. 
Examples include, but are not limited to: (1) Case and rebuttal briefs, 
filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309; (2) factual information to value 
factors under section 19 CFR 351.408(c), or to measure the adequacy of 
remuneration under section 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2), filed pursuant to 19 
CFR 351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, clarification and correction filed 
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(iv); (3) comments concerning the 
selection of a surrogate country and surrogate values and rebuttal; (4) 
comments concerning CBP data; and (5) quantity and value 
questionnaires. Under certain circumstances, the Department may elect 
to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be 
considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties 
simultaneously. In such a case, the Department will inform parties in 
the

[[Page 73842]]

letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified 
time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered 
timely. This modification also requires that an extension request must 
be made in a separate, stand-alone submission, and clarifies the 
circumstances under which the Department will grant untimely-filed 
requests for the extension of time limits. These modifications are 
effective for all segments initiated on or after October 21, 2013. 
Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to 
submitting factual information in this segment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 
(September 20, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\20\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect for company/government officials as well as their 
representatives in all AD or CVD investigations or proceedings 
initiated on or after August 16, 2013, including this 
investigation.\21\ The formats for the revised certifications are 
provided at the end of the Final Rule. The Department intends to reject 
factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the 
revised certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \21\ See Certification of Factual Information To Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (``Final Rule'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.

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

Appendix

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigation

    The product subject to this investigation is 1,1,1,2-
Tetrafluoroethane, R-134a, or its chemical equivalent, regardless of 
form, type, or purity level. The chemical formula for 1,1,1,2-
tetrafluoroethane is CF3-CH2F, and the 
Chemical Abstracts Service (``CAS'') registry number is CAS 811-97-
2.
    1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane is sold under a number of trade names 
including Klea 134a and Zephex 134a (Mexichem Fluor); Genetron 134a 
(Honeywell); Suva 134a, Dymel 134a, and Dymel P134a (DuPont); 
Solkane 134a (Solvay); and Forane 134a (Arkema). Generically, 
1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane has been sold as Fluorocarbon 134a, R-
134a, HFC-134a, HF A-134a, Refrigerant 134a, and UN3159.
    Merchandise covered by the scope of this investigation is 
currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States (``HTSUS'') at subheading 2903.39.2020. Although the HTSUS 
subheading and CAS registry number are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes, the written description of the scope is 
dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2013-29341 Filed 12-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P