49592 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 206 / Thursday, October 26, 2017 / Notices 

1See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Re: 

Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from the 

People’s Republic of China and India: Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Petitions’’ (September 28, 

2017) (the Petition). 

2 Id. at 2. 

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

Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of 

Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from India: 

Supplemental Questions’’ (October 3, 2017). 

4See Letter from the petitioner, 

‘‘Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from India: 

Responses to Supplemental Questions Regarding 

the Countervailing Duty Petition’’ (October 6, 2017). 

5See Letter from the petitioner, 

‘‘Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from the 

People’s Republic of China and India: Amendment 

to the Suggested Scope of the Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Petitions’’ (October 13, 2017). 

6See ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the 

Petition’’ section, below. 

7See Letter from the petitioner, 

‘‘Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from the 

People’s Republic of China and India: Amendment 

to the Suggested Scope of the Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Petitions’’ (October 13, 2017). 

See also Memorandum to the File (October 11, 

2017). 

8See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; 

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

9See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual 

information’’). 

10See 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 the Department’s electronic filing requirements, 

which went into effect on 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%20on%20Electronic

%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf. 

is C2F4, and the Chemical Abstracts Service 

Registry number is 9002–84–0. 

PTFE further processed into micropowder, 

having particle size typically ranging from 1 

to 25 microns, and a melt-flow rate no less 

than 0.1 gram/10 minutes, is excluded from 

the scope of these investigations. 

PTFE is classified in the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under 

subheadings 3904.61.0010 and 3904.61.0090. 

Subject merchandise may also be classified 

under HTSUS subheading 3904.69.5000. 

Although the HTSUS subheadings and CAS 

Number are provided for convenience and 

Customs purposes, the written description of 

the scope is dispositive. 

[FR Doc. 2017–23307 Filed 10–25–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–533–880] 

Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin From 

India: Initiation of Countervailing Duty 

Investigation 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Applicable October 18, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Toby Vandall at (202) 482–1664 or 

Aimee Phelan at (202) 482–0697, 

AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petition 

On September 28, 2017, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) received a countervailing 

duty (CVD) Petition concerning imports 

of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin 

from India, filed in proper form on 

behalf of the Chemours Company FC 

LLC (the petitioner).1 The CVD Petition 

was accompanied by antidumping duty 

(AD) Petitions concerning imports of 

PTFE resin from India and the People’s 

Republic of China. The petitioner is a 

domestic producer of PTFE resin.2

On October 3, 2017, the Department 

requested supplemental information 

pertaining to certain areas of the 

Petition.3 The petitioner filed a response 

to this request on October 6, 2017.4 In 

addition, the petitioner filed revised 

scope language on October 13, 2017.5

In accordance with section 702(b)(1) 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(the Act), the petitioner alleges that the 

Government of India is providing 

countervailable subsidies, within the 

meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of 

the Act, to imports of PTFE resin from 

India and that such imports are 

materially injuring, or threatening 

material injury to, the domestic industry 

producing PTFE resin in the United 

States. Also, consistent with section 

702(b)(1) of the Act, for those alleged 

programs on which we are initiating a 

CVD investigation, the Petition is 

accompanied by information reasonably 

available to the petitioner supporting its 

allegations. 

The Department finds that the 

petitioner is an interested party as 

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

and that the petitioner filed this Petition 

on behalf of the domestic industry and 

demonstrated sufficient industry 

support with respect to the initiation of 

the CVD investigation that the petitioner 

is requesting.6

Period of Investigation 

Because the Petition was filed on 

September 28, 2017, the period of 

investigation (POI) is January 1, 2016, 

through December 31, 2016. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The product covered by this 

investigation is PTFE resin from India. 

For a full description of the scope of this 

investigation, see the ‘‘Scope of the 

Investigation,’’ in the Appendix to this 

notice. 

Comments on Scope of the Investigation 

During our review of the Petition, the 

Department issued questions to, and 

received a response from, the petitioner 

pertaining to the proposed scope to 

ensure that the scope language in the 

Petition would be an accurate reflection 

of the products for which the domestic 

industry is seeking relief.7

As discussed in the preamble to the 

Department’s regulations, we are setting 

aside a period for interested parties to 

raise issues regarding product coverage 

(scope).8 The Department will consider 

all comments received from interested 

parties and, if necessary, will consult 

with the interested parties prior to the 

issuance of the preliminary 

determinations. If scope comments 

include factual information,9 all such 

factual information should be limited to 

public information. To facilitate 

preparation of its questionnaires, the 

Department requests all interested 

parties to submit such comments by 

5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on 

Tuesday, November 7, 2017, 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 Friday, 

November 17, 2017, which is 10 

calendar days from the initial comments 

deadline. 

