[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 206 (Thursday, October 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49587-49592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23307]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-879, A-570-066]


Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin From India and the People's 
Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

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

DATES: Applicable October 18, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Kennedy at (202) 482-7883 
(India), and Catherine Cartsos (the People's Republic of China (PRC)) 
at (202) 482-1757, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions

    On September 28, 2017, the U.S. Department of Commerce (the 
Department) received antidumping duty (AD) Petitions concerning imports 
of polytetrafluoroethylene resin (PTFE resin) from India and the PRC, 
filed in proper form on behalf of The Chemours Company FC LLC (the 
petitioner).\1\ The AD Petitions were accompanied by a countervailing 
duty (CVD) Petition concerning imports of PTFE resin from India. The 
petitioner is a domestic producer of PTFE resin.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce re: 
``Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from the People's Republic of 
China and India: Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions,'' 
dated September 28, 2017 (the Petitions).
    \2\ See the Petitions at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 2, 2017, and October 3, 2017, the Department requested 
supplemental information pertaining to certain areas of the 
Petitions.\3\ The petitioner filed responses to these requests on 
October 4, 2017, and October 5, 2017.\4\ In addition, the petitioner 
filed revised scope language on October 13, 2017.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Letter from the Department, ``Petitions for the 
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from India and the People's Republic 
of China: Supplemental Questions,'' dated October 2, 2017 (General 
Issues Questionnaire); see also Letter from the Department, 
``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 
Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from the People's Republic of China: 
Supplemental Questions,'' dated October 2, 2017 (PRC AD Supplemental 
Questionnaire); Letter from the Department, ``Petition for the 
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 
Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from India: Supplemental Questions,'' 
dated October 3, 2017 (India AD Supplemental Questionnaire).
    \4\ See Letter from the petitioner, ``Polytetrafluoroethylene 
(PTFE) Resin from the People's Republic of China and India: 
Responses to Supplemental Questions Regarding the Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Petitions'' (October 4, 2017) (General Issues 
and AD Supplement); see also Letter from the petitioner, 
``Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from the People's Republic of 
China and India: Additional Responses to Supplemental Questions 
Regarding the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions'' 
(October 5, 2017); Letter from the petitioner, 
``Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from India: Exhibit III-12'' 
(October 5, 2017).
    \5\ See Letter from the petitioner, ``Polytetrafluoroethylene 
(PTFE) Resin from the People's Republic of China and India: 
Amendment to the Suggested Scope of the Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Petitions'' (October 13, 2017). See also 
Memorandum to the File, dated October 11, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of PTFE resin 
from India and the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the 
United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 
of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or 
threatening material injury to, the domestic industry producing PTFE 
resin in the United States. Also, consistent with section 732(b)(1) of 
the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably 
available to the petitioner supporting its allegations.
    The Department finds that the petitioner is an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and that the petitioner filed 
these Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry and demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the AD 
investigations that the petitioner is requesting.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petitions'' section, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Periods of Investigation

    Because the Petitions were filed on September 28, 2017, the period 
of investigation (POI) for India is July 1, 2016, through June 30, 
2017. Because the PRC is a non-market economy (NME) country, the POI 
for the PRC is January 1, 2017, through June 30, 2017.

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is PTFE resin from 
India and the PRC. 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

    During our review of the Petitions, the petitioner submitted a 
revised proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the 
Petitions would be an accurate reflection of the products for which the 
domestic industry is seeking relief.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Letter from the petitioner, ``Polytetrafluoroethylene 
(PTFE) Resin from the People's Republic of China and India: 
Amendment to the Suggested Scope of the Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Petitions'' (October 13, 2017). See also 
Memorandum to the File, dated October 11, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations, we 
are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage (scope).\8\ The Department will consider all 
comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will 
consult with interested parties prior to the issuance of the 
preliminary determinations. If scope comments include factual 
information,\9\ all such factual information should be limited to 
public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, 
the Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments 
by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Tuesday, November 7, 2017, which is 
20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal 
comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 
p.m. ET on Friday, November 17, 2017, which is 10 calendar days from 
the initial comments deadline.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
    \10\ 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 records of each of the concurrent AD and 
CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing

[[Page 49588]]

Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\11\ 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, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 
the applicable deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order 
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and 
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046 
(November 20, 2014) for details of the Department's electronic 
filing requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. 
Information on help 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 for AD Questionnaires

    The Department will provide interested parties an opportunity to 
comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of PTFE resin to be 
reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaires. This 
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics 
of the merchandise under consideration in order to report the relevant 
costs of production accurately as well as to develop appropriate 
product-comparison criteria.
    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that 
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of 
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to 
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product 
characteristics and (2) product-comparison criteria. We note that it is 
not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-
comparison criteria. We base product-comparison criteria on meaningful 
commercial differences among products. In other words, although there 
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers 
to describe PTFE resin, it may be that only a select few product 
characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical 
characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the 
order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching 
products. Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important 
physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics 
last.
    In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in 
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product 
characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on November 7, 
2017. Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on November 
17, 2017. All comments and submissions to the Department must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the records of both 
the India and the PRC less-than-fair-value 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,\12\ 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.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \13\ 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, 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 PTFE 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.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from the People's Republic of 
China (PRC AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of 
Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Petitions Covering Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from the 
People's Republic of China and India (Attachment II); and 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from India (India AD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are dated 
concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, 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 petitioner has 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 Appendix I of 
this notice. The petitioner provided its own production of the domestic 
like product in 2016, as well as estimated 2016 production data of the 
domestic like product by the entire U.S. industry.\15\ To establish 
industry support, the petitioner compared its production to the total 
2016 production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic 
industry.\16\ We relied on the data the petitioner provided for

[[Page 49589]]

purposes of measuring industry support.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See the Petitions, at 2-4 and Exhibit I-2; see also General 
Issues and AD Supplement, at 3-4.
    \16\ See the Petitions, at Exhibit I-2; see also General Issues 
and AD Supplement, at 3-4.
    \17\ Id. For further discussion, see PRC AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II; and India AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions and other 
information readily available to the Department indicates that the 
petitioner has established industry support.\18\ 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).\19\ 
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.\20\ 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.\21\ 
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and 
India AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \19\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also PRC AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and India AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \20\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and 
India AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the AD investigations that 
it is requesting that the Department initiate.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the 
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened 
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject 
merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the 
petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility 
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See the Petitions, at 21 and Exhibit I-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by a significant volume of subject imports; an increase in 
the volume of subject imports relative to U.S. consumption and 
production; reduced market share; underselling and price suppression or 
depression; lost sales and revenues; a negative impact on the domestic 
industry's capacity, capacity utilization, and employment; and a 
negative impact on revenues and operating profits.\24\ 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.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id. at 24-34, Exhibit I-8, and Exhibits I-14, I-16, and I-
17.
    \25\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin (PTFE Resin) from India and 
the People's Republic of China (the PRC) (Attachment III); see also 
India 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 PTFE resin from India and the 
PRC. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to 
U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the country-
specific initiation checklists.

Export Price

    For the PRC, the petitioner based the U.S. price on export price 
(EP) using average unit values (AUVs) of publicly available import data 
and price quotes for sales of PTFE resin produced in, and exported 
from, the PRC and offered for sale in the United States.\26\ For India, 
the petitioner based U.S. price on EP using AUVs of publicly available 
import data.\27\ Where applicable, the petitioner made deductions from 
U.S. price for movement and other expenses, consistent with the terms 
of sale.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
    \27\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
    \28\ See India AD Initiation Checklist and PRC AD Initiation 
Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Constructed Export Price

