Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices 48977 

1See Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Polyester (sic) 

Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, 

the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan— 

Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties,’’ 

September 26, 2017 (the Petitions). Indorama is not 

a petitioner with respect to the Indonesia petition. 

See Volume I of the Petitions, at 1. 

2See Volume I of the Petitions, at 1. 

3See Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petition for the 

Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 

Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from 

Brazil: Supplemental Questions,’’ September 29, 

2017; see also Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petition 

for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 

Imports of Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate 

Resin from Indonesia: Supplemental Questions,’’ 

September 29, 2017; Letter from the Department, 

‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties 

on Imports of Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate 

Resin from the Republic of Korea: Supplemental 

Questions,’’ September 29, 2017; Letter from the 

Department, ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of 

Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain 

Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Pakistan: 

Supplemental Questions,’’ September 29, 2017; 

Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petition for the 

Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 

Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from 

Taiwan: Supplemental Questions,’’ September 29, 

2017; and Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petitions for 

the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports 

of Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from 

Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, 

and Taiwan,’’ September 29, 2017. 

4See Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Polyethylene 

Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, 

the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan— 

Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume I Relating to 

General Issues,’’ October 3, 2017 (General Issues 

Supplement); see also Letter from the petitioners, 

‘‘Polyethylene Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from 

Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, 

and Taiwan—Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume II 

Relating to Brazil Antidumping Duties,’’ October 3, 

2017; Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Polyethylene 

Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, 

the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan— 

Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume III Relating to 

Indonesia Antidumping Duties,’’ October 3, 2017; 

Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Polyethylene 

Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, 

the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan— 

Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume IV Relating to 

the Republic of Korea Antidumping Duties,’’ 

October 3, 2017; Letter from the petitioners, 

‘‘Polyethylene Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from 

Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, 

and Taiwan—Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume V 

Relating to Pakistan Antidumping Duties,’’ October 

3, 2017; Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Polyethylene 

Terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, 

the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan— 

Petitioners’ Amendment to Volume VI Relating to 

Taiwan Antidumping Duties,’’ October 3, 2017. 

5See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for 

the Petitions’’ section below. 

6See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 

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

7See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual 

information’’). 

8See 19 CFR 351.303(b). 

9See 19 CFR 351.303(b). 

Dated: October 16, 2017. 

Christopher A. McLean, 

Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. 

[FR Doc. 2017–22857 Filed 10–20–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–351–852, A–560–832, A–580–896, A–535– 

905, A–583–862] 

Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin 

From Brazil, Indonesia, the Republic of 

Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan: Initiation 

of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Applicable October 16, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gene Calvert at (202) 482–3586 

(Indonesia, Korea, and Pakistan) or Jun 

Jack Zhao at (202) 482–1396 (Brazil and 

Taiwan), Office VII, AD/CVD 

Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions 

On September 26, 2017, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) received antidumping duty 

(AD) petitions concerning imports of 

polyethylene terephthalate (PET) resin 

from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, 

and Taiwan, filed in proper form on 

behalf of DAK Americas LLC, Indorama 

Ventures USA, Inc. (Indorama), M&G 

Polymers USA, LLC, and Nan Ya 

Plastics Corporation, America 

(collectively, the petitioners).1 The 

petitioners are domestic producers of 

PET resin.2

On September 29, 2017, the 

Department requested supplemental 

information pertaining to certain areas 

of the Petitions.3 The petitioners filed 

responses to these requests on October 

3, 2017.4

In accordance with section 732(b) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act), the petitioners allege that imports 

of PET resin from Brazil, Indonesia, 

Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan are being, 

or are likely to be, sold in the United 

States at less than fair value, within the 

meaning of section 731 of the Act, and 

that such imports are materially 

injuring, or threatening material injury 

to, the domestic industry producing PET 

resin in the United States. Consistent 

with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the 

Petitions are accompanied by 

information reasonably available to the 

petitioners to support their allegations. 

The Department finds that the 

petitioners filed these Petitions on 

behalf of the domestic industry because 

the petitioners are interested parties as 

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

The Department also finds that the 

petitioners demonstrated sufficient 

industry support with respect to 

initiation of the AD investigations that 

the petitioners are requesting.5

Period of Investigations 

Because the Petitions were filed on 

September 26, 2017, the period of 

investigation (POI) for all investigations 

is July 1, 2016, through June 30, 2017, 

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

Scope of the Investigations 

The product covered by these 

investigations is PET resin from Brazil, 

Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan. 

For a full description of the scope of 

these investigations, see the ‘‘Scope of 

the Investigations’’ in the Appendix to 

this notice. 

Comments on Scope of the 

Investigations 

As discussed in the preamble to the 

Department’s regulations,6 we are 

setting aside a period for interested 

parties to raise issues regarding product 

coverage (i.e., scope). The Department 

will consider all comments received 

from interested parties and, if necessary, 

will consult with interested parties 

regarding scope prior to the issuance of 

the preliminary determinations. All 

factual information included in scope 

comments should be limited to public 

information.7 To facilitate preparation 

of its questionnaires, the Department 

requests that interested parties submit 

all such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern 

Time (ET) on November 6, 2017, which 

is the first business day 20 calendar 

days from the signature date of this 

notice.8 Any rebuttal comments, which 

may include factual information, must 

be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on November 

16, 2017, which is 10 calendar days 

from the initial comment deadline.9

The Department requests that any 

factual information the parties consider 

relevant to the scope of the 

investigations be submitted during this 

time period. However, if a party 

subsequently finds that additional 

factual information pertaining to the 

scope of the investigations may be 

relevant, the party may contact the 

Department and request permission to 

submit the additional information. All 

such comments must be filed on the 

record of each concurrent AD 

investigation. 

Filing Requirements 

All submissions to the Department 

must be electronically filed using 

Enforcement and Compliance’s 

Antidumping Duty and Countervailing 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
48978 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices 

10For details of the Department’s electronic filing 

requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 

2011, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; 

Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 

39263 (July 6, 2011), and Enforcement and 

Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System 

Name, 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014). 

Additional information on using ACCESS can be 

found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx, and a 

handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/ 

help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling

%20Procedures.pdf. 11See section 771(10) of the Act. 

12See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 

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

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

aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)). 

13For a discussion of the domestic like product 

analysis as applied to these cases and information 

regarding industry support, see Antidumping Duty 

Investigation Initiation Checklist: Polyethylene 

Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Brazil (Brazil AD 

Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, ‘‘Analysis of 

Industry Support for the Antidumping Duty 

Petitions Covering Polyethylene Terephthalate 

Resin (PET Resin) from Brazil, Indonesia, the 

Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan’’ 

(Attachment II); see also Antidumping Duty 

Investigation Initiation Checklist: Polyethylene 

Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Indonesia’’ 

(Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment 

II; see also Antidumping Duty Investigation 

Initiation Checklist: Polyethylene Terephthalate 

(PET) Resin from the Republic of Korea (Korea AD 

Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; see also 

Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation 

Checklist: Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Resin 

from Pakistan (Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist), at 

Attachment II; see also Antidumping Duty 

Investigation Initiation Checklist: Polyethylene 

Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Taiwan (Taiwan 

AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These 

checklists are dated concurrently with this notice 

and on file electronically via ACCESS. Access to 

documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the 

Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main 

Department of Commerce building. 

Duty Centralized Electronic Service 

System (ACCESS).10 An electronically 

filed document must be received 

successfully in its entirety by the time 

and date it is due. Documents exempted 

from the electronic submission 

requirements must be filed manually 

(i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement 

and Compliance’s APO/Dockets Unit, 

Room 18022, Department of Commerce, 

1401 Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230, and stamped 

with the date and time of receipt by the 

applicable deadlines. 

Comments on Product Characteristics 

The Department will provide 

interested parties an opportunity to 

comment on the appropriate physical 

characteristics of PET resin to be 

reported in response to the 

Department’s questionnaires. This 

information will be used to identify the 

key physical characteristics of the 

merchandise under consideration in 

order to accurately report the relevant 

costs of production, as well as 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, parties may provide 

comments regarding 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 PET resin, it 

may be that only a select few product 

characteristics take commercially 

meaningful physical characteristics into 

account. Interested parties may also 

comment on the order in which the 

physical characteristics should be used 

in matching products. Generally, the 

Department attempts to list the most 

important physical characteristics first 

and the least important characteristics 

last. 

For the Department to consider the 

suggestions of interested parties in 

developing and issuing the AD 

questionnaires, all product 

characteristics comments must be filed 

by 5:00 p.m. ET on November 6, 2017. 

Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 

5:00 p.m. ET on November 16, 2017. As 

explained above, all comments and 

submissions to the Department must be 

electronically filed, via ACCESS, on the 

records of the concurrent Brazil, 

Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan 

investigations. 

Determination of Industry Support for 

the Petitions 

Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires 

that a petition be filed on behalf of the 

domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) 

of the Act provides that a petition meets 

this requirement if the domestic 

producers or workers who support the 

petition account for: (i) At least 25 

percent of the total production of the 

domestic like product; and (ii) more 

than 50 percent of the production of the 

domestic like product produced by that 

portion of the industry expressing 

support for, or opposition to, the 

petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) 

of the Act provides that, if the petition 

does not establish support of domestic 

producers or workers accounting for 

more than 50 percent of the total 

production of the domestic like product, 

the Department shall: (i) Poll the 

industry or rely on other information in 

order to determine if there is support for 

the petition, as required by 

subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine 

industry support using a statistically 

valid sampling method to poll the 

‘‘industry.’’ 

Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines 

the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a 

whole of a domestic like product. Thus, 

to determine whether a petition has the 

requisite industry support, the statute 

directs the Department to look to 

producers and workers who produce the 

domestic like product. The International 

Trade Commission (ITC), which is 

responsible for determining whether 

‘‘the domestic industry’’ has been 

injured, must also determine what 

constitutes a domestic like product in 

order to define the industry. While both 

the Department and the ITC must apply 

the same statutory definition regarding 

the domestic like product,11 they do so 

for different purposes and pursuant to a 

separate and distinct authority. In 

addition, the Department’s 

determination is subject to limitations of 

time and information. Although this 

may result in different definitions of the 

like product, such differences do not 

render the decision of either agency 

contrary to law.12

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 a petition). 

With regard to the domestic like 

product, the petitioner does not offer a 

definition of the domestic like product 

distinct from the scope of the 

investigations. Based on our analysis of 

the information submitted on the 

record, we have determined that PET 

resin, as defined in the scope, 

constitutes a single domestic like 

product, and we have analyzed industry 

support in terms of that domestic like 

product.13

In determining whether the 

petitioners have 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. The petitioners 

provided their 2016 production of the 

domestic like product, and compared 

this to the estimated total production of 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices 48979 

14See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit GEN– 

2; see also General Issues Supplement, at Exhibit 

GEN–S2. 15 Id. For further discussion, see Brazil AD 

Initiation Checklist, Indonesia AD Initiation 

Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, Pakistan 

AD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan AD Initiation 

Checklist, at Attachment II. 16See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist, Indonesia 

AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation 

Checklist, Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist, and 

Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 

17See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also 

Brazil AD Initiation Checklist, Indonesia AD 

Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, 

Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan AD 

Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 

18See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist, Indonesia 

AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation 

Checklist, Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist, and 

Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 

19 Id. 

20 Id. 

21See Volume I of the Petitions, at 16–17 and 

Exhibit GEN–8. 

22 Id., at 13–32 and Exhibits GEN–5 and GEN–7 

through GEN–12. 

23See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist, at 

Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and 

Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 

Antidumping Duty Petitions Covering Polyethylene 

Terephthalate (PET) Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, 

the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan 

(Attachment III); Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, 

at Attachment III; Korea AD Initiation Checklist, at 

Attachment III; Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist, at 

Attachment III; and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, 

at Attachment III. 

24See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also 

Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist; Korea AD 

Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD Initiation 

Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist. 

25 Id. 

26See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also 

Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist; Korea AD 

Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD Initiation 

Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist. 

27See Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Certain 

Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Brazil— 

Petitioners’ Foreign Market Research Report,’’ 

September 27, 2017; see also Letter from the 

petitioners, ‘‘Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate 

Resin from Indonesia—Petitioners’ Foreign Market 

Research Report,’’ September 27, 2017; Letter from 

the petitioners, ‘‘Certain Polyethylene 

Terephthalate Resin from the Republic of Korea— 

Petitioners’ Foreign Market Research Report,’’ 

September 27, 2017; Letter from the petitioners, 

‘‘Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from 

Pakistan—Petitioners’ Foreign Market Research 

Report,’’ September 27, 2017; Letter from the 

petitioners, ‘‘Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate 

Resin from Taiwan—Petitioners’ Foreign Market 

Research Report,’’ September 27, 2017. 

28See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also 

Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist; Korea AD 

Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD Initiation 

Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist. 

29 Id. 

30See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also 

Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist. 

31See Korea AD Initiation Checklist; see also 

Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist; and Taiwan AD 

Initiation Checklist. 

32 In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade 

Preferences Extension Act of 2015, amending 

section 773(b)(2) of the Act, in all investigations, 

the Department will request information necessary 

to calculate the CV and 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. The Department no longer requires a 

COP allegation to conduct this analysis. 

the domestic like product for the entire 

domestic industry.14 We relied on data 

the petitioners provided for purposes of 

measuring industry support.15

Our review of the data provided in the 

Petitions, General Issues Supplement, 

and other information readily available 

to the Department indicates that the 

petitioner has established industry 

support for the Petitions.16 First, the 

Petitions established support from 

domestic producers (or workers) 

accounting for more than 50 percent of 

the total production of the domestic like 

product and, as such, the Department is 

not required to take further action in 

order to evaluate industry support (e.g., 

polling).17 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.18 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.19 Accordingly, the 

Department determines that the 

Petitions were filed on behalf of the 

domestic industry within the meaning 

of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. 

The Department finds that the 

petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf 

of the domestic industry because they 

are interested parties as defined in 

section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and that the 

petitioners have demonstrated sufficient 

industry support with respect to the AD 

investigations that they are requesting 

the Department to initiate.20

Allegations and Evidence of Material 

Injury and Causation 

The petitioners allege that the U.S. 

industry producing the domestic like 

product is being materially injured, or is 

threatened with material injury, by 

reason of the imports of the subject 

merchandise sold at less than normal 

value (NV). In addition, the petitioners 

allege that subject imports exceed the 

negligibility threshold provided for 

under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.21

The petitioners contend that the 

industry’s injured condition is 

illustrated by reduced market share; 

underselling and price suppression or 

depression; lost sales and revenues; 

declines in production, capacity 

utilization, and U.S. shipments; and 

declines in financial performance.22 We 

have assessed the allegations and 

supporting evidence regarding material 

injury, threat of material injury, and 

causation, and we have determined that 

these allegations are properly supported 

by adequate evidence, and meet the 

statutory requirements for initiation.23

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair 

Value 

The following is a description of the 

allegations of sales at less than fair value 

upon which the Department based its 

decision to initiate AD investigations of 

imports of PET resin from Brazil, 

Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan. 

The sources of data for the deductions 

and adjustments relating to U.S. price 

and NV are discussed in greater detail 

in the country-specific initiation 

checklists. 

Export Price 

For all countries addressed in the 

Petitions, the petitioners based the U.S. 

price on export price (EP), using (1) 

average unit values (AUVs) of publicly 

available import data and (2) price 

quotes for PET resin produced in, and 

exported from, the relevant countries 

and offered for sale or actually sold in 

the United States.24 Where applicable, 

the petitioners made adjustments to the 

U.S. price for movement and other 

expenses, consistent with the terms of 

sale.25

Normal Value 

For all countries addressed in the 

Petitions, the petitioners provided home 

market price information obtained 

through market research for PET resin 

produced, and offered for sale, in each 

country.26 For all countries, the 

petitioners provided market researcher 

declarations to support the price 

information.27 Where applicable, the 

petitioners made deductions for 

movement expenses, consistent with the 

terms of sale.28

For all countries included in the 

Petitions, the petitioners provided 

information that sales of PET resin in 

each respective home market were made 

at prices below the cost of production 

(COP).29 With respect to Brazil and 

Indonesia, the petitioners calculated NV 

based on home market prices as well as 

on constructed value (CV).30 With 

respect to Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan, 

the petitioners calculated NV based only 

on CV.31 For further discussion of COP 

and NV based on CV, see the ‘‘Normal 

Value Based on CV’’ section of this 

notice.32


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
48980 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices 

33See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist; see also 

Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist; Korea AD 

Initiation Checklist; Pakistan AD Initiation 

Checklist; Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist. 

34 Id. 

35 Id. 

36 Id. 

37 Id. 

38 Id. 

39 Id. 

40 Id. 

41 Id. 

42See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist. 

43See Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist. 

44See Korea AD Initiation Checklist. 

45See Pakistan AD Initiation Checklist. 

46See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist. 

47See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, 

Public Law 114–27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015). 

48See Dates of Application of Amendments to the 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws Made 

by the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, 80 

FR 46793 (August 6, 2015). 

49 Id. at 46794–46795. The 2015 amendments may 

be found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114thcongress/house-bill/1295/text/pl. 50See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit 

GEN–4. 

Normal Value Based on CV 

Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the 

Act, COP consists of the cost of 

manufacturing (COM), selling, general, 

and administrative (SG&A) expenses, 

financial expenses, and packing 

expenses. For Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, 

Pakistan, and Taiwan, the petitioners 

calculated the COM based on the input 

factors of production and usage rates 

from U.S. producers of PET resin.33 For 

Brazil, Indonesia, Korea and Taiwan, 

the input factors of production were 

valued using publicly available data on 

costs specific to Brazil, Indonesia, Korea 

and Taiwan.34 Specifically, the prices 

for raw material and packing inputs 

were based on Brazilian, Indonesian, 

Korean and Taiwanese publicly 

available import/export data.35 For 

Pakistan, because publicly-available 

information concerning the cost of 

certain raw materials, nitrogen, and 

packing inputs in Pakistan was not 

reasonably available to the petitioners, 

the petitioners based their raw material 

and packing input cost calculations on 

their own experiences.36 For all five 

countries, labor and energy costs were 

valued using publicly available sources 

from those countries.37 The petitioners 

calculated factory overhead, SG&A, and 

financial expenses based on the 

experience of Brazilian, Indonesian, 

Korean, Pakistani, and Taiwanese 

producers of comparable 

merchandise.38

For all five countries, because certain 

home market prices fell below the COP, 

pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b), 

and 773(e) of the Act, as noted above, 

the petitioners calculated NVs based on 

CV.39 Pursuant to section 773(e) of the 

Act, CV consists of the COM, SG&A 

expenses, financial expenses, packing 

expenses, and profit. The petitioners 

calculated CV using the same average 

COM, SG&A expenses, financial 

expenses, and packing expenses that 

were used to calculate the COP.40 The 

petitioners relied on the financial 

statements of the same producers that 

they used for calculating factory 

overhead, SG&A expenses, and financial 

expenses to calculate the profit rates.41

Fair Value Comparisons 

Based on the data provided by the 

petitioners, there is reason to believe 

that imports of PET resin from Brazil, 

Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan 

are being, or are likely to be, sold in the 

United States at less than fair value. 

Based on comparisons of EP to NV, 

pursuant to sections 772 and 773 of the 

Act, the estimated dumping margins for 

PET resin from each of the countries 

included in the Petitions and covered by 

this initiation notice are: (1) 18.76 

percent to 115.87 percent for Brazil,42

(2) 8.49 percent to 53.50 percent for 

Indonesia,43 (3) 55.74 percent and 

101.41 percent for Korea,44 (4) 25.03 

percent and 43.40 percent for 

Pakistan,45 and (5) 14.67 percent and 

45.00 percent for Taiwan.46

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value 

Investigations 

Based upon the examination of the 

Petitions, we find that the Petitions 

meet the requirements of section 732 of 

the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD 

investigations to determine whether or 

not imports of PET resin from Brazil, 

Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan 

are being, or are likely to be, sold in the 

United States at less than fair value. In 

accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of 

the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), 

unless postponed, we will make our 

preliminary determinations no later 

than 140 days after the date of this 

initiation. 

Numerous amendments to the AD and 

countervailing duty (CVD) laws were 

made under the Trade Preferences 

Extension Act of 2015.47 The 2015 law 

does not specify dates of application for 

those amendments. On August 6, 2015, 

the Department published an 

interpretative rule, in which it 

announced the applicability dates for 

each amendment to the Act, except for 

amendments contained in section 771(7) 

of the Act, which relate to 

determinations of material injury by the 

ITC.48 The amendments to sections 

771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are 

applicable to all determinations made 

on or after August 6, 2015, and, 

therefore, apply to these AD 

investigations.49

Respondent Selection 

The petitioners named five companies 

in Brazil, seven companies in Indonesia, 

16 companies in Korea, two companies 

in Pakistan, and eight companies in 

Taiwan as producers and/or exporters of 

PET resin.50 Following standard 

practice in AD investigations involving 

market economy countries, in the event 

the Department determines that the 

number of companies for any of the 

countries identified above is large, the 

Department intends to review U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

data for U.S. imports of PET resin 

during the respective POIs under the 

appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

of the United States subheadings, and if 

the Department determines that it 

cannot individually examine each 

company based upon the Department’s 

resources, then it will select 

respondents based on that CBP data. We 

intend to release CBP data under 

Administrative Protective Order (APO) 

to all parties with access to information 

protected by APO within five business 

days of the announcement of the 

initiation of these investigations. 

Interested parties must submit 

applications for disclosure under APO 

in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). 

Instructions for filing such applications 

may be found on the Department’s Web 

site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo. 

Interested parties may submit 

comments regarding the CBP data and 

respondent selection by 5:00 p.m. ET on 

the seventh calendar day after 

placement of the CBP data on the 

records of these investigations. 

Interested parties wishing to submit 

rebuttal comments should submit those 

comments five calendar days after the 

deadline for initial comments. 

With respect to Pakistan, although the 

Department normally relies on import 

data from CBP to determine whether to 

select a limited number of producers/ 

exporters for individual examination in 

AD investigations, the petitioners 

identified only two companies as 

producers/exporters of PET resin from 

Pakistan: Novatex Limited and Pakistan 

Synthetics Limited. The petitioners 

relied on information from a 

subscription database of import 

shipments, additional research of 

publicly-available sources, and the 

petitioners’ foreign market research 

report as support for their claim that 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices 48981 

51See Volume I of the Petitions, at 13, and Exhibit 

GEN–4, See also letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Re: 

Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from 

Pakistan—Petitioners’ Foreign Market Research 

Report,’’ dated September 27, 2017. 52See 19 CFR 351.301(b). 

53See section 782(b) of the Act. 

54See Certification of Factual Information to 

Import Administration during Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 

17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also frequently asked 

questions regarding the Final Rule, available at 

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

info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. 

there are only two producers/exporters 

of PET resin in Pakstan.51 We currently 

know of no additional producers/ 

exporters of PET resin from Pakistan. 

Accordingly, the Department intends to 

examine the producers/exporters 

identified in the petition for the 

investigation. Parties wishing to 

comment on respondent selection must 

do so within five days of the publication 

of this notice in the Federal Register. 

Comments must be electronically 

filed via ACCESS. An electronically 

filed document must be successfully 

received, in its entirety, by ACCESS no 

later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the relevant 

date noted above. If respondent 

selection is necessary, we intend to 

make our decisions regarding 

respondent selection, based on 

comments received from interested 

parties and our analysis of the record 

information, within 20 days of 

publication of this notice. 

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions 

In accordance with section 

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

351.202(f), copies of the public version 

of the Petitions have been provided to 

the governments of Brazil, Indonesia, 

Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan 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 PET resin from Brazil, Indonesia, 

Korea, Pakistan, and/or Taiwan are 

materially injuring or threatening 

material injury to a U.S. industry. A 

negative ITC determination for any 

country will result in the investigation 

being terminated with respect to that 

country. Otherwise, these 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 the Department, and (v) 

evidence other than factual information 

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

of the Department’s regulations requires 

any party submitting factual 

information, to specify under which 

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

information is being submitted 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.52 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. 

Extensions of Time Limits 

Parties may request an extension of 

time limits before the expiration of a 

time limit established under 19 CFR 

351.301 or as otherwise specified by the 

Secretary. In general, an extension 

request will be considered untimely if it 

is filed after the expiration of the time 

limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. 

For submissions that are due from 

multiple parties simultaneously, an 

extension request will be considered 

untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET 

on the due date. Under certain 

circumstances, we may elect to specify 

a different time limit by which 

extension requests will be considered 

untimely for such submissions and, in 

such a case, will inform parties in the 

letter or memorandum setting forth the 

deadline (i.e., include a time by which 

extension requests must be filed to be 

considered timely). An extension 

request must be made in a separate, 

stand-alone submission. We will grant 

untimely filed requests for the extension 

of time limits only under limited 

circumstances. Parties should review 

Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 

FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), 

available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ 

pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013- 

22853.htm, prior to submitting factual 

information in these investigations. 

Certification Requirements 

Any party submitting factual 

information in an AD or CVD 

proceeding must certify to the accuracy 

and completeness of that information.53

Parties are hereby reminded that revised 

certification requirements are in effect 

for company and government officials, 

as well as their representatives. 

Investigations initiated on the basis of 

petitions filed on or after August 16, 

2013, and other segments of any AD or 

CVD proceedings initiated on or after 

August 16, 2013, should use the formats 

for the revised certifications provided at 

the end of the Final Rule.54 The 

Department will reject factual 

submissions if the submitting party does 

not comply with applicable revised 

certification requirements. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

As noted above, Interested parties 

must submit applications for disclosure 

under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.305. On January 22, 2008, the 

Department published Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Documents Submission Procedures; 

APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 

22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate 

in these investigations should ensure 

that they meet the requirements of these 

procedures (e.g., filing of letters of 

appearance, in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.103(d)). 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i) 

of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c). 

Dated: October 16, 2017. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix—Scope of the Investigations 

The merchandise covered by these 

investigations is polyethylene terephthalate 

(PET) resin having an intrinsic viscosity of at 

least 70, but not more than 88, milliliters per 

gram (0.70 to 0.88 deciliters per gram). The 

scope includes blends of virgin PET resin 

and recycled PET resin containing 50 percent 

or more virgin PET resin content by weight, 

provided such blends meet the intrinsic 

viscosity requirements above. The scope 

includes all PET resin meeting the above 

specifications regardless of additives 

introduced in the manufacturing process. 

The merchandise subject to these 

investigations is properly classified under 

subheadings 3907.61.0000 and 3907.69.0000 

of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
48982 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 203 / Monday, October 23, 2017 / Notices 

1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty, Order, 

Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity 

to Request Administrative Review, 82 FR 9709 

(February 8, 2017). 

2See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Utility Scale 

Wind Towers from the People’s Republic of China: 

Request for Administrative Review,’’ dated 

February 28, 2017. 

3See Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR 

17188 (April 10, 2017). 

4See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Utility Scale 

Wind Towers from the People’s Republic of China: 

Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review,’’ 

dated May 31, 2017. 

subheadings are provided for convenience 

and customs purposes, the written 

description of the merchandise covered by 

these investigations is dispositive. 

[FR Doc. 2017–22931 Filed 10–20–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–981] 

Utility Scale Wind Towers From the 

People’s Republic of China: Notice of 

Rescission of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; 2016–2017 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) is rescinding its 

administrative review of utility scale 

wind towers (wind towers) from the 

People’s Republic of China (PRC) for the 

period or review (POR) February 1, 

2016, through January 31, 2017, based 

on the withdrawal of request for review. 

DATES: Applicable October 23, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Trisha Tran, 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) 482–4852. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On February 8, 2017, the Department 

published the notice of opportunity to 

request an administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on wind towers 

from the PRC for the above POR.1 On 

February 28, 2017, in accordance with 

section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 

as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 

351.213(b), the Department received a 

timely request from the Wind Tower 

Coalition (the petitioner) to conduct an 

administrative review of this 

antidumping duty order.2

Pursuant to this request, and in 

accordance with 19 CFR 

351.225(c)(1)(i), on April 10, 2017, the 

Department published a notice of 

initiation of an administrative review of 

the antidumping duty order on wind 

towers from the PRC.3 On May 31, 2017, 

the petitioner timely withdrew its 

request for an administrative review of 

all 56 companies for which it had 

requested a review.4

Rescission of Review 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the 

Department will rescind an 

administrative review, in whole or in 

part, if the party that requested a review 

withdraws the request within 90 days of 

the publication date of the notice of 

initiation of the requested review. As 

noted above, the petitioner withdrew its 

request for review within 90 days of the 

publication date of the Initiation Notice. 

No other parties requested an 

administrative review of the order. 

Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding this 

review on wind towers from the PRC in 

its entirety. 

Assessment 

The Department will instruct U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to 

assess antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries of wind towers from 

the PRC. Antidumping duties shall be 

assessed at rates equal to the cash 

deposit of estimated antidumping duties 

required at the time of entry, or 

withdrawal from warehouse, for 

consumption in accordance with 19 

CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department 

intends to issue appropriate assessment 

instructions to CBP 15 days after the 

date of publication of this notice of 

rescission of administrative review in 

the Federal Register. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice also serves as a final 

reminder to importers for whom this 

review is being rescinded of their 

responsibility under 19 CFR 

351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 

regarding the reimbursement of 

antidumping duties prior to liquidation 

of the relevant entries during this 

review period. Failure to comply with 

this requirement could result in the 

Secretary’s presumption that 

reimbursement of the antidumping 

duties occurred and the subsequent 

assessment of double antidumping 

duties. 

Notification Regarding Administrative 

Protective Orders 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective orders (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the return or 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues 

to govern business proprietary 

information in this segment of the 

proceeding. Timely written notification 

of the return/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 

which is subject to sanction. 

This notice is published in 

accordance with section 777(i)(1) of the 

Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4). 

Dated: October 17, 2017. 

James Maeder, 

Senior Director performing the duties of 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2017–22932 Filed 10–20–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[Docket No.: 170413395–7395–02] 

RIN 0625–XCO3 

2017 Fee Schedule for National Travel 

and Tourism Office for the Advance 

Passenger Information System (APIS)/ 

I–92 Program, I–94 International 

Arrivals Program, and Survey of 

International Air Travelers Program 

AGENCY: International Trade 

Administration, Department of 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final notice of implementation 

of user fees. 

SUMMARY: The International Trade 

Administration (ITA) solicited public 

feedback on its proposal to adjust the 

National Travel & Tourism Office 

(NTTO) 2017 I–94/APIS & SIAT data 

user fees for three programs after 

considering an independent cost study 

which concluded that ITA is not fully 

covering its costs for providing services 

under the current fee structure. Federal 

agencies are directed by Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

Circular A–25 to ensure they recoup 

their costs when providing certain 

services. The NTTO provides key 

market intelligence to the government 

and travel industry to help U.S. 

businesses expand travel exports. ITA, 

through the NTTO, will continue to 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES