3768 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices 

1See Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 85 FR 

19730, 19740 (April 8, 2020). 

2See Certain Softwood Lumber Products from 

Canada: Final Results of the Countervailing Duty 

Administrative Review, 2019, 86 FR 68467, 68470 

(December 2, 2021) (Final Results). 

3See Certain Softwood Lumber Products from 

Canada: Notice of Amended Final Results of the 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 2019, 

87 FR 1114 (January 10, 2022) (Amended Final 

Results). 

1See Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Antidumping Duty 

Petition on Behalf of Ventura Coastal LLC: Lemon 

Juice from Brazil and South Africa,’’ dated 

December 30, 2021 (Petitions). 

2See Commerce’s Letters, ‘‘Petitions for the 

Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 

Lemon Juice from Brazil and South Africa: 

Supplemental Questions,’’ dated January 4, 2022 

(General Issues Questionnaire); ‘‘Petition for the 

Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 

Lemon Juice from Brazil: Supplemental Questions,’’ 

dated January 4, 2022; ‘‘Petition for the Imposition 

of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Lemon Juice 

from South Africa: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated 

January 4, 2022; ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of 

Antidumping Duties on Imports of Lemon Juice 

from Brazil: Second Supplemental Questions,’’ 

dated January 11, 2022; and ‘‘Petition for the 

Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 

Lemon Juice from South Africa: Supplemental 

Questions,’’ dated January 11, 2022. 

3See Petitioner’s Letters, ‘‘Lemon Juice from 

Brazil and South Africa: Petitioner’s Response to 

General Issues Questionnaire,’’ dated January 6, 

2022 (General Issues Supplement); ‘‘Lemon Juice 

from Brazil: Petitioner’s Response to General Issues 

Questionnaire,’’ dated January 6, 2022 and ‘‘Lemon 

Juice from Brazil: Petitioner’s Response to 

Supplemental Questionnaire (Q5),’’ dated January 

10, 2022 (collectively, First Brazil AD Supplement); 

‘‘Lemon Juice from Brazil: Petitioner’s Response to 

Second Supplemental Questionnaire,’’ dated 

January 13, 2022 (Second Brazil AD Supplement); 

‘‘Lemon Juice from Brazil {sic}: Petitioner’s 

Response to General Issues Questionnaire,’’ dated 

January 6, 2022 and ‘‘Lemon Juice from South 

Africa: Petitioner’s Response to Supplemental 

Questionnaire (Q11),’’ dated January 10, 2022 

(collectively, First South Africa AD Supplement); 

and ‘‘Lemon Juice from South Africa: Petitioner’s 

Response to Second Supplemental Questionnaire,’’ 

dated January 13, 2022 (Second South Africa AD 

Supplement). 

4See infra, section titled ‘‘Determination of 

Industry Support for the Petitions.’’ 

5See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1). 

Forest Products Inc. (Carter), that was 

subject to the CVD review. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Hoffner, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3315. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Correction 

In the Federal Register of January 10, 

2022, in FR Doc. 2022–00212, on page 

1116 in the second column, Commerce 

did not list a company named ‘‘Carter 

Forest Products Inc.’’ 

Background 

On April 8, 2020, Commerce 

indicated in the Federal Register that 

Carter Forest Products Inc. (Carter) was 

a firm subject to the CVD administrative 

review on certain softwood lumber 

products from Canada covering the 

period of review (POR) of January 1, 

2019, through December 31, 2019.1 In 

the final results of the CVD 

administrative review covering the 2019 

POR, Commerce inadvertently omitted 

Carter from Appendix II as being among 

the firms subject to the review that 

received the non-selected subsidy rate 

that Commerce applied to those firms 

not individually-examined.2

Additionally, Commerce also omitted 

Carter in the appendix to the notice of 

Amended Final Results as being among 

the firms subject to the review that 

received the non-selected subsidy rate 

that Commerce applied to those firms 

not individually examined.3 With the 

issuance of this notice of correction, we 

confirm that Carter is included among 

the firms subject to the non-selected rate 

in CVD administrative review covering 

calendar year 2019. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 

777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended. 

Dated: January 19, 2022. 

Ryan Majerus, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and 

Negotiations. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01361 Filed 1–24–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–351–858, A–791–827] 

Lemon Juice From Brazil and South 

Africa: Initiation of Less-Than-FairValue Investigations 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Applicable January 19, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dakota Potts (Brazil) or Ariela Garvett 

(South Africa); 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) 482–0223 

and (202) 482–3609, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions 

On December 30, 2021, the 

Department of Commerce (Commerce) 

received antidumping duty (AD) 

petitions concerning imports of lemon 

juice from Brazil and South Africa filed 

in proper form on behalf of Ventura 

Coastal, LLC (the petitioner), a domestic 

producer of lemon juice.1

On January 4 and 11, 2022, Commerce 

requested supplemental information 

pertaining to certain aspects of the 

Petitions in separate supplemental 

questionnaires.2 The petitioner filed 

responses to the supplemental 

questionnaires on January 6, 10, and 13, 

2022.3

In accordance with section 732(b) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act), the petitioner alleges that imports 

of lemon juice from Brazil and South 

Africa are being, or are likely to be, sold 

in the United States at less than fair 

value (LTFV) within the meaning of 

section 731 of the Act, and that imports 

of such products are materially injuring, 

or threatening material injury to, the 

lemon juice industry in the United 

States. Consistent with section 732(b)(1) 

of the Act, the Petitions are 

accompanied by information reasonably 

available to the petitioner supporting its 

allegations. 

Commerce finds that the petitioner 

filed the Petitions on behalf of the 

domestic industry, because the 

petitioner is an interested party, as 

defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. 

Commerce also finds that the petitioner 

demonstrated sufficient industry 

support for the initiation of the 

requested LTFV investigations.4

Periods of Investigation 

Because the Petitions were filed on 

December 30, 2021, the period of 

investigation (POI) for these LTFV 

investigations is October 1, 2020, 

through September 30, 2021, pursuant 

to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).5

Scope of the Investigations 

The product covered by these 

investigations is lemon juice from Brazil 

and South Africa. For a full description 

of the scope of these investigations, see 

the appendix to this notice. 

Comments on the Scope of the 

Investigations 

On January 4, 10, and 12, 2022, 

Commerce requested further 

information and clarification from the 

petitioner regarding the proposed scope, 

to ensure that the scope language in the 

Petitions is an accurate reflection of the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices 3769 

6See General Issues Questionnaire; see also 

Memoranda, ‘‘Phone Call with Counsel to the 

Petitioner,’’ dated January 10, 2022; and ‘‘Phone 

Call with Counsel to the Petitioner’’ dated January 

12, 2022. 

7See General Issues Supplement at Exhibit SI–15; 

see also Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Lemon Juice from 

Brazil and South Africa: Petitioner’s Response to 

Scope Issues Raised in 1/10/22 Phone Call with 

Counsel,’’ dated January 11, 2022 at Exhibit 2SI–15; 

Second Brazil AD Supplement at 1 and Exhibit 3SI– 

15; and Second South Africa AD Supplement at 1 

and Exhibit 3SI–15. 

8We note that the third paragraph of the scope 

of these investigations references certain lemon 

juice that is blended with certain lemon juice from 

sources not subject to these investigations. While 

Commerce has adopted this scope language for the 

purposes of initiation, we invite parties to these 

proceedings to comment on this scope language. In 

particular, we invite parties to focus on 

administrability and circumvention concerns. 

9See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 

Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) 

(Preamble). 

10See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual 

information’’). 

11See 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 Commerce’s electronic filing requirements, 

effective 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_on_Electronic_

Filing_Procedures.pdf. 

12See section 771(10) of the Act. 

13See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 

2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. 

Continued 

product for which the domestic industry 

is seeking relief.6 On January 6, 11, and 

13, 2022, the petitioner revised the 

scope.7 The description of the 

merchandise covered by these 

investigations, as described in the 

appendix to this notice, reflects these 

clarifications.8

As discussed in the Preamble to 

Commerce’s regulations, we are setting 

aside a period for interested parties to 

raise issues regarding product coverage 

(i.e., scope).9 Commerce 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,10 all such 

factual information should be limited to 

public information. To facilitate 

preparation of its questionnaires, 

Commerce requests that all interested 

parties submit such comments by 5:00 

p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on February 8, 

2022, 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 February 18, 2022, 

which is ten calendar days from the 

initial comment deadline. 

Commerce requests that any factual 

information that parties consider 

relevant to the scope of these 

investigations be submitted during this 

period. However, if a party subsequently 

finds that additional factual information 

pertaining to the scope of these 

investigations may be relevant, the party 

may contact Commerce and request 

permission to submit the additional 

information. All such submissions must 

be filed on the records of each of the 

concurrent investigations. 

Filing Requirements 

All submissions to Commerce must be 

filed electronically via Enforcement and 

Compliance’s Antidumping Duty and 

Countervailing Duty Centralized 

Electronic Service System (ACCESS), 

unless an exception applies.11 An 

electronically filed document must be 

received successfully in its entirety by 

the time and date on which it is due. 

Comments on Product Characteristics 

Commerce is providing interested 

parties an opportunity to comment on 

the appropriate physical characteristics 

of lemon juice to be reported in 

response to Commerce’s AD 

questionnaires. This information will be 

used to identify the key physical 

characteristics of the subject 

merchandise 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 

lemon juice, 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, 

Commerce 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 February 8, 

2022, which is 20 calendar days from 

the signature date of this notice. Any 

rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 

p.m. ET on February 18, 2022, which is 

ten calendar days from the initial 

comment deadline. All comments and 

submissions to Commerce must be filed 

electronically using ACCESS, as 

explained above, on the record of each 

of the LTFV 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, 

Commerce 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 Commerce 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 Commerce 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, 

Commerce’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


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
3770 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices 

v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), 

aff’d 865 F. 2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)). 14See Petitions at Volume I at 22–27 and Exhibits 

I–4 and I–5. 15For a discussion of the domestic like product 

analysis as applied to these cases and information 

regarding industry support, see Country-Specific 

AD Checklists, ‘‘Antidumping Duty Investigation 

Initiation Checklists: Lemon Juice from Brazil and 

South Africa,’’ dated concurrently with this Federal 

Register notice and on file electronically via 

ACCESS (Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists) 

at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for 

the Antidumping Duty Petitions Covering Lemon 

Juice from Brazil and South Africa (Attachment II). 

16See Petitions at Volume I at 3–4 and Exhibits 

I–1 and I–3; see also General Issues Supplement at 

4–5 and Exhibit SI–1. 17See Petitions at Volume I at 4 and Exhibit 

I–2. 18See Petitions at Volume I at 3–4 and Exhibit 

I–3; see also General Issues Supplement at 4. 

19See Petitions at Volume I at 3–5 and Exhibits 

I–1 through I–3; see also General Issues Supplement 

at 4–5 and Exhibit SI–1. 

20See Petitions at Volume I at 17, 29–30 and 

Exhibit I–10. 

21See Petitions at Volume I at 17, 28–37, Exhibits 

I–4, I–5, I–9, I–10, I–12 through I–14; see also 

General Issues Supplement at 5. 

22See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists 

at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and 

Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 

Antidumping Duty Petitions Covering Lemon Juice 

from Brazil and South Africa (Attachment III). 

23See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists. 

24 In accordance with section 773(b)(2) of the Act, 

for these investigations, Commerce will request 

information necessary to calculate the CV and cost 

of production (COP) to determine whether there are 

reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales 

of the foreign like product have been made at prices 

that represent less than the COP of the product. 

25See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists. 

26 Id. 

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.14 Based on our analysis 

of the information submitted on the 

record, we have determined that lemon 

juice, as defined in the scope, 

constitutes a single domestic like 

product, and we have analyzed industry 

support in terms of that domestic like 

product.15

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 the appendix to this 

notice. To establish industry support, 

the petitioner provided the total volume 

of lemons that it processed during the 

most recently completed lemon 

marketing season (August 1, 2020—July 

31, 2021).16 The petitioner also 

provided the total volume of lemons 

processed in the United States during 

the 2020–21 lemon marketing season, as 

reported by the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture’s National Agricultural 

Statistics Service (USDA NASS) in its 

September 2021 Citrus Fruits: 2021 

Summary.17 The petitioner then 

compared its own volume of lemons 

processed to the total volume of lemons 

processed as reported by USDA NASS 

for the 2020–21 lemon marketing 

season.18 We relied on data provided by 

the petitioner for purposes of measuring 

industry support.19

Our review of the data provided in the 

Petitions, the General Issues 

Supplement, and other information 

readily available to Commerce indicates 

that the petitioner has established 

industry support for the Petitions. 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, Commerce is not 

required to take further action in order 

to evaluate industry support (e.g., 

polling). 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. 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. Accordingly, Commerce 

determines that the Petitions were filed 

on behalf of the domestic industry 

within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) 

of the Act. 

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 LTFV. In addition, 

the petitioner alleges that subject 

imports exceed the negligibility 

threshold provided for under section 

771(24)(A) of the Act.20

The petitioner contends that the 

industry’s injured condition is 

illustrated by an absolute and relative 

increase in the volume of subject 

imports; increasing market share of 

subject imports at the expense of the 

domestic industry; price reductions and 

decline in the unit value of domestic 

shipments; decreased profitability; 

declining sales; decreased capacity 

utilization; and the magnitude of the 

alleged dumping margins.21 We 

assessed the allegations and supporting 

evidence regarding material injury, 

threat of material injury, causation, as 

well as negligibility, and we have 

determined that these allegations are 

properly supported by adequate 

evidence, and meet the statutory 

requirements for initiation.22

Allegations of Sales at LTFV 

The following is a description of the 

allegations of sales at LTFV upon which 

Commerce based its decision to initiate 

these LTFV investigations of imports of 

lemon juice from Brazil and South 

Africa. The sources of data for the 

deductions and adjustments relating to 

U.S. price and normal value (NV) are 

discussed in greater detail in the 

country-specific AD initiation 

checklists. 

U.S. Price 

For Brazil and South Africa, the 

petitioner established U.S. price on the 

average unit value of publicly available 

import data. The petitioner deducted 

expenses associated with inland freight 

incurred in Brazil and South Africa to 

calculate an ex-factory, or net, U.S. 

price.23

Normal Value Based on Constructed 

Value 24

For Brazil and South Africa, the 

petitioner stated it was unable to obtain 

home-market or third-country prices for 

lemon juice to use as a basis for NV. 

Therefore, for Brazil and South Africa, 

the petitioner calculated NV based on 

constructed value (CV).25

Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, 

the petitioner calculated CV as the sum 

of the cost of manufacturing, selling, 

general, and administrative expenses, 

financial expenses, and profit.26 For 

Brazil and South Africa, in calculating 

the cost of manufacturing, the petitioner 

relied on its own production experience 

and input consumption rates, valued 

using publicly available information 

applicable to each respective subject 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices 3771 

27 Id. 

28 Id. 

29 Id. 

30See Petitions at Volume I at 16 and Exhibit I– 

8; see also General Issues Supplement at 1. 

31The petitioner states that it relied on its own 

market knowledge, company data from Descartes 

Datamyne, and internet research to identify 

producers and/or exporters of lemon juice in Brazil. 

See Petitions at Volume I at 16 n.39. The Petitions 

do not include supporting information from 

independent, third-party sources to support the 

petitioner’s identification of the two Brazilian 

companies as the only known producers and/or 

exporters of lemon juice in Brazil. Accordingly, we 

intend to use CBP data to select mandatory 

respondents in the Brazil investigation. 

32See Memoranda, ‘‘Antidumping Duty Petition 

on Imports of Lemon Juice from South Africa: 

Release of U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

Data,’’ dated January 11, 2022; and ‘‘Antidumping 

Duty Petition on Imports of Lemon Juice from 

Brazil: Release of U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection Data,’’ dated January 12, 2022. 

33See section 733(a) of the Act. 

34 Id. 

35See 19 CFR 351.301(b). 

36See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2). 

country.27 For Brazil and South Africa, 

in calculating selling, general, and 

administrative expenses, financial 

expenses, and profit ratios (where 

applicable), the petitioner relied on the 

2020 financial statements of a producer 

of lemon juice in Brazil, and the 2020– 

2021 financial statements of a 

diversified food and beverage company 

that produces products incorporating 

lemon juice in South Africa.28

Fair Value Comparisons 

Based on the data provided by the 

petitioner, there is reason to believe that 

imports of lemon juice from Brazil and 

South Africa are being, or are likely to 

be, sold in the United States at LTFV. 

Based on comparisons of U.S. price to 

CV in accordance with section 773 of 

the Act, the estimated dumping margins 

for lemon juice concerning each of the 

countries covered by this initiation are 

as follows: (1) Brazil—222.16 percent; 

and (2) South Africa—97.15 percent.29

Initiation of LTFV Investigations 

Based upon the examination of the 

Petitions and supplemental responses, 

we find that they meet the requirements 

of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we 

are initiating these LTFV investigations 

to determine whether imports of lemon 

juice from Brazil and South Africa are 

being, or are likely to be, sold in the 

United States at LTFV. In accordance 

with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 

19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, 

we will make our preliminary 

determinations no later than 140 days 

after the date of this initiation. 

Respondent Selection 

In the Petitions, the petitioner 

identified two companies in Brazil and 

five companies in South Africa as 

producers and/or exporters of lemon 

juice.30 With respect to Brazil 31 and 

South Africa, following standard 

practice in LTFV investigations 

involving market economy countries, in 

the event that Commerce determines 

that the number of exporters or 

producers in any individual case is large 

such that Commerce cannot 

individually examine each company 

based upon its resources, where 

appropriate, Commerce intends to select 

mandatory respondents in that case 

based on U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports 

under the appropriate Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States 

subheadings listed in the ‘‘Scope of the 

Investigations,’’ in the appendix. 

On January 11 and 12, 2022, 

Commerce released CBP data on imports 

of lemon juice from South Africa and 

Brazil, respectively, under 

administrative protective order (APO) to 

all parties with access to information 

protected by APO and indicated that 

interested parties wishing to comment 

on the CBP data must do so within three 

business days after the publication date 

of the notice of initiation of these 

investigations.32 Commerce will not 

accept rebuttal comments regarding the 

CBP data or respondent selection. 

Comments on CBP data and 

respondent selection must be filed 

electronically using ACCESS. An 

electronically filed document must be 

received successfully in its entirety via 

ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. ET on the 

specified deadline. 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 

Commerce’s website at https://

enforcement.trade.gov/apo. 

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions 

In accordance with section 

732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.202(f), copies of the public version 

of the Petitions have been provided to 

the governments of Brazil and South 

Africa 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 lemon juice from Brazil and/or South 

Africa are materially injuring, or 

threatening material injury to, a U.S. 

industry.33 A negative ITC 

determination for any country will 

result in the investigation being 

terminated with respect to that 

country.34 Otherwise, these LTFV 

investigations will proceed according to 

statutory and regulatory time limits. 

Submission of Factual Information 

Factual information is defined in 19 

CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence 

submitted in response to questionnaires; 

(ii) evidence submitted in support of 

allegations; (iii) publicly available 

information to value factors under 19 

CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the 

adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 

351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on 

the record by Commerce; and (v) 

evidence other than factual information 

described in (i)–(iv). Section 351.301(b) 

of Commerce’s regulations requires any 

party, when submitting factual 

information, to specify under which 

subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the 

information is being submitted 35 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.36 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. 

Particular Market Situation Allegation 

Section 773(e) of the Act addresses 

the concept of particular market 

situation (PMS) for purposes of CV, 

stating that ‘‘if a particular market 

situation exists such that the cost of 

materials and fabrication or other 

processing of any kind does not 

accurately reflect the cost of production 

in the ordinary course of trade, the 

administering authority may use 

another calculation methodology under 

this subtitle or any other calculation 

methodology.’’ When an interested 

party submits a PMS allegation pursuant 

to section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce 

will respond to such a submission 

consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v). 

If Commerce finds that a PMS exists 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
3772 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices 

37See 19 CFR 351.301; see also Extension of Time 

Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 

2013), available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/ 

FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm. 

38See section 782(b) of the Act. 

39See Certification of Factual Information to 

Import Administration During Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 

17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked 

questions regarding the Final Rule are available at 

https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_

info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. 

40See Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD 

Service Requirements Due to COVID–19; Extension 

of Effective Period, 85 FR 41363 (July 10, 2020). 

1See Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from 

India: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Preliminary 

Affirmative Determination of Critical 

Circumstances, Postponement of Final 

Determination, and Extension of Provisional 

Measures, 86 FR 49299 (September 2, 2021) 

(Preliminary Determination), and accompanying 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 

2See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Affirmative 

under section 773(e) of the Act, then it 

will modify its dumping calculations 

appropriately. 

Neither section 773(e) of the Act, nor 

19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v), set a deadline 

for the submission of PMS allegations 

and supporting factual information. 

However, in order to administer section 

773(e) of the Act, Commerce must 

receive PMS allegations and supporting 

factual information with enough time to 

consider the submission. Thus, should 

an interested party wish to submit a 

PMS allegation and supporting new 

factual information pursuant to section 

773(e) of the Act, it must do so no later 

than 20 days after submission of a 

respondent’s initial section D 

questionnaire response. 

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 

Commerce. 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 a 

letter or memorandum of 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 untimelyfiled requests for the extension of time 

limits. Parties should review 

Commerce’s regulations concerning 

factual information prior to submitting 

factual information in these 

investigations.37

Certification Requirements 

Any party submitting factual 

information in an AD or countervailing 

duty (CVD) proceeding must certify to 

the accuracy and completeness of that 

information.38 Parties must use the 

certification formats provided in 19 CFR 

351.303(g).39 Commerce intends to 

reject factual submissions if the 

submitting party does not comply with 

the applicable certification 

requirements. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

Interested parties must submit 

applications for disclosure under APO 

in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 

Parties wishing to participate in these 

investigations should ensure that they 

meet the requirements of 19 CFR 

351.103(d) (e.g., by the filing a letter of 

appearance as discussed). Note that 

Commerce has temporarily modified 

certain of its requirements for serving 

documents containing business 

proprietary information, until further 

notice.40

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: January 19, 2022. 

Lisa W. Wang, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

Appendix 

Scope of the Investigations 

The product covered by these 

investigations is certain lemon juice. Lemon 

juice is covered: (1) With or without addition 

of preservatives, sugar, or other sweeteners; 

(2) regardless of the GPL (grams per liter of 

citric acid) level of concentration, brix level, 

brix/acid ratio, pulp content, clarity; (3) 

regardless of the grade, horticulture method 

(e.g., organic or not), processed form (e.g., 

frozen or not-from-concentrate), the size of 

the container in which packed, or the method 

of packing; and (4) regardless of the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) standard of identity (as 

defined under 19 CFR 146.114 et seq.) (i.e., 

whether or not the lemon juice meets an FDA 

standard of identity). 

Excluded from the scope are: (1) Lemon 

juice at any level of concentration packed in 

retail-sized containers ready for sale to 

consumers; and (2) beverage products, such 

as lemonade, that contain 20 percent or less 

lemon juice as an ingredient by actual 

volume. ‘‘Retail-sized containers’’ are defined 

as lemon juice products sold in ready-for-sale 

packaging (e.g., clearly visible branding, 

nutritional facts listed, etc.) containing up to 

128 ounces of lemon juice by actual volume. 

The scope also includes certain lemon 

juice that is blended with certain lemon juice 

from sources not subject to these 

investigations. Only the subject lemon juice 

component of such blended merchandise is 

covered by the scope of these investigations. 

Blended lemon juice is defined as certain 

lemon juice with two distinct component 

parts of differing country(s) of origin mixed 

together to form certain lemon juice where 

the component parts are no longer 

individually distinguishable. 

The product subject to these investigations 

is currently classifiable under subheadings 

2009.31.4000, 2009.31.6020, 2009.31.6040, 

2009.39.6020, and 2009.39.6040 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 

States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for convenience 

and customs purposes, the written 

description of the scope of these 

investigations is dispositive. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01411 Filed 1–24–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–533–899] 

Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin 

From India: Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 

Final Affirmative Determination of 

Critical Circumstances 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) determines that imports of 

granular polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) 

resin from India are being, or are likely 

to be, sold in the United States at less 

than fair value (LTFV). 

DATES: Applicable January 25, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alexis Cherry or Katherine Johnson, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII, 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0607 or 

(202) 482–4929, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On September 2, 2021, Commerce 

published its preliminary determination 

in the LTFV investigation of granular 

PTFE resin from India, in which we also 

postponed the final determination until 

January 18, 2022.1 For a complete 

description of the events that followed 

the Preliminary Determination, see the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum.2 The 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES