[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 30, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24737-24740]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11710]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-875]


Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber From India: Final Affirmative 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that fine 
denier polyester staple fiber (fine denier PSF) from India is being, or 
is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value 
(LTFV). The period of investigation (POI) is April 1, 2016, through 
March 31, 2017.

DATES: Applicable May 30, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick O'Connor, 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) 482-0989.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On January 5, 2018, Commerce published the Preliminary 
Determination of this antidumping duty investigation, as provided by 
section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Commerce 
preliminarily found that fine denier PSF from India was sold at 
LTFV.\1\ A summary of the events that have occurred since Commerce 
published the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion 
of the issues raised by interested parties for this final 
determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\2\ 
The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file 
electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). 
ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, 
and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main 
Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the 
Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from India: 
Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value, Postponement of Final Determination, and Extension of 
Provisional Measures 83 FR 662 (January 5, 2018), and accompanying 
Preliminary Decision Memorandum (collectively, Preliminary 
Determination).
    \2\ See Memorandum, ``Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from 
India: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Affirmative 
Determination in the Less Than Fair Value,'' dated concurrently 
with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decision 
Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce has exercised its discretion to toll deadlines for the 
duration of the closure of the Federal Government from January 20 
through 22, 2018. The revised deadline for the final determination in 
this investigation is now May 23, 2018.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Memorandum for The Record from Christian Marsh, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, performing the 
non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for 
Enforcement and Compliance, ``Deadlines Affected by the Shutdown of 
the Federal Government'' (Tolling Memorandum), dated January 23, 
2018. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been 
extended by three days.

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

[[Page 24738]]

Scope Comments

    We provided parties an opportunity to provide comments on all 
issues regarding product coverage (i.e., scope).\4\ Certain interested 
parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in 
the Preliminary Determination.\5\ For a summary of the product coverage 
comments and rebuttals submitted to the record of this investigation, 
and our accompanying discussion and analysis of the comments and 
rebuttals that were timely received, see the Final Scope Decision 
Memorandum.\6\ Based on parties' comments, we made no changes to the 
scope of the investigation, as it appeared in the Preliminary 
Determination.\7\ The product covered by this investigation is fine 
denier PSF from India. For a complete description of the scope of this 
investigation, see Appendix I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Memorandum, ``Due Dates for Case and Rebuttal Briefs 
Regarding the Scope,'' dated December 11, 2017
    \5\ See Preliminary Determination.
    \6\ See Memorandum, ``Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from 
the People's Republic of China, India, Republic of Korea, and 
Taiwan: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Final 
Determinations,'' dated January 16, 2018 (Final Scope Memorandum).
    \7\ While we made no changes to the scope based on parties' 
comments, we discovered that we inadvertently included the phrase 
``or pre-opened'' in the scope in the Preliminary Determination. 
This phrase was not included in the scope in the Initiation. See 
Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's Republic of 
China, India, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, and the Socialist 
Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value 
Investigations, 82 FR 29023 (Initiation). We have corrected this 
error by removing the phrase ``or pre-opened'' from the scope for 
this final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in January and March 
2018, we conducted a verification of the information reported by the 
mandatory respondent Reliance Industries Limited (RIL), for use in this 
final determination.\8\ We used standard verification procedures, 
including an examination of relevant accounting and production records 
and original source documents provided by the respondent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Memorandum, ``Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Fine 
Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from India: Verification of the Sales 
Questionnaire Responses of Reliance Industries Limited,'' dated 
March 13, 2018; and Memorandum, ``Verification of the Cost Response 
of Reliance Industries Limited in the Less-Than-Fair-Value 
Investigation of Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from India,'' 
dated March 27, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs that were 
submitted by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum. A list of these issues is attached to this 
notice as Appendix II.

Application of Adverse Facts Available (AFA)

    As in the Preliminary Determination, pursuant to sections 776(a) 
and (b) of the Act, we have continued to base Bombay Dyeing & 
Manufacturing Company Limited's (Bombay Dyeing) dumping margin upon the 
facts otherwise available, with an adverse inference, because the 
company did not respond to Commerce's questionnaire. In addition, based 
on our verification findings, our re-evaluation of the record evidence, 
and our analysis of the comments received, we are also basing RIL's 
dumping margin on facts available with an adverse inference pursuant to 
sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act. For further discussion, see the 
Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    As noted above, we are now basing RIL's dumping margin on facts 
available with an adverse inference. Moreover, we have revised the all-
others rate as explained below.

All-Others Rate

    Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that in the final 
determination Commerce shall determine an estimated all-others rate for 
all exporters and producers not individually examined. This rate 
``shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated 
weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and 
producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis 
margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the 
Act''. Pursuant to section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act, however, if ``the 
estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for all 
exporters and producers individually examined are zero, de minimis or 
determined based entirely on facts otherwise available,'' Commerce 
``may use any reasonable method to establish the estimated weighted-
average dumping margin for all-other producers and/or exporters.'' \9\ 
Furthermore, Congress, in the SAA, stated that when ``the dumping 
margins for all of the exporters and producers that are individually 
investigated are determined entirely on the basis of the facts 
available or are zero or de minimis . . . (t)he expected method in such 
cases will be to weight-average the zero and de minimis margins and 
margins determined pursuant to the facts available.'' \10\ For the 
final determination, Commerce has determined the estimated weighted-
average dumping margin for each of the individually examined 
respondents under section 776 of the Act. Consequently, pursuant to 
section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act, Commerce's normal practice under these 
circumstances has been to calculate the ``all-others'' rate as a simple 
average of the alleged dumping margins from the petition.\11\ In this 
case, however, we initiated using only one duming margin in the 
petition. Therefore, for the final determination, we have used this one 
dumping margin, which is 21.43 percent, as the ``All-Others'' rate.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See also Statement of Administrative Action (SAA), H.R. Doc. 
103-316, 103d Cong., 2d Session, vol 1 (1994) SAA at 873 (explaining 
that if all the rates are ``determined entirely on the basis of the 
facts available or are zero or de minimis,'' the ``expected method 
in such cases will be to weight-average'' the rates available. See 
also Albemarle Corp. & Subsidiaries v. United States, 821 F.3d 1345, 
1351-54 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (explaining and relying on the ``expected 
method,'' as directed by the SAA).
    \10\ See SAA accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H.R. 
Doc. No. 103-316 at 873 (1994), reprinted in 1994 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4040, 
4200.
    \11\ See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Sodium Nitrite from the Federal Republic of 
Germany, 73 FR 21909, 21912 (April 23, 2008), unchanged in Notice of 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sodium Nitrite 
from the Federal Republic of Germany, 73 FR 38986, 38987 (July 8, 
2008), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2; 
see also Steel Threaded Rod from Thailand: Preliminary Determination 
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Preliminary 
Determination of Critical Circumstances, 78 FR 79670, 79671 
(December 31, 2013), unchanged in Steel Threaded Rod from Thailand: 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative 
Final Determination of Critical Circumstances, 79 FR 14476, 14477 
(March 14, 2014). See also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Raw Flexible Magnets from Taiwan, 73 FR 39673, 
39674 (July 10, 2008).
    \12\ See Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Japan: 
Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 81 FR 
32721 (May 24, 2016); Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less 
than Fair Value: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Sweden, 70 FR 
28278 (May 17, 2005); and Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Ferrovanadium from the Republic of South 
Africa, 67 FR 71136 (November 29, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Determination

    Commerce determines that the following estimated weighted-average 
dumping margins exist:

[[Page 24739]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Estimated     Cash deposit
                                             weighted-    rate (adjusted
            Exporter/producer                 average       for subsidy
                                          dumping margin    offset(s))
                                             (percent)       (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reliance Industries Limited.............           21.43           14.48
Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Company              21.43           15.49
 Limited................................
All-Others..............................           21.43           14.67
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, Commerce will 
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to 
suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of fine denier PSF from 
India as described in Appendix I of this notice, which were entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after January 5, 2018, 
the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination of this 
investigation in the Federal Register.
    Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(d), 
Commerce will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the 
estimated weighted-average dumping margin or the estimated all-others 
rate, as follows: (1) The cash deposit rate for the respondents listed 
above will be equal to the respondent-specific estimated weighted-
average dumping margin determined in this final determination; (2) if 
the exporter is not a respondent identified above, but the producer is, 
then the cash deposit rate will be equal to the respondent-specific 
estimated weighted-average dumping margin established for that producer 
of the subject merchandise; and (3) the cash deposit rate for all other 
producers and/or exporters will be equal to the all-others estimated 
weighted-average dumping margin.
    Further, Commerce will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal 
to the estimated amount by which the normal value (NV) exceeds the U.S. 
price, as shown above, adjusted where appropriate for export subsidies 
found in the final determination of the companion countervailing duty 
investigation. Consistent with Commerce's practice, where the product 
under investigation is also subject to a concurrent countervailing duty 
investigation, Commerce instructs CBP to require a cash deposit equal 
to the amount by which the NV exceeds the U.S. price, less the amount 
of the countervailing duty determined to constitute any export 
subsidies.\13\ Because a countervailing duty order has been issued with 
respect to fine denier PSF from India and suspension of liquidation is 
occurring with respect to this order, Commerce will instruct CBP to 
require cash deposits adjusted by the amount of export subsidies, as 
appropriate. These adjustments are reflected in the final column of the 
rate chart, above.\14\ Therefore, so long as suspension of liquidation 
continues under this antidumping duty investigation, the cash deposit 
rates for this antidumping duty investigation will be the rates 
identified in the final column of the rate chart, above. These 
suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until 
further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See, e.g., Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Turkey: 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 80 FR 61362, 
61364 (October 13, 2015); Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value and Negative Critical Circumstances 
Determination: Bottom Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers from 
the Republic of Korea, 77 FR 17413, 17417 (March 26, 2012).
    \14\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Fine Denier 
Polyester Staple Fiber from India: Final Affirmative Determination, 
83 FR 3122 (January 23, 2018); see also Fine Denier Polyester Staple 
Fiber from the People's Republic of China and India: Amended Final 
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination for the People's 
Republic of China and Countervailing Duty Orders for the People's 
Republic of China and India, 83 FR 12149 (March 20, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    Normally, Commerce discloses to interested parties the calculations 
performed in connection with a final determination within five days of 
any public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within 
five days of the date of publication of the notice of final 
determination in the Federal Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.224(b). However, because Commerce applied AFA to the individually 
examined companies, RIL and Bombay Dyeing, in this investigation, in 
accordance with section 776 of the Act, and the applied AFA rate is 
based solely on the petition, there are no calculations to disclose.

International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, Commerce will notify 
the International Trade Commission (ITC) of its final affirmative 
determination. Because the final determination in this proceeding is 
affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2)(B) of the Act, the 
ITC will make its final determination as to whether the domestic 
industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with 
material injury, by reason of imports of fine denier PSF from India no 
later than 45 days after Commerce's final determination. If the ITC 
determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not 
exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted will 
be refunded or canceled. If the ITC determines that such injury does 
exist, Commerce will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to 
assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, antidumping duties on 
appropriate imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the 
suspension of liquidation.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to an 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of the 
return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial 
protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the 
regulations and the terms of an APO is a violation subject to sanction.
    This determination and this notice are issued and published 
pursuant to sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.201(c).

     Dated: May 23, 2018.
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 I--Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is fine denier 
polyester staple fiber (fine denier PSF), not carded or combed, 
measuring less than 3.3 decitex (3 denier) in diameter. The scope 
covers all fine denier PSF, whether coated or uncoated. The

[[Page 24740]]

following products are excluded from the scope:
    (1) PSF equal to or greater than 3.3 decitex (more than 3 
denier, inclusive) currently classifiable under Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings 5503.20.0045 and 
5503.20.0065.
    (2) Low-melt PSF defined as a bi-component polyester fiber 
having a polyester fiber component that melts at a lower temperature 
than the other polyester fiber component, which is currently 
classifiable under HTSUS subheading 5503.20.0015.
    Fine denier PSF is classifiable under the HTSUS subheading 
5503.20.0025. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
scope of this investigation is dispositive.

Appendix II--List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum

I. Summary
II. List of Issues
III. Background
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. Discussion of the Issues
    Comment 1: Whether Commerce Should Apply Total Adverse Facts 
Available
    Comment 2: Whether Commerce Should Apply Partial AFA to Certain 
Freight Expenses
    Comment 3: Whether Commerce Should Reduce RIL's Billing 
Adjustments
    Comment 4: Whether Commerce Should Reject RIL's Inland Freight 
to Warehouse
    Comment 5: Whether Commerce Should Reject RIL's Reported 
Warranty Expenses
    Comment 6: Whether Commerce Should Rely on RIL's Rebate and 
Commission Fields
    Comment 7: Whether Commerce Should Correct an Error in RIL's 
Margin Program
    Comment 8: Reliance Artificially Understated the Reported Costs 
by Reporting Chain Cost and Withholding the Cost Reconciliation in 
the Form and Manner Requested by Commerce
    Comment 9: Reliance understated the Reported General and 
Administrative (G&A) Expenses
    Comment 10: RIL Understated the Financial Expenses
VI. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2018-11710 Filed 5-29-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P