[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 78 (Tuesday, April 23, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16840-16843]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-08275]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-097 and C-570-098]


Polyester Textured Yarn From the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Affirmative Determinations of Critical Circumstances in the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines 
that critical circumstances exist with respect to all imports of 
polyester textured yarn (yarn) from the People's Republic of China 
(China).

DATES: Applicable April 23, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Ayache, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue

[[Page 16841]]

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-2623.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On October 18, 2018, Commerce received antidumping duty (AD) and 
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of yarn from 
China filed in proper form on behalf of Unifi Manufacturing, Inc. and 
Nan Ya Plastics Corp. America (the petitioners).\1\ On November 19, 
2018, we published the notices of initiation of the AD and CVD 
investigations.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the petitioners' letter, ``Polyester Textured Yarn from 
the People's Republic of China and India--Petition for the 
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,'' dated October 
18, 2018 (Petitions).
    \2\ See Polyester Textured Yarn from India and the People's 
Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value 
Investigations, 83 FR 58223 (November 19, 2018); see also Polyester 
Textured Yarn from India and the People's Republic of China: 
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations, 83 FR 58232 
(November 19, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the AD investigation, Commerce selected Fujian Billion 
Polymerization Fiber Technology Industrial Co., Ltd. (Fujian Billion), 
Fujian Zhengqi High Tech Fiber, and Suzhou Shenghong Fiber Co., Ltd. 
(Suzhou Shenghong) as the respondents for individual examination.\3\ In 
the CVD investigation, Commerce selected Fujian Billion, Jiangsu 
Shenghong Textile Imp & Exp Co., Suzhou Shenghong, and Suzhou Shenghong 
Garmant Development Co.\4\ On April 2, 2019, the petitioners alleged 
that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of yarn from 
China, pursuant to sections 703(e)(1) and 733(e)(1) of the Tariff Act 
of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.206.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Memorandum, ``Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of 
Polyester Textured Yarn from the People's Republic of China: 
Respondent Selection,'' dated December 11, 2018.
    \4\ See Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Investigation of 
Polyester Textured Yarn from the People's Republic of China: 
Respondent Selection,'' dated December 11, 2018.
    \5\ See the petitioners' letter, ``Polyester Textured Yarn from 
the People's Republic of China--Petitioners' Allegation of Critical 
Circumstances,'' dated April 2, 2018 (Critical Circumstances 
Allegation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.206(c)(2)(i), if the petitioner 
submits an allegation of critical circumstances more than 20 days 
before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination, Commerce 
must issue a preliminary finding whether there is a reasonable basis to 
believe or suspect that critical circumstances exist by no later than 
the date of the preliminary determination.\6\ In these AD and CVD 
investigations, the petitioners requested that Commerce issue 
preliminary critical circumstances determinations on an expedited 
basis.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The preliminary determination for the AD investigation is 
currently due no later than June 25, 2019, and the preliminary 
determination for the CVD investigation is currently due no later 
than April 26, 2019.
    \7\ See Critical Circumstances Allegation at 3-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 703(e)(1) of the Act provides that Commerce, upon receipt 
of a timely allegation of critical circumstances, will preliminarily 
determine that critical circumstances exist in CVD investigations if 
there is a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that: (A) ``the 
alleged countervailable subsidy'' is inconsistent with the Subsidies 
and Countervailing Measures (SCM) Agreement of the World Trade 
Organization; and (B) there have been massive imports of the subject 
merchandise over a relatively short period. Section 733(e)(1) of the 
Act provides that Commerce, upon receipt of a timely allegation of 
critical circumstances, will preliminarily determine that critical 
circumstances exist in AD investigations if there is a reasonable basis 
to believe or suspect that: (A)(i) There is a history of dumping and 
material injury by reason of dumped imports in the United States or 
elsewhere of the subject merchandise, or (ii) the person by whom, or 
for whose account, the merchandise was imported knew or should have 
known that the exporter was selling the subject merchandise at less 
than its fair value and that there was likely to be material injury by 
reason of such sales; and (B) there have been massive imports of the 
subject merchandise over a relatively short period.
    Sections 351.206(h)(2) and (i) of Commerce's regulations provide 
that imports must increase by at least 15 percent during the 
``relatively short period'' to be considered ``massive'' and defines a 
``relatively short period'' as normally being the period beginning on 
the date the proceeding begins (i.e., the date the petition is filed) 
and ending at least three months later. Commerce's regulations also 
provide, however, that if Commerce finds that importers, or exporters 
or producers, had reason to believe, at some time prior to the 
beginning of the proceeding, that a proceeding was likely, Commerce may 
consider a period of not less than three months from that earlier 
time.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 19 CFR 351.206(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Critical Circumstances Analysis

Alleged Countervailable Subsidies Are Inconsistent With the SCM 
Agreement

    To determine whether an alleged countervailable subsidy is 
inconsistent with the SCM Agreement, in accordance with section 
703(e)(1)(A) of the Act, Commerce considered the evidence currently on 
the record of the CVD investigation. Specifically, as reflected in the 
initiation checklist, the following subsidy programs, alleged in the 
Petitions and supported by information reasonably available to the 
petitioners, appear to be either export contingent or contingent upon 
the use of domestic goods over imported goods, which would render them 
inconsistent with the SCM Agreement: \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See CVD Initiation Checklist: Polyester Textured Yarn from 
the People's Republic of China, dated November 7, 2018.

 Export Loans from Chinese State-Owned Banks
 Export Seller's Credit
 Export Buyer's Credit
 Export Credit Guarantees
 GOC and Sub-Central Government Subsidies for the Development 
of Famous Brands and China World Top Brands
 SME International Market Exploration/Development Fund
 Export Assistance Grants
 VAT Refunds for FIEs Purchasing Domestically-Produced 
Equipment

    Therefore, Commerce preliminarily determines that there is a 
reasonable basis to believe or suspect that alleged subsidies in the 
CVD investigation are inconsistent with the SCM Agreement.

History of Dumping and Material Injury/Knowledge of Sales Below Fair 
Value and Material Injury

    To determine whether there is a history of dumping pursuant to 
section 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, Commerce generally considers 
current or previous AD orders on subject merchandise from the country 
in question in the United States and current orders imposed by other 
countries regarding imports of the same merchandise. However, in the 
Critical Circumstances Allegation, the petitioners did not provide 
information on the history of dumping.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Critical Circumstances Allegation at 5-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To determine whether importers knew or should have known that 
exporters were selling the subject merchandise at less than fair value 
pursuant to section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act, we typically consider 
the magnitude of dumping margins, including margins alleged in 
petitions.\11\

[[Page 16842]]

Commerce has found margins of 15 percent or more (for constructed 
export price) to 25 percent or more (for export price) to be sufficient 
for this purpose.\12\ The dumping margins of 74.98 percent and 77.15 
percent alleged in the AD Petition Supplement significantly exceed the 
15 to 25 percent threshold.\13\ Therefore, on that basis, we 
preliminarily conclude importers knew, or should have known, that 
exporters in China were selling at less than fair value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determinations of Critical 
Circumstances: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from 
Australia, the People's Republic of China, India, the Republic of 
Korea, the Netherlands, and the Russian Federation, 67 FR 19157, 
19158 (April 18, 2002) (unchanged in Notice of Final Determination 
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel 
Flat Products from Australia, 67 FR 47509 (July 19, 2002), Notice of 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-
Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from the People's Republic of 
China, 67 FR 62107 (October 3, 2002), Notice of Final Determination 
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel 
Flat Products from India, 67 FR 47518 (July 19, 2002), Notice of 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-
Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea, 67 FR 62124 (October 
3, 2002), Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value and Critical Circumstances: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel 
Flat Products from The Netherlands, 67 FR 62112 (October 3, 2002), 
Notice of the Final Determination Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Critical Circumstances: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 
Products from the Russian Federation, 67 FR 62121 (October 3, 
2002)).
    \12\ Id.
    \13\ See the petitioners' letter, ``Polyester Textured Yarn from 
the People's Republic of China--Petitioners' Supplement for Volume 
II Regarding China Antidumping Duties,'' dated October 29, 2018 (AD 
Petition Supplement), at 7 and Exhibit AD-PRC-Supp-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To determine whether importers knew, or should have known, that 
there was likely to be material injury caused by reason of such imports 
pursuant section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act, Commerce normally will 
look to the preliminary injury determination of the International Trade 
Commission (ITC).\14\ If the ITC finds a reasonable indication of 
material injury to the relevant U.S. industry, Commerce will determine 
that a reasonable basis exists to impute importer knowledge that 
material injury is likely by reason of such imports. In these 
investigations, the ITC found that there is a ``reasonable indication'' 
of material injury to the domestic industry because of the imported 
subject merchandise.\15\ Therefore, the ITC's preliminary injury 
determination in the AD investigation is sufficient to impute importer 
knowledge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See, e.g., Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Investigations of Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: 
Preliminary Determinations of Critical Circumstances, 82 FR 19219, 
19220 (April 26, 2017) (Softwood Lumber from Canada Preliminary 
Critical Circumstances Determination), unchanged in Certain Softwood 
Lumber Products from Canada: Final Affirmative Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final Determination of 
Critical Circumstances, 82 FR 51806, 51807-08 (November 8, 2017) 
(Softwood Lumber from Canada Final AD Determination).
    \15\ See Polyester Textured Yarn from China and India: 
Investigation Nos. 701-TA-612-613 and 731-1429-1430 (Preliminary), 
83 FR 63532 (December 10, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Massive Imports

    In determining whether there are ``massive imports'' over a 
``relatively short period,'' pursuant to sections 703(e)(1)(B) and 
733(e)(1)(B) of the Act, Commerce normally compares the import volumes 
of the subject merchandise for at least three months immediately 
preceding the filing of the petition (i.e., the ``base period'') to a 
comparable period of at least three months following the filing of the 
petition (i.e., the ``comparison period'').\16\ Imports will normally 
be considered massive when imports during the comparison period have 
increased by 15 percent or more compared to imports during the base 
period.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Softwood Lumber from Canada Preliminary Critical 
Circumstances Determination, 82 FR at 19220, unchanged in Softwood 
Lumber from Canada Final AD Determination, 82 FR at 51807-08.
    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, to determine preliminarily whether there has been a 
massive surge in imports for each mandatory respondent which provided 
shipment data, Commerce compared the total volume of shipments from 
November 2018 through January 2019, the comparison period (i.e., all 
months for which shipment data was available), with the preceding 
three-month period of August 2018 through October 2018, the base 
period. Regarding the CVD investigation, for ``all others,'' Commerce 
compared Global Trade Atlas (GTA) data for the period November 2018 
through January 2019 with the preceding three-month period of August 
2018 through October 2018,\18\ after subtracting from the GTA data 
shipments reported by the mandatory respondents which provided such 
data. Similarly, regarding the AD investigation, for non-individually 
examined companies requesting separate rate status, we performed the 
same comparison. For those mandatory respondents in either the CVD or 
AD investigation that are not participating in the investigation, we 
preliminarily determine, on the basis of adverse facts available,\19\ 
that there has been a massive surge in imports. Accordingly, based on 
our analysis of information on the record, we preliminarily determine 
that all producers/exporters of yarn from China had massive surges in 
imports.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Commerce gathered GTA data under the following harmonized 
tariff schedule numbers: 5402.33.3000 and 5402.33.6000.
    \19\ See section 776 of the Act.
    \20\ See Memorandum, ``Polyester Textured Yarn from the People's 
Republic of China: Preliminary Critical Circumstances Calculation,'' 
dated concurrently with this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the criteria and findings discussed above, we 
preliminarily determine in both the AD and CVD investigations that 
critical circumstances exist with respect to all imports of yarn from 
China.

Final Critical Circumstances Determination

    We will issue our final determinations concerning critical 
circumstances when we issue our final CVD and AD determinations. All 
interested parties will have the opportunity to address this 
determination in case briefs to be submitted after the completion of 
the preliminary CVD and AD determinations by a deadline to be 
established at a later date.

ITC Notification

    In accordance with sections 703(f) and 733(f) of the Act, we will 
notify the ITC of these preliminary determinations of critical 
circumstances.

Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 703(e)(2) of the Act, because we have 
preliminarily found that critical circumstances exist with regard to 
imports from all producers and exporters of yarn from China, if we make 
an affirmative preliminary determination that countervailable subsidies 
have been provided to these same producers/exporters at above de 
minimis rates, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of subject merchandise from 
these producers/exporters that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse 
for consumption, on or after the date that is 90 days prior to the 
effective date of ``provisional measures'' (e.g., the date of 
publication in the Federal Register of the notice of an affirmative 
preliminary determination that countervailable subsidies have been 
provided at above de minimis rates). At such time, we will also 
instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the estimated 
preliminary subsidy rates reflected in the preliminary determination 
published in the Federal Register. The suspension of liquidation will 
remain in effect until further notice.
    In accordance with section 733(e)(2) of the Act, because we have 
preliminarily found that critical circumstances exist with regard to 
imports from all producers and

[[Page 16843]]

exporters of yarn from China, if we make an affirmative preliminary 
determination that sales at less than fair value have been made by 
these same producers/exporters at above de minimis rates, we will 
instruct CBP to suspend liquidation of all entries of subject 
merchandise from these producers/exporters that are entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date that is 
90 days prior to the effective date of ``provisional measures'' (e.g., 
the date of publication in the Federal Register of the notice of an 
affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV at above de 
minimis rates). At such time, we will also instruct CBP to require a 
cash deposit equal to the estimated preliminary dumping margins 
reflected in the preliminary determination published in the Federal 
Register. The suspension of liquidation will remain in effect until 
further notice.
    These determinations are issued and published pursuant to section 
777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206(c)(2).

    Dated: April 18, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019-08275 Filed 4-22-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P