    For India, because the petitioner had reason to believe that the 
prices/offers for sale were made through a U.S. affiliate, the 
petitioner also based the U.S. price on constructed export price (CEP) 
using price quotes for sales and prices of actual sales of PTFE resin 
produced in, and exported from, India and offered for sale in the 
United States.\29\ Where applicable, the petitioner made deductions 
from U.S. price for movement and other expenses, consistent with the 
terms of sale.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
    \30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    For India, the petitioner provided home market price information 
for PTFE resin produced and offered for sale in India that was obtained 
through market research.\31\ For India, the petitioner provided a 
declaration from a market researcher to support the price 
information.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Id.
    \32\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the PRC, the petitioner stated that the Department 
has found it to be a NME country in prior administrative proceedings in 
which they were involved.\33\ In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) 
of the Act, the presumption of NME status remains in effect until 
revoked by the Department. The presumption of NME status for the PRC 
has not been revoked by the Department and, therefore, remains in 
effect for purposes of the initiation of this investigation. 
Accordingly, NV in the PRC is appropriately based on factors of 
production (FOPs) valued in a surrogate market economy country, in 
accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.\34\ In the course of this 
investigation, all parties, and the public, will have the opportunity 
to provide relevant information related to the granting of separate 
rates to individual exporters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See the Petitions, at 38.
    \34\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner claims that Mexico is an appropriate surrogate 
country for the PRC because it is a market economy country that is at a 
level of economic development comparable to that of the PRC, it is a 
significant producer of comparable merchandise, and public information 
from Mexico is available to value all material input factors.\35\ Based 
on the information provided by the petitioner, we determine that it is 
appropriate to use Mexico as a surrogate country for initiation 
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See Petitions, at 39-42 and Exhibits I-1, II-2, II-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit comments 
regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR

[[Page 49590]]

351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly 
available information to value FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled 
date of the preliminary determination.

Factors of Production

    Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by the 
PRC producers/exporters is not available, the petitioner relied on its 
own production experience as an estimate of Chinese manufacturers' 
FOPs.\36\ The petitioner valued the estimated FOPs using surrogate 
values from Mexico and used the average POI exchange rate to convert 
the data to U.S. dollars.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See the Petitions, at 43 and Exhibit II-5.
    \37\ See the Petitions, at 43-46 and Exhibits II-6, II-7, II-8, 
II-9, II-10, II-11, II-12, II-13, and II-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to 
believe that imports of PTFE resin from India and the PRC are being, or 
are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. 
Based on comparisons of EP and CEP to NV for India and EP to NV for the 
PRC in accordance with sections 772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated 
dumping margins for PTFE resin for each of the countries covered by 
this initiation are as follows: (1) PRC--23.4 to 408.9 percent,\38\ and 
(2) India--15.8 to 128.1 percent.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
    \39\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the AD Petitions, we find that the 
Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, 
we are initiating AD investigations to determine whether imports of 
PTFE resin from India and the PRC 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 intend to make our preliminary determinations no later 
than 140 days after the date of this initiation.
    Under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, numerous 
amendments to the AD and CVD law were made.\40\ 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.\41\ 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.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, PubLIC LAW 
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
    \41\ 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).
    \42\ Id. at 46794-95. The 2015 amendments may be found at 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Respondent Selection

    The petitioner named seven companies in India as producers/
exporters of PTFE resin.\43\ For India, following standard practice in 
AD investigations involving market economy countries, in the event the 
Department determines that the number of producers/exporters involved 
in the investigation is large, the Department intends to review U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of PTFE resin 
during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States subheadings, and if it determines that it cannot 
individually examine each company based upon the Department's 
resources, then the Department will select respondents based on that 
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 this 
investigation. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See the Petitions, at Exhibit I-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties may submit comments regarding the CBP data and 
respondent selection by 5:00 p.m. ET seven calendar days after the 
placement of the CBP data on the record of this investigation. 
Interested parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments should submit 
those comments five calendar days after the deadline for initial 
comments.
    Comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An 
electronically-filed document must be received successfully, in its 
entirety, by ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the date noted above. 
If respondent selection is necessary, within 20 days of publication of 
this notice, we intend to make our decisions regarding respondent 
selection based upon comments received from interested parties and our 
analysis of the record information.
    With respect to the PRC, the petitioner named 49 companies in the 
PRC as producers/exporters of PTFE resin.\44\ In accordance with our 
standard practice for respondent selection in AD cases involving NME 
countries, we intend to issue quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires 
to producers/exporters of merchandise subject to this NME investigation 
and, in the event the Department determines that the number of 
producers/exporters involved in the investigation is large, base 
respondent selection on the responses received. For this NME 
investigation, the Department will request Q&V information from known 
exporters and producers identified, with complete contact information, 
in the Petitions. In addition, the Department will post the Q&V 
questionnaire along with filing instructions on Enforcement and 
Compliance's Web site at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See the Petitions at Exhibit I-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Producers/exporters of PTFE resin from the PRC that do not receive 
Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the Q&V 
questionnaire and can obtain a copy of the Q&V questionnaire from 
Enforcement & Compliance's Web site. The Q&V response must be submitted 
by the relevant PRC exporters/producers no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on 
November 2, 2017. All Q&V responses must be filed electronically via 
ACCESS.

Separate Rates

    In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation, 
exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate application.\45\ 
The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application in 
the PRC investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself, 
which is available on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separate-rate 
application will be due 30 days after publication of this initiation 
notice.\46\ Exporters and producers who submit a separate-rate 
application and have been selected as mandatory respondents will be 
eligible for consideration for separate-rate status only if they 
respond to all parts of the

[[Page 49591]]

Department's AD questionnaire as mandatory respondents. The Department 
requires that companies from the PRC submit a response to both the Q&V 
questionnaire and the separate-rate application by the respective 
deadlines in order to receive consideration for separate-rate status. 
Companies not filing a timely Q&V response will not receive separate-
rate consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and 
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation 
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin 
05.1).
    \46\ Although in past investigations this deadline was 60 days, 
consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(a), which states that ``the Secretary 
may request any person to submit factual information at any time 
during a proceeding,'' this deadline is now 30 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use of Combination Rates

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

{w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates 
only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now 
assign in its NME Investigation will be specific to those producers 
that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, 
however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the 
producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period 
of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory 
respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as 
well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-
average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is 
referred to as the application of ``combination rates'' because such 
rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more 
producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply 
only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question and 
produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of 
investigation.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 India and the PRC 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 PTFE resin from India and/or the PRC are 
materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. 
industry.\48\ A negative ITC determination for either country will 
result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that 
country.\49\ Otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \49\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of 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). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires 
any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which 
subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 
\50\ 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.\51\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \51\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 
submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such 
a case, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting 
forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension 
requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request 
must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited 
circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension 
of time limits. Parties should review Extension of Time Limits; Final 
Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://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.\52\ 
Parties must use the certifications formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\53\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if 
the submitting party does not comply with applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \53\ 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 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the 
Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 
22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations 
should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures 
(e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed in 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 18, 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 product covered by these investigations is 
polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin, including but not limited to 
granular, dispersion, or coagulated dispersion (also known as fine 
powder). PTFE is covered by the scope of these investigations 
whether filled or unfilled, whether or not modified, and whether or 
not containing co-polymer additives, pigments, or other materials. 
Also included is PTFE wet raw polymer. The chemical formula for PTFE

[[Page 49592]]

is C2F4, and the Chemical Abstracts Service Registry number is 9002-
84-0.
    PTFE further processed into micropowder, having particle size 
typically ranging from 1 to 25 microns, and a melt-flow rate no less 
than 0.1 gram/10 minutes, is excluded from the scope of these 
investigations.
    PTFE is classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 3904.61.0010 and 
3904.61.0090. Subject merchandise may also be classified under HTSUS 
subheading 3904.69.5000. Although the HTSUS subheadings and CAS 
Number are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the 
written description of the scope is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2017-23307 Filed 10-25-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P