[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 15 (Tuesday, January 23, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3122-3124]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01151]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-876]


Countervailing Duty Investigation of Fine Denier Polyester Staple 
Fiber From India: Final Affirmative Determination

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that 
countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters 
of fine denier polyester staple fiber (fine denier PSF) from India. The 
period of investigation is January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016. 
For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the ``Final 
Determination and Suspension of Liquidation'' section of this notice.

DATES: Applicable January 23, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eli Lovely or Trisha Tran, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-1593 or (202) 482-4852, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On November 6, 2017, Commerce published the Preliminary 
Determination.\1\ A summary of the events that occurred since Commerce 
published the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion 
of the issues raised by parties for this final determination, may be 
found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum \2\ issued concurrently 
with this notice. 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 http://access.trade.gov, and is available 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/. The 
signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version are 
identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from India: 
Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 82 FR 
51387 (November 6, 2017) (Preliminary Determination) and 
accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (Preliminary Decision 
Memorandum).
    \2\ See Commerce Memorandum, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum 
for the Final Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation 
of Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from India,'' dated 
concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this 
notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope Comments

    In accordance with the Preliminary Scope Memorandum, Commerce 
provided parties an opportunity to provide comments on all issues 
regarding product coverage (i.e., scope).\3\ Certain interested parties 
commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the 
Initiation Notice.\4\ As a result, the scope of this investigation was 
modified for the preliminary determination. No further changes to the 
scope of the investigation were made to this final determination. For a 
summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses 
submitted to the record for this final determination, and accompanying 
discussion and analysis

[[Page 3123]]

of all comments timely received, see the Final Scope Decision 
Memorandum.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Commerce 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 Preliminary 
Determinations,'' dated May 31, 2016 (Preliminary Scope Memorandum); 
see also See Commerce Memorandum, ``Due Dates for Case and Rebuttal 
Briefs Regarding the Scope,'' dated December 11, 2017.
    \4\ See Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from India and the 
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty 
Investigations, 82 FR 29029 (June 27, 2017) (Initiation Notice).
    \5\ See Commerce 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 concurrently with this determination and 
hereby adopted by this notice (Final Scope Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Methodology

    Commerce conducted this countervailing duty (CVD) investigation in 
accordance with section 701 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
Act). For each of the subsidy programs found to be countervailable, we 
determine that there is a subsidy (i.e., a financial contribution by an 
``authority'' that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient) and that 
the subsidy is specific. For a full description of the methodology 
underlying our final determination, see the Issues and Decisions 
Memorandum.

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is fine denier PSF 
from India. For a complete description of the scope of this 
investigation, see Appendix II.

Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received

    The subsidy programs under investigation, and the issues raised in 
the case and rebuttal briefs submitted by the parties, are discussed in 
the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues that parties 
raised, and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum, is attached to this notice at Appendix I.

Use of Adverse Facts Available (AFA)

    For purposes of this final determination, we relied on facts 
available, and because certain respondents did not act to the best of 
their ability in responding to Commerce's requests for information, we 
drew an adverse inference, where appropriate, in selecting from among 
the facts otherwise available.\6\ A full discussion of our decision to 
rely on adverse facts available is presented in the ``Use of Facts 
Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences'' section of the Issues and 
Decisions Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our review and analysis of the comments received from 
parties, and minor corrections presented at verification, we made 
certain changes to the respondents' sales figures and subsidy rate 
calculations since the Preliminary Determination. For a discussion of 
these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum and the Final 
Calculation Memoranda.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Commerce Memoranda, ``Bombay Dyeing Final Determination 
Calculation Memorandum,'' dated January 16, 2018 (Bombay Dyeing's 
Final Calculation Memorandum) and ``Countervailing Duty 
Investigation of Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from India: 
Final Determination Calculation for Reliance Industries Limited,'' 
dated January 16, 2018 (Reliance's Final Calculation Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Determination

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we 
calculated an individual rate for each producer/exporter of the subject 
merchandise individually investigated.
    In accordance with section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, for companies 
not individually investigated, we apply an ``all-others'' rate. Under 
section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, the ``all-others'' rate excludes 
zero and de minimis rates calculated for the exporters and producers 
individually investigated as well as rates based entirely on facts 
otherwise available.
    Pursuant to section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, we have calculated 
the ``all-others'' rate using the subsidy rates of the two individually 
investigated respondents. The Department calculated the all-others' 
rate using a weighted average of the individual estimated subsidy rates 
calculated for the examined respondents using each company's publicly-
ranged values for the merchandise under consideration.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ With two respondents under examination, the Department 
normally calculates (A) a weighted-average of the estimated subsidy 
rates calculated for the examined respondents; (B) a simple average 
of the estimated subsidy rates calculated for the examined 
respondents; and (C) a weighted-average of the estimated subsidy 
rates calculated for the examined respondents using each company's 
publicly-ranged U.S. sale quantities for the merchandise under 
consideration. The Department then compares (B) and (C) to (A) and 
selects the rate closest to (A) as the most appropriate rate for all 
other producers and exporters. See, e.g., Ball Bearings and Parts 
Thereof from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final 
Results of Changed-Circumstances Review, and Revocation of an Order 
in Part, 75 FR 53661, 53663 (September 1, 2010). As complete 
publicly ranged sales data was available, the Department based the 
all-others rate on the publicly ranged sales data of the mandatory 
respondents. For a complete analysis of the data, please see the 
All-Others' Rate Calculation Memorandum.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Subsidy rate
                         Company                             (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Company Limited...........           13.38
Reliance Industries Limited.............................           27.36
All-Others..............................................           24.80
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    We intend to disclose to parties in this proceeding the 
calculations performed for this final determination within five days of 
the date of public announcement of our final determination, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Suspension of Liquidation

    As a result of our Preliminary Determination, and pursuant to 
sections 703(d)(1)(B) and (2) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs 
and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of 
merchandise under consideration from India that were entered or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after November 6, 
2017, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the 
Federal Register.
    If the U.S. International Trade Commission (the ITC) issues a final 
affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order, will 
reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the 
Act, and will require a cash deposit of estimated CVDs for such entries 
of subject merchandise in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC 
determines that material injury, or threat of material injury, does not 
exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all estimated duties 
deposited or securities posted as a result of the suspension of 
liquidation will be refunded or canceled.

ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the 
ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the 
ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information related to this 
investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and 
business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC 
confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or 
under an administrative protective order (APO), without the written 
consent of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    In the event the ITC issues a final negative injury determination, 
this notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to an APO of 
their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary 
information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.305(a)(3). Timely written 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 terms of an APO 
is a violation subject to sanction.

[[Page 3124]]

    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 
705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: January 16, 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

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. List of Issues
III. Background
IV. Scope Comments
V. Scope of the Investigation
VI. Subsidies Valuation Information
VII. Benchmarks and Interest Rates
VIII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences
IX. Analysis of Programs
X. Analysis of Comments
    Comment 1: Whether to Countervail the AAP and DDB
    Comment 2: Whether to Apply AFA to Reliance and Bombay Dyeing's 
Discovered Benefits under the TUFS
    Comment 3: Treatment of the EPCG
    Comment 4: Whether to Apply AFA to Bombay Dyeing's Unreported 
Benefits from the SHIS
    Comment 5: Whether Commerce should countervail the FPS/IEIS
    Comment 6: Whether Commerce should countervail the SGOM PSI
    Comment 7: Whether to Apply AFA to the POI Value of Bombay 
Dyeing's Company-Wide Sales and Company-Wide Export Sales
    Comment 8: Whether to Apply AFA to Reliance's Unreported 
Benefits from the AAP
    Comment 9: Whether to Apply AFA to Reliance's Unreported 
Benefits from the MEIS and the MLFPS
    Comment 10: Whether to Apply AFA to Reliance's Alleged Benefits 
for EOU programs
    Comment 11: Whether to Apply AFA to Reliance's Purported 
Benefits for Two Income Deductions Related to SEZ programs
    Comment 12: Whether to Apply AFA to Reliance's Purported 
Benefits under Section 35(1)(iv), Section 35(I)(ii), and Section 
35(I)(i) Income Tax Deductions
    Comment 13: Whether to Apply AFA to Reliance's Unreported 
Benefits for SEZ programs
    Comment 14: Whether to Revise the Application of AFA Rates for 
SEZ programs
    Comment 15: Whether to Apply Total AFA to Reliance
    Comment 16: Whether to Revise the Calculation of Benefits 
Received under the EPCG
XI. Recommendation

Appendix II

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 
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 the investigations is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2018-01151 Filed 1-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P