The Department requests that any 

factual information the parties consider 

relevant to the scope of the investigation 

be submitted during this time period. 

However, if a party subsequently finds 

that additional factual information 

pertaining to the scope of the 

investigation 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 records of each of the 

concurrent AD and CVD investigations. 

Filing Requirements 

All submissions to the Department 

must be filed electronically using 

Enforcement and Compliance’s 

Antidumping Duty and Countervailing 

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 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 206 / Thursday, October 26, 2017 / Notices 49593 

11See Letter to the Embassy of India, 

‘‘Countervailing Duty Petition on 

Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from India’’ 

(September 28, 2017). 

12See Memorandum, ‘‘Consultations with 

Officials from the Government of India Regarding 

the Countervailing Duty Petition on 

Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from India’’ 

(October 18, 2017). 

13See section 771(10) of the Act. 14See 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)). 15For a discussion of the domestic like product 

analysis in this case, see Countervailing Duty 

Investigation Initiation Checklist 

Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from India 

(India CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, 

Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering 

Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Resin from the 

People’s Republic of China and India (Attachment 

II). This checklist is 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. 

16See Petition at 2–4 and Exhibit I–2; see also 

General Issues and AD Supplement at 3–4. 

17See Petition at Exhibit I–2; see also General 

Issues and AD Supplement at 3–4. 

18 Id. For further discussion, see India CVD 

Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. 

19See India CVD Initiation Checklist at 

Attachment II. 

20See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also 

India CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. 

21See India CVD Initiation Checklist at 

Attachment II. 

22 Id. 

23 Id. 

and Compliance’s APO/Dockets Unit, 

Room 18022, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20230, and 

stamped with the date and time of 

receipt by the applicable deadlines. 

Consultations 

Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) 

and (ii) of the Act, the Department 

notified representatives of the 

Government of India of the receipt of 

the Petition, and provided them the 

opportunity for consultations with 

respect to the CVD Petition.11

Consultations with the GOI were held at 

the Department of Commerce on 

October 18, 2017.12

Determination of Industry Support for 

the Petition 

Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires 

that a petition be filed on behalf of the 

domestic industry. Section 702(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 702(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,13 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.14

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 this 

investigation. Based on our analysis of 

the information submitted on the 

record, we have determined that PTFE 

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.15

In determining whether the petitioner 

has standing under section 702(c)(4)(A) 

of the Act, we considered the industry 

support data contained in the Petition 

with reference to the domestic like 

product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of the 

Investigation,’’ in the Appendix to this 

notice. The petitioner provided its own 

production of the domestic like product 

in 2016, as well as estimated 2016 

production data of the domestic like 

product by the entire U.S. industry.16 To 

establish industry support, the 

petitioner compared its production to 

the total 2016 production of the 

domestic like product for the entire 

domestic industry.17 We relied on the 

data the petitioner provided for 

purposes of measuring industry 

support.18

Our review of the data provided in the 

Petition and other information readily 

available to the Department indicates 

that the petitioner has established 

industry support.19 First, the Petition 

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).20 Second, the domestic 

producers (or workers) have met the 

statutory criteria for industry support 

under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act 

because the domestic producers (or 

workers) who support the Petition 

account for at least 25 percent of the 

total production of the domestic like 

product.21 Finally, the domestic 

producers (or workers) have met the 

statutory criteria for industry support 

under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act 

because the domestic producers (or 

workers) who support the Petition 

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 Petition.22 Accordingly, the 

Department determines that the Petition 

was filed on behalf of the domestic 

industry within the meaning of section 

702(b)(1) of the Act. 

The Department finds that the 

petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of 

the domestic industry because it is an 

interested party as defined in section 

771(9)(C) of the Act and it has 

demonstrated sufficient industry 

support with respect to the CVD 

investigation that it is requesting the 

Department initiate.23

Injury Test 

Because India is a ‘‘Subsidies 

Agreement Country’’ within the 

meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, 

section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
49594 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 206 / Thursday, October 26, 2017 / Notices 

24See Volume I of the Petitions at 21 and Exhibit 

I–14. 

25 Id. 

26 Id. at 24–34, Exhibit I–8, and Exhibits I–14, I– 

16, and I–17. 

27See India CVD Initiation Checklist at 

Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and 

Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 

Covering Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin (PTFE 

Resin) from India and the People’s Republic of 

China (the PRC) (Attachment III). 

28See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, 

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

29See 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) (Applicability Notice). 

The 2015 amendments may be found at https://

www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/ 

1295/text/pl. 

30See Applicability Notice, 80 FR at 46794–95. 

31See Petition at Exhibit I–13. 

32See Memorandum, ‘‘Polytetrafluoroethylene 

(PTFE) Resin from India Countervailing Duty 

Petition: Release of U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection Data’’ (October 12, 2017). 

33See section 703(a)(2) of the Act. 

34See section 703(a)(1) of the Act. 

this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC 

must determine whether imports of the 

subject merchandise from India 

materially injure, or threaten material 

injury to, a U.S. industry. 

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, which are benefitting from 

countervailable subsidies. In addition, 

the petitioner alleges that subject 

imports exceed the negligibility 

threshold provided for under section 

771(24)(A) of the Act.24 In CVD 

petitions, section 771(24)(B) of the Act 

provides that imports of subject 

merchandise from developing and least 

developed countries must exceed the 

negligibility threshold of four percent. 

The petitioner also demonstrates that 

subject imports from India, which has 

been designated as a least developed 

country under section 771(36)(B) of the 

Act, exceed the negligibility threshold 

of four percent.25

The petitioner contends that the 

industry’s injured condition is 

illustrated by a significant volume of 

subject imports; an increase in the 

volume of subject imports relative to 

U.S. consumption and production; 

reduced market share; underselling and 

price suppression or depression; lost 

sales and revenues; a negative impact on 

the domestic industry’s capacity, 

capacity utilization, and employment; 

and a negative impact on revenues and 

operating profits.26 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.27

Initiation of CVD Investigation 

Based on the examination of the CVD 

Petition, we find that the Petition meets 

the requirements of section 702 of the 

Act. Therefore, we are initiating a CVD 

investigation to determine whether 

imports of PTFE resin from India benefit 

from countervailable subsidies 

conferred by the government of this 

country. In accordance with section 

703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we 

intend to make our preliminary 

determination no later than 65 days 

after the date of this initiation. 

Under the Trade Preferences 

Extension Act of 2015, numerous 

amendments to the AD and CVD laws 

were made.28 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.29 The 

amendments to sections 776 and 782 of 

the Act are applicable to all 

determinations made on or after August 

6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to this 

CVD investigation.30

Based on our review of the Petition, 

we find that there is sufficient 

information to initiate a CVD 

investigation on 18 of the 22 alleged 

programs in India. For a full discussion 

of the basis for our decision on whether 

to initiate on each program, see the 

India CVD Initiation Checklist. A public 

version of the initiation checklist for 

this investigation is available on 

ACCESS. 

In accordance with section 703(b)(1) 

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

unless postponed, we will make our 

preliminary determination no later than 

65 days after the date of this initiation. 

Respondent Selection 

The petitioner named seven 

companies in India as producers/ 

exporters of PTFE resin.31 For India, 

following standard practice in CVD 

investigations, in the event the 

Department determines that the number 

of producers/exporters is large, the 

Department intends to review U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

data for U.S. imports of PTFE resin 

during the POI under the appropriate 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States subheadings, and if it 

determines it cannot individually 

examine each company based upon the 

Department’s resources, then the 

Department will select respondents 

based on that data. 

On October 12, 2017, the Department 

released CBP data under the 

Administrative Protective Order (APO) 

to all parties with access to information 

protected by APO and indicated that 

interested parties wishing to comment 

regarding the CBP data and respondent 

selection must do so within three 

business days of the publication date of 

the notice of initiation of this CVD 

investigation.32 Interested parties must 

submit applications for disclosure under 

APO in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.505(b). Instructions for filing such 

applications may be found on the 

Department’s Web site at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/apo. The 

Department will not accept rebuttal 

comments regarding the CBP data or 

respondent selection. 

Comments must be filed 

electronically using ACCESS. An 

electronically filed document must be 

received successfully, in its entirety, by 

ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on 

the date noted above. If respondent 

selection is necessary, within 20 days of 

publication of this notice, we intend to 

make our decision regarding respondent 

selection based upon comments 

received from interested parties and our 

analysis of the record information. 

Distribution of Copies of the Petition 

In accordance with section 

702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.202(f), a copy of the public version 

of the Petition has been provided to the 

Government of India via ACCESS. To 

the extent practicable, we will attempt 

to provide a copy of the public version 

of the Petition to each exporter named 

in the Petition, as provided under 19 

CFR 351.203(c)(2). 

ITC Notification 

We will notify the ITC of our 

initiation, as required by section 702(d) 

of the Act. 

Preliminary Determination by the ITC 

The ITC will preliminarily determine, 

within 45 days after the date on which 

the Petition were filed, whether there is 

a reasonable indication that imports of 

PTFE resin from India is materially 

injuring, or threatening material injury 

to, a U.S. industry.33 A negative ITC 

determination will result in the 

investigation being terminated.34


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 206 / Thursday, October 26, 2017 / Notices 49595 

35See 19 CFR 351.301(b). 

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

37See section 782(b) of the Act. 

38See also 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 http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/ 

notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. 

Otherwise, this investigation 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). 19 CFR 351.301(b) 

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 this investigation. 

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 time limit established 

under 19 CFR 351.301 expires. 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 the letter or 

memorandum setting forth 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 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 this 

investigation. 

Certification Requirements 

Any party submitting factual 

information in an AD or CVD 

proceeding must certify to the accuracy 

and completeness of that information.37

Parties must use the certification 

formats provided in 19 CFR 

351.303(g).38 The Department intends to 

reject factual submissions if the 

submitting party does not comply with 

the applicable revised certification 

requirements. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

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 this investigation should ensure that 

they meet the requirements of these 

procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of 

appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 

351.103(d)). 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to sections 702 and 777(i) of 

the Act. 

Dated: October 18, 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 Investigation 

The product covered by this investigation 

is polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin, 

including but not limited to granular, 

dispersion, or coagulated dispersion (also 

known as fine powder). PTFE is covered by 

the scope of this investigation whether filled 

or unfilled, whether or not modified, and 

whether or not containing co-polymer 

additives, pigments, or other materials. Also 

included is PTFE wet raw polymer. The 

chemical formula for PTFE is C2F4, and the 

Chemical Abstracts Service Registry number 

is 9002–84–0. 

PTFE further processed into micropowder, 

having particle size typically ranging from 1 

to 25 microns, and a melt-flow rate no less 

than 0.1 gram/10 minutes, is excluded from 

the scope of this investigation. 

PTFE is classified in the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under 

subheadings 3904.61.0010 and 3904.61.0090. 

Subject merchandise may also be classified 

under HTSUS subheading 3904.69.5000. 

Although the HTSUS subheadings and CAS 

Number are provided for convenience and 

Customs purposes, the written description of 

the scope is dispositive. 

[FR Doc. 2017–23308 Filed 10–25–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology 

Judges Panel of the Malcolm Baldrige 

National Quality Award 

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards 

and Technology, Department of 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of closed meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Judges Panel of the 

Malcolm Baldrige National Quality 

Award (Judges Panel) will meet in 

closed session Sunday, November 5, 

2017 through Thursday, November 9, 

2017 from 8:30 a.m. until 5:30 p.m. 

Eastern Time each day. The purpose of 

this meeting is to review 

recommendations from site visits, and 

recommend 2017 Malcolm Baldrige 

National Quality Award recipients. The 

meeting is closed to the public in order 

to protect the proprietary data to be 

examined and discussed at the meeting. 

DATES: The meeting will be held 

Sunday, November 5, 2017 through 

Thursday, November 9, 2017, from 8:30 

a.m. until 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time each 

day. The entire meeting will be closed 

to the public. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, 

Gaithersburg, MD 20899. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Fangmeyer, Director, Baldrige 

Performance Excellence Program, 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail 

Stop 1020, Gaithersburg, MD 20899– 

1020, telephone number (301) 975– 

2360, email robert.fangmeyer@nist.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 3711a(d)(1) and the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 

amended, 5 U.S.C. App. 

Pursuant to 41 CFR 102–3.150(b), this 

Federal Register notice for this meeting 

is being published fewer than 15 

calendar days prior to the meeting as 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES