Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 20678-20682 [E9-10345]
Download as PDF
20678
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 5, 2009 / Notices
manufactured by your company that were
subsequently exported by an affiliated
exporter to the United States.
• Please do not include any sales of subject
merchandise manufactured in Hong Kong in
your figures.
Further Manufactured
• Sales of further manufactured or
assembled (including re-packaged)
merchandise is merchandise that undergoes
further manufacture or assembly in the
United States before being sold to the first
unaffiliated customer.
• Further manufacture or assembly costs
include amounts incurred for direct
materials, labor and overhead, plus amounts
for general and administrative expense,
interest expense, and additional packing
expense incurred in the country of further
manufacture, as well as all costs involved in
moving the product from the U.S. port of
entry to the further manufacturer.
[FR Doc. E9–10346 Filed 5–4–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation is January
1, 2008, through December 31, 2008.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Scope of Investigation
The products covered by this
investigation are certain OCTG from the
PRC. For a full description of the scope
of the investigation, please see the
‘‘Scope of the Investigation’’ in
Appendix I of this notice.
International Trade Administration
[C–570–944]
Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods
from the People’s Republic of China:
Initiation of Countervailing Duty
Investigation
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 5, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yasmin Nair and Joseph Shuler, AD/
CVD Operations, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3813 and (202)
482–1293, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On April 8, 2009, the Department of
Commerce (‘‘Department’’) received a
petition filed in proper form by
Maverick Tube Corporation; United
States Steel Corporation; TMK IPSCO;
V&M Star L.P.; Wheatland Tube
Corporation; Evraz Rocky Mountain
Steel; and the United Steel, Paper and
Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing,
Energy, Allied Industrial and Service
Workers International Union, AFL–CIOCLC (collectively, ‘‘petitioners’’),
domestic producers of certain oil
country tubular goods (‘‘OCTG’’). In
response to the Department’s requests,
the petitioners provided timely
information supplementing the petition
on April 20, 22, and 24, 2009.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:12 May 04, 2009
Jkt 217001
In accordance with section 702(b)(1)
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(‘‘the Act’’), the petitioners allege that
manufacturers, producers, or exporters
of OCTG in the People’s Republic of
China (‘‘PRC’’) receive countervailable
subsidies within the meaning of section
701 of the Act, and that such imports
are materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, an industry in the
United States.
The Department finds that the
petitioners filed the petition on behalf of
the domestic industry because they are
interested parties as defined in section
771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act, and the
petitioners have demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the
countervailing duty (‘‘CVD’’)
investigation (see ‘‘Determination of
Industry Support for the Petition’’
section below).
Comments on Scope of Investigation
During our review of the petition, we
discussed the scope with the petitioners
to ensure that it is an accurate reflection
of the products for which the domestic
industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as
discussed in the preamble to the
Department’s regulations (Antidumping
Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final
Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19,
1997)), we are setting aside a period for
interested parties to raise issues
regarding product coverage. The
Department encourages all interested
parties to submit such comments by
May 18, 2009, twenty calendar days
from the signature date of this notice.
Comments should be addressed to
Import Administration’s APO/Dockets
Unit, Room 1870, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.
The period of scope consultations is
intended to provide the Department
with ample opportunity to consider all
comments and to consult with parties
prior to the issuance of the preliminary
determinations.
Consultations
Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of
the Act, the Department invited
representatives of the Government of the
PRC for consultations with respect to
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the CVD petition. The Department held
these consultations in Washington, DC,
on April 21, 2009. See the
Memorandum from Yasmin Nair and
Joseph Shuler to the File, entitled,
‘‘Consultations with Officials from the
Government of the People’s Republic of
China on the Countervailing Duty
Petition regarding Certain Oil Country
Tubular Goods,’’ (April 23, 2009), which
is on file in the Central Records Unit
(‘‘CRU’’) of the main Department of
Commerce building, Room 1117.
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.
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 U.S.
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 (section 771(10)
of the Act), 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. See
E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM
05MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 5, 2009 / Notices
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), cert. denied
492 U.S. 919 (1989).
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 petitioners do not offer a
definition of domestic like product
distinct from the scope of the
investigation. Based on our analysis of
the information submitted on the
record, we have determined that OCTG
constitute a single domestic like product
and we have analyzed industry support
in terms of that domestic like product.
For a discussion of the domestic like
product analysis in this case, see
Countervailing Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Certain Oil Country
Tubular Goods from the People’s
Republic of China (‘‘Initiation
Checklist’’) at Attachment II (Analysis of
Industry Support), on file in the CRU,
Room 1117 of the main Department of
Commerce building.
With regard to section 702(c)(4)(A), in
determining whether the petitioners
have standing, (i.e., those domestic
workers and producers supporting the
petition account for: (1) at least 25
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product; and (2) 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), 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’’ at Appendix I. To
establish industry support, the
petitioners provided their production of
the domestic like product for the year
2008, and compared this to an estimate
of production of the domestic like
product for the entire domestic
industry. See Volume I of the petition,
at pages 3–4 and Exhibit I–3a. To
estimate 2008 production of the
domestic like product Petitioners used
an industry publication which reports
data in shipments. The petitioners
approximated domestic production of
OCTG by inflating the volume of
domestic shipments reported by the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:12 May 04, 2009
Jkt 217001
ratio of the difference between the
petitioners’ production and shipments
in the applicable calendar year. See
Volume I of the petition, at page 3 and
Exhibits I–3b and I–3c, and Supplement
to the petition, dated April 22, 2009, at
pages 10–11 and Exhibit Supp. I–6. For
further discussion, see Initiation
Checklist at Attachment II.
The Department’s review of the data
provided in the petition, supplemental
submissions, and other information
readily available to the Department,
indicates that the petitioners have
established industry support. First, the
petition establishes 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). See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the
Act and Initiation Checklist at
Attachment II. 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. See Initiation Checklist at
Attachment II. 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. 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. See Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
The Department finds that the
petitioners filed the petition on behalf of
the domestic industry because they are
interested parties as defined in section
771(9)(C) of the Act and have
demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the CVD
investigation that they are requesting
the Department initiate. See Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
Injury Test
Because the PRC is a ‘‘Subsidies
Agreement Country’’ within the
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act,
section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to
this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC
must determine whether imports of the
subject merchandise from the PRC
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20679
materially injure, or threaten material
injury to, a U.S. industry.
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
The petitioners allege that imports of
OCTG from the PRC are benefitting from
countervailable subsidies and that such
imports are causing or threaten to cause,
material injury to the domestic
industries producing OCTG. In addition,
the petitioners allege that subsidized
imports exceed the negligibility
threshold provided for under section
771(24)(A) of the Act.
The petitioners contend that the
industry’s injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share,
increased import penetration,
underselling and price depressing and
suppressing effects, lost sales and
revenue, reduced production and
capacity utilization, reduced shipments
and increased inventories, reduced
employment, and an overall decline in
financial performance. 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. See
Initiation Checklist at Attachment III
(Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of
Material Injury and Causation for the
Petition).
Initiation of Countervailing Duty
Investigation
Section 702(b) of the Act requires the
Department to initiate a CVD proceeding
whenever an interested party files a
petition on behalf of an industry that:
(1) alleges the elements necessary for an
imposition of a duty under section
701(a) of the Act; and (2) is
accompanied by information reasonably
available to the petitioner(s) supporting
the allegations.
The Department has examined the
CVD petition on OCTG from the PRC
and finds that it complies with the
requirements of section 702(b) of the
Act. Therefore, in accordance with
section 702(b) of the Act, we are
initiating a CVD investigation to
determine whether manufacturers,
producers, or exporters of OCTG in the
PRC receive countervailable subsidies.
For a discussion of evidence supporting
our initiation determination, see
Initiation Checklist.
We are including in our investigation
the following programs alleged in the
petition to have provided
countervailable subsidies to producers
and exporters of the subject
merchandise in the PRC:
E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM
05MYN1
20680
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 5, 2009 / Notices
A. Preferential Loans
1. Policy Loans
2. Export Loans
3. Treasury Bond Loans to Northeast
4. Preferential Loans for State-Owned
Enterprises
5. Preferential Loans for Key Projects
and Technologies
6. Loans and Interest Subsidies
Provided Pursuant to the Northeast
Revitalization Program
G. Equity Programs
1. Debt-to-equity Swap for Pangang
2. Equity Infusions
3. Exemptions for SOEs From
Distributing Dividends to the State
4. Loan and Interest Forgiveness for
SOEs
E. Tax Benefit Programs
1. Income Tax Credits for
Domestically Owned Companies
Purchasing Domestically Produced
Equipment
2. Preferential Income Tax Policy for
Enterprises in the Northeast Region
3. Forgiveness of Tax Arrears for
Enterprises in the Old Industrial
Bases of Northeast China
D. Tariff and Indirect Tax Programs
1. Stamp Exemption on Share
Transfers Under Non-Tradable
Share Reform
2. Value Added Tax (‘‘VAT’’) and
Tariff Exemptions for Purchases of
Fixed Assets Under the Foreign
Trade Development Fund Program
3. Export Incentive Payments
Characterized as ‘‘VAT rebates’’
D. Land Grants and Discounts
1. Provision of Land Use Rights for
Less Than Adequate Remuneration
to Huludao
2. Provision of Land to SOEs for Less
Than Adequate Remuneration
C. Provision of Inputs for Less Than
Adequate Remuneration
1. Provision of Hot-Rolled Steel for
Less Than Adequate Remuneration
2. Provision of Steel Rounds for Less
Than Adequate Remuneration
3. Provision of Electricity for Less
Than Adequate Remuneration
4. Provision of Low-cost Coke through
the Imposition of Export Restraints
5. Provision of Coking Coal for Less
than Adequate Remuneration
F. Grant Programs
1. The State Key Technology Project
Fund
2. Foreign Trade Development Fund
(Northeast Revitalization Program)
3. Export Assistance Grants
4. Program to Rebate Antidumping
Duties
5. Subsidies for Development of
Famous Export Brands and China
World Top Brands
6. Sub-central Government Programs
to Promote Famous Export Brands
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:12 May 04, 2009
Jkt 217001
and China World Top Brands
7. Grants to Loss-Making SOEs
8. Export Interest Subsidies
I. Other Regional Programs
1. Subsidies Provided in the Tianjin
Binhai New Area and the Tianjin
Economic and Technological
Development Area
2. Five Points, One Line Program
3. High-Tech Industrial Development
Zones
D. Subsidies for Foreign Invested
Enterprises (‘‘FIEs’’)
1. ‘‘Two Free, Three Half’’ Program
2. Local Income Tax Exemption and
Reduction Programs for
‘‘Productive’’ Foreign-Invested
Enterprises
3. Preferential Tax Programs for
Foreign-Invested Enterprises
Recognized as High or New
Technology Enterprises
4. Reduced Income Tax Rates for
Export-Oriented FIEs
For further information explaining
why the Department is investigating
these programs, see Initiation Checklist.
We are not including in our
investigation the following programs
alleged to benefit producers and
exporters of the subject merchandise in
the PRC:
A. Equity Programs
1. Tradable Shares Reform Program
The petitioners allege that, in April
2005, the China Securities Regulatory
Commission announced a plan that
allowed certain companies to transform
their non-tradable shares into tradable
shares. The petitioners allege that
Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd.’s
(‘‘Baosteel’’) share values would have
been vulnerable to decline during the
transition from non-tradable to tradable
stock. Citing to notes in the Baoshan
Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. Third Quarter
Report, the petitioners allege that
Baosteel’s parent company, state-owned
Baosteel Group, made share purchases
to prevent Baosteel’s share prices from
falling below a certain market price and
that these purchases provided a
countervailable subsidy to Baosteel.
Because we found the program not
countervailable in OTR Tires from the
PRC,1 we do not plan to investigate this
program.
B. Tax Benefit Programs
1. Tax Reduction for Companies
Engaging in Research and
Development
The petitioners allege that according
to China’s World Trade Organization
1 See New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the
People’s Republic of China: Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination and Final
Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances,
73 FR 40480 (July 15, 2008) and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum at pages 21 and
159-160 (‘‘OTR Tires from the PRC’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
subsidies notification, domestic
industrial enterprises whose research
and development expenses increased by
10 percent from the previous year may
offset 150 percent of the research
expenditures from their income tax
obligations. The petitioners have not
sufficiently established that this tax
reduction program is specific.
Consequently, we do not plan to
investigate this program.
C. Provision of Inputs for Less than
Adequate Remuneration
1. Provision of Natural Gas for Less
Than Adequate Remuneration
The petitioners allege that, in 2007,
the Chinese Vice Premier indicated that
the central government would increase
electricity rates charged to steel
enterprises that have outdated
production capacities. The petitioners
further assert that this increase likely
resulted in OCTG producers receiving
lower, preferential rates, because OCTG
producers have the largest and most
advanced production capabilities. The
petitioners propose that OCTG
producers, being among the largest and
most advanced producers of hightechnology steel, would have perhaps
received similar benefits from the
preferential provision of natural gas.
The petitioners have failed to show how
the provision of natural gas for less than
adequate remuneration program is
specific. Consequently, we do not plan
to investigate this program.
2. Provision of Scrap for Less Than
Adequate Remuneration
The petitioners allege that the PRC
imposes export restrictions, such as
export quotas, related export licensing
and bidding requirements, minimum
export prices and duties, on the raw
materials used for producing OCTG. The
petitioners contend that these
restrictions have resulted in artificially
suppressing raw material prices of scrap
in the PRC. The petitioners have not
provided sufficient pricing data for
scrap. In addition, the source
documents referenced by the petitioners
do not provide any information that the
export restraints on scrap have resulted
in lower Chinese domestic scrap prices.
Consequently, we do not plan to
investigate this program.
Critical Circumstances
The petitioners have alleged that
critical circumstances exist with regard
to imports of OCTG from the PRC, and
have supported their allegation with the
following information.
Section 703(e)(1) of the Act states that
if a petitioner alleges critical
circumstances, the Department will find
that such critical circumstances exist, at
any time after the date of initiation,
E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM
05MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 5, 2009 / Notices
when there is a reasonable basis to
believe or suspect that under paragraph
(A), the alleged countervailable
subsidies are inconsistent with the
Subsidies Agreement, and that, under
paragraph (B), there have been massive
imports of the subject merchandise over
a relatively short period of time. Section
351.206(h) of the Department’s
regulations defines ‘‘massive imports’’
as imports that have increased by at
least 15 percent over the imports during
an immediately preceding period of
comparable duration. Section 351.206(i)
of the Department’s regulations states
that a ‘‘relatively short period’’ will
normally be defined as the period
beginning on the date the proceeding
begins and ending at least three months
later.
As discussed above, the petitioners
have provided documentation
supporting allegations of
countervailable subsidies which are
inconsistent with the Subsidies
Agreement.
The petitioners also have alleged that
imports from the PRC have been
massive over a relatively short period.
Arguing that there was sufficient prefiling notice of this CVD petition, the
petitioners contend that the Department
should compare imports of OCTG from
the PRC from January through June 2008
to imports during July through
December 2008 for purposes of this
determination. The petitioners
supported this allegation with copies of
news articles discussing the likelihood
of filing unfair trade complaints against
producers of OCTG. In particular, the
petitioners cite to an international news
article from July 2008 discussing the
likelihood that U.S. steel producers
would file unfair trade cases related to
seamless pipe, and explaining that
OCTG makes up approximately half of
total exports of Chinese seamless pipe.
Their comparison of the six month
period prior to that article (January–June
2008) with the six month period
immediately following (July–December
2008) shows that U.S. imports of OCTG
from the PRC increased 165 percent. In
addition, the petitioners cite to a
number of other news articles, ITC
decisions on other pipe and tube
products, and recent cases on the same
or similar products in other countries.
Although the ITC has not yet made a
preliminary decision with respect to
injury, the petitioners note that in the
past the Department has also considered
the extent of the increase in the volume
of imports of the subject merchandise as
one indicator of whether a reasonable
basis exists to impute knowledge that
material injury was likely. In this case
involving the PRC, the petitioners note
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:12 May 04, 2009
Jkt 217001
that the increase in imports far exceeds
the amount considered ‘‘massive.’’
We find that the petitioners have
alleged the elements of critical
circumstances and supported them with
information reasonably available for
purposes of initiating a critical
circumstances inquiry. We will
investigate this matter further and will
make a preliminary determination at the
appropriate time, in accordance with
section 735(e)(1) of the Act and
Department practice (see Policy Bulletin
98/4 (63 FR 55364, October 15, 1998)).
The petitioners have also requested an
expedited review, which the
Department will consider.
Respondent Selection
For this investigation, the Department
expects to select respondents based on
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(‘‘CBP’’) data for U.S. imports during the
period of investigation. We intend to
make our decision regarding respondent
selection within 20 days of publication
of this Federal Register notice. The
Department invites comments regarding
the CBP data and respondent selection
within seven calendar days of
publication of this Federal Register
notice.
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section
702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, a copy of the
public version of the petition has been
provided to the Government of the PRC.
As soon as and 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,
consistent with section 351.203(c)(2) of
the Department’s regulations.
ITC Notification
We have notified 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 25 days after the date on which
it receives notice of the initiation,
whether there is a reasonable indication
that imports of subsidized OCTG from
the PRC are causing material injury, or
threatening to cause material injury, to
a U.S. industry. See section 703(a)(2) of
the Act. A negative ITC determination
will result in the investigation being
terminated; otherwise, the investigation
will proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20681
Dated: April 28, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by this
investigation consists of certain oil
country tubular goods (OCTG), which
are hollow steel products of circular
cross-section, including oil well casing
and tubing, of iron (other than cast iron)
or steel (both carbon and alloy), whether
seamless or welded, regardless of end
finish (e.g., whether or not plain end,
threaded, or threaded and coupled)
whether or not conforming to American
Petroleum Institute (API) or non-API
specifications, whether finished
(including limited service OCTG
products) or unfinished (including
green tubes and limited service OCTG
products), whether or not thread
protectors are attached. The scope of the
investigation also covers OCTG
coupling stock. Excluded from the scope
of the investigation are casing or tubing
containing 10.5 percent or more by
weight of chromium; drill pipe;
unattached couplings; and unattached
thread protectors.
The merchandise covered by the
investigation is currently classified in
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) under item
numbers:
7304.29.10.10, 7304.29.10.20,
7304.29.10.30, 7304.29.10.40,
7304.29.10.50, 7304.29.10.60,
7304.29.10.80, 7304.29.20.10,
7304.29.20.20, 7304.29.20.30,
7304.29.20.40, 7304.29.20.50,
7304.29.20.60, 7304.29.20.80,
7304.29.31.10, 7304.29.31.20,
7304.29.31.30, 7304.29.31.40,
7304.29.31.50, 7304.29.31.60,
7304.29.31.80, 7304.29.41.10,
7304.29.41.20, 7304.29.41.30,
7304.29.41.40, 7304.29.41.50,
7304.29.41.60, 7304.29.41.80,
7304.29.50.15, 7304.29.50.30,
7304.29.50.45, 7304.29.50.60,
7304.29.50.75, 7304.29.61.15,
7304.29.61.30, 7304.29.61.45,
7304.29.61.60, 7304.29.61.75,
7305.20.20.00, 7305.20.40.00,
7305.20.60.00, 7305.20.80.00,
7306.29.10.30, 7306.29.10.90,
7306.29.20.00, 7306.29.31.00,
7306.29.41.00, 7306.29.60.10,
7306.29.60.50, 7306.29.81.10, and
7306.29.81.50.
The OCTG coupling stock covered by
the investigation may also enter under
the following HTSUS item numbers:
7304.39.00.24, 7304.39.00.28,
7304.39.00.32, 7304.39.00.36,
E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM
05MYN1
20682
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 5, 2009 / Notices
7304.39.00.40, 7304.39.00.44,
7304.39.00.48, 7304.39.00.52,
7304.39.00.56, 7304.39.00.62,
7304.39.00.68, 7304.39.00.72,
7304.39.00.76, 7304.39.00.80,
7304.59.60.00, 7304.59.80.15,
7304.59.80.20, 7304.59.80.25,
7304.59.80.30, 7304.59.80.35,
7304.59.80.40, 7304.59.80.45,
7304.59.80.50, 7304.59.80.55,
7304.59.80.60, 7304.59.80.65,
7304.59.80.70, and 7304.59.80.80.
The HTSUS subheadings are provided
for convenience and customs purposes
only, the written description of the
scope of the investigation is dispositive.
[FR Doc. E9–10345 Filed 5–4–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[Docket No. 0612242720–9794–03]
RIN 0648–ZB55
Availability of Pacific Coastal Salmon
Recovery Funds for Fiscal Year 2009;
Amendment
AGENCY: Fisheries Northwest Region
Program Office (NWRO), National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of funding availability;
amended solicitation.
SUMMARY: NOAA publishes this notice
to amend the Federal Funding
Opportunity (NMFS-NWRO–2009–
2001656) entitled ‘‘Pacific Coastal
Salmon Recovery Fund 2009’’ which
was originally announced in the Federal
Register on Friday, January 2, 2009.
This notice announces changes to the
eligibility criteria, program priorities,
funding amount, and application
deadline for proposals to implement the
requirements of the Omnibus
Appropriations Act, 2009.
DATES: Final applications should be
submitted via www.grants.gov and must
be received no later than 11:59 p.m. PST
on May 20, 2009. No facsimile or
electronic mail applications will be
accepted. Paper applications must be
postmarked by May 20, 2009. Any
application transmitted or postmarked,
as the case may be, after the deadline
will be considered non-responsive and
will not be considered for funding in
this competition.
Applications submitted through
www.grants.gov will have a date and
time indication on them. Hard copy
applications will be date and time
VerDate Nov<24>2008
23:12 May 04, 2009
Jkt 217001
stamped when they are received.
PLEASE NOTE: It may take
www.grants.gov up to two (2) business
days to validate or reject the
application. Please keep this in mind in
developing your submission timeline.
ADDRESSES: All application materials
can be found at the Grants.gov portal at
https://www.grants.gov. If an applicant
does not have internet access,
applications can be received from the
following address: Nicolle Hill, NMFS
Northwest Region Building #1, 7600
Sand Point Way, Seattle, WA 98115.
NMFS’ internet website at https://
www.nwr.noaa.gov contains additional
information on the Pacific Coastal
Salmon Recovery Fund (PCSRF).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information on PCSRF, please
contact Barry Thom, NMFS Northwest
Region Acting Regional Administrator,
at (503) 231–6266. Questions regarding
this announcement should be directed
to Nicolle Hill, NMFS Northwest
Region, PCSRF Federal Program Officer,
at (206) 526–4358 or
Nicolle.Hill@noaa.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),
announces that it is amending the
solicitation for PCSRF published on
January 2, 2009 (74 FR 72), to indicate
that the program supports the
restoration of Pacific salmon
populations, as authorized in 16 U.S.C.
3645 (d)(2) and the Omnibus
Appropriations Act, 2009 (the Act),
Public Law No. 111–8 (March 11, 2009).
In light of the new program objectives
and increased appropriations
implemented though the Act, the
program announces that the total
amount available for awards is up to
$80,000,000 through fiscal year (FY)
2009. In addition, pursuant to the Act,
the State of Nevada is added as an
eligible entity for projects under the
program. Due to the amendments to the
program, the deadline for applications
has been extended until May 20, 2009.
Under this amended solicitation,
NMFS allows for modifications to
applications originally received under
the initial announcement, and allows
new applications for projects from
individual eligible Indian Tribes,
eligible states, and representative Tribal
commissions. Any proposal that was
submitted to the initial solicitation
within the initial deadline is not
required to be resubmitted to be
considered under this amendment.
However, this amendment may impact
the content of proposals submitted by
applicants in response to the initial
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
announcement. Any revisions to such
proposals must be submitted by the new
deadline in order for the revised
changes to be considered under this
amended solicitation. An applicant may
only submit one application to the
Federal government for program
funding. Application submissions,
requesting any funding from both the
representative Commission and a Tribe
represented by that Commission will
not be accepted.
The following sections of the Federal
Funding Opportunity have been
amended to reflect the changes
announced in this notice: ‘‘Dates,’’
‘‘Funding Opportunity Description,’’
‘‘Award Information,’’ ‘‘Eligibility
Information,’’ ‘‘Application Review
Information,’’ and ‘‘Application and
Submission Information.’’ All other
requirements and information remain
unchanged.
Electronic Access
The full text of the full funding
opportunity announcement for this
program can be accessed via the
Grants.gov web site at https://
www.grants.gov. The announcement
will also be available by contacting the
program officials identified under FOR
FUTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Applicants must comply with all
requirements contained in the full
funding opportunity announcement.
Statutory Authority
This program is administered under
the authority of 16 U.S.C. 3645 (d)(2)
and Public Law No. 111–8 (March 11,
2009).
Funding Availability
Up to $80,000,000 is available for FY
2009 projects. There are no restrictions
on minimum funding request, but there
is a limit of $30,000,000, on a maximum
amount requested by any recipient.
Award periods may be up to a
maximum of 5 years.
Eligibility
Eligible state applicants are the States
of Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho,
Nevada and California. Eligible tribal
applicants are any federally recognized
Pacific Coastal or Columbia River tribes.
Limitation of Liability
Funding for this program is limited to
that provided within the FY 2009
appropriation. In no event will NOAA
or the Department of Commerce be
responsible for proposal preparation
costs if this program fails to receive
funding or is cancelled because of other
agency priorities. Publication of this
announcement does not oblige NOAA to
E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM
05MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 85 (Tuesday, May 5, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20678-20682]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-10345]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-570-944]
Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the People's Republic of
China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 5, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yasmin Nair and Joseph Shuler, AD/CVD
Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3813 and (202) 482-1293,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On April 8, 2009, the Department of Commerce (``Department'')
received a petition filed in proper form by Maverick Tube Corporation;
United States Steel Corporation; TMK IPSCO; V&M Star L.P.; Wheatland
Tube Corporation; Evraz Rocky Mountain Steel; and the United Steel,
Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial
and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO-CLC (collectively,
``petitioners''), domestic producers of certain oil country tubular
goods (``OCTG''). In response to the Department's requests, the
petitioners provided timely information supplementing the petition on
April 20, 22, and 24, 2009.
In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (``the Act''), the petitioners allege that manufacturers,
producers, or exporters of OCTG in the People's Republic of China
(``PRC'') receive countervailable subsidies within the meaning of
section 701 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring,
or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States.
The Department finds that the petitioners filed the petition on
behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as
defined in section 771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act, and the petitioners
have demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the
countervailing duty (``CVD'') investigation (see ``Determination of
Industry Support for the Petition'' section below).
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation is January 1, 2008, through December
31, 2008.
Scope of Investigation
The products covered by this investigation are certain OCTG from
the PRC. For a full description of the scope of the investigation,
please see the ``Scope of the Investigation'' in Appendix I of this
notice.
Comments on Scope of Investigation
During our review of the petition, we discussed the scope with the
petitioners to ensure that it is an accurate reflection of the products
for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as
discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations (Antidumping
Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19,
1997)), we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise
issues regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all
interested parties to submit such comments by May 18, 2009, twenty
calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Comments should
be addressed to Import Administration's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 1870,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230. The period of scope consultations is intended to
provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider all comments
and to consult with parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary
determinations.
Consultations
Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, the Department
invited representatives of the Government of the PRC for consultations
with respect to the CVD petition. The Department held these
consultations in Washington, DC, on April 21, 2009. See the Memorandum
from Yasmin Nair and Joseph Shuler to the File, entitled,
``Consultations with Officials from the Government of the People's
Republic of China on the Countervailing Duty Petition regarding Certain
Oil Country Tubular Goods,'' (April 23, 2009), which is on file in the
Central Records Unit (``CRU'') of the main Department of Commerce
building, Room 1117.
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.
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 U.S. 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 (section 771(10) of the Act), 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. See
[[Page 20679]]
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), cert. denied 492 U.S. 919
(1989).
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 petitioners do not
offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of
the investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted
on the record, we have determined that OCTG constitute a single
domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of
that domestic like product. For a discussion of the domestic like
product analysis in this case, see Countervailing Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the
People's Republic of China (``Initiation Checklist'') at Attachment II
(Analysis of Industry Support), on file in the CRU, Room 1117 of the
main Department of Commerce building.
With regard to section 702(c)(4)(A), in determining whether the
petitioners have standing, (i.e., those domestic workers and producers
supporting the petition account for: (1) at least 25 percent of the
total production of the domestic like product; and (2) 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), 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'' at Appendix I. To establish industry
support, the petitioners provided their production of the domestic like
product for the year 2008, and compared this to an estimate of
production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic
industry. See Volume I of the petition, at pages 3-4 and Exhibit I-3a.
To estimate 2008 production of the domestic like product Petitioners
used an industry publication which reports data in shipments. The
petitioners approximated domestic production of OCTG by inflating the
volume of domestic shipments reported by the ratio of the difference
between the petitioners' production and shipments in the applicable
calendar year. See Volume I of the petition, at page 3 and Exhibits I-
3b and I-3c, and Supplement to the petition, dated April 22, 2009, at
pages 10-11 and Exhibit Supp. I-6. For further discussion, see
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
The Department's review of the data provided in the petition,
supplemental submissions, and other information readily available to
the Department, indicates that the petitioners have established
industry support. First, the petition establishes 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). See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act and
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. 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. See Initiation
Checklist at Attachment II. 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.
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. See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
The Department finds that the petitioners filed the petition on
behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and have demonstrated
sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that
they are requesting the Department initiate. See Initiation Checklist,
at Attachment II.
Injury Test
Because the PRC is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine
whether imports of the subject merchandise from the PRC materially
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioners allege that imports of OCTG from the PRC are
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are
causing or threaten to cause, material injury to the domestic
industries producing OCTG. In addition, the petitioners allege that
subsidized imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share, increased import penetration,
underselling and price depressing and suppressing effects, lost sales
and revenue, reduced production and capacity utilization, reduced
shipments and increased inventories, reduced employment, and an overall
decline in financial performance. 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. See Initiation Checklist at Attachment III
(Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
for the Petition).
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation
Section 702(b) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a CVD
proceeding whenever an interested party files a petition on behalf of
an industry that: (1) alleges the elements necessary for an imposition
of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act; and (2) is accompanied by
information reasonably available to the petitioner(s) supporting the
allegations.
The Department has examined the CVD petition on OCTG from the PRC
and finds that it complies with the requirements of section 702(b) of
the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 702(b) of the Act, we
are initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether manufacturers,
producers, or exporters of OCTG in the PRC receive countervailable
subsidies. For a discussion of evidence supporting our initiation
determination, see Initiation Checklist.
We are including in our investigation the following programs
alleged in the petition to have provided countervailable subsidies to
producers and exporters of the subject merchandise in the PRC:
[[Page 20680]]
A. Preferential Loans
1. Policy Loans
2. Export Loans
3. Treasury Bond Loans to Northeast
4. Preferential Loans for State-Owned Enterprises
5. Preferential Loans for Key Projects and Technologies
6. Loans and Interest Subsidies Provided Pursuant to the Northeast
Revitalization Program
G. Equity Programs
1. Debt-to-equity Swap for Pangang
2. Equity Infusions
3. Exemptions for SOEs From Distributing Dividends to the State
4. Loan and Interest Forgiveness for SOEs
E. Tax Benefit Programs
1. Income Tax Credits for Domestically Owned Companies Purchasing
Domestically Produced Equipment
2. Preferential Income Tax Policy for Enterprises in the Northeast
Region
3. Forgiveness of Tax Arrears for Enterprises in the Old Industrial
Bases of Northeast China
D. Tariff and Indirect Tax Programs
1. Stamp Exemption on Share Transfers Under Non-Tradable Share
Reform
2. Value Added Tax (``VAT'') and Tariff Exemptions for Purchases of
Fixed Assets Under the Foreign Trade Development Fund Program
3. Export Incentive Payments Characterized as ``VAT rebates''
D. Land Grants and Discounts
1. Provision of Land Use Rights for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
to Huludao
2. Provision of Land to SOEs for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
C. Provision of Inputs for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
1. Provision of Hot-Rolled Steel for Less Than Adequate
Remuneration
2. Provision of Steel Rounds for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
3. Provision of Electricity for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
4. Provision of Low-cost Coke through the Imposition of Export
Restraints
5. Provision of Coking Coal for Less than Adequate Remuneration
F. Grant Programs
1. The State Key Technology Project Fund
2. Foreign Trade Development Fund (Northeast Revitalization
Program)
3. Export Assistance Grants
4. Program to Rebate Antidumping Duties
5. Subsidies for Development of Famous Export Brands and China
World Top Brands
6. Sub-central Government Programs to Promote Famous Export Brands
and China World Top Brands
7. Grants to Loss-Making SOEs
8. Export Interest Subsidies
I. Other Regional Programs
1. Subsidies Provided in the Tianjin Binhai New Area and the
Tianjin Economic and Technological Development Area
2. Five Points, One Line Program
3. High-Tech Industrial Development Zones
D. Subsidies for Foreign Invested Enterprises (``FIEs'')
1. ``Two Free, Three Half'' Program
2. Local Income Tax Exemption and Reduction Programs for
``Productive'' Foreign-Invested Enterprises
3. Preferential Tax Programs for Foreign-Invested Enterprises
Recognized as High or New Technology Enterprises
4. Reduced Income Tax Rates for Export-Oriented FIEs
For further information explaining why the Department is
investigating these programs, see Initiation Checklist.
We are not including in our investigation the following programs
alleged to benefit producers and exporters of the subject merchandise
in the PRC:
A. Equity Programs
1. Tradable Shares Reform Program
The petitioners allege that, in April 2005, the China Securities
Regulatory Commission announced a plan that allowed certain companies
to transform their non-tradable shares into tradable shares. The
petitioners allege that Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd.'s (``Baosteel'')
share values would have been vulnerable to decline during the
transition from non-tradable to tradable stock. Citing to notes in the
Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. Third Quarter Report, the petitioners
allege that Baosteel's parent company, state-owned Baosteel Group, made
share purchases to prevent Baosteel's share prices from falling below a
certain market price and that these purchases provided a
countervailable subsidy to Baosteel. Because we found the program not
countervailable in OTR Tires from the PRC,\1\ we do not plan to
investigate this program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the People's
Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination and Final Negative Determination of Critical
Circumstances, 73 FR 40480 (July 15, 2008) and accompanying Issues
and Decision Memorandum at pages 21 and 159-160 (``OTR Tires from
the PRC'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Tax Benefit Programs
1. Tax Reduction for Companies Engaging in Research and Development
The petitioners allege that according to China's World Trade
Organization subsidies notification, domestic industrial enterprises
whose research and development expenses increased by 10 percent from
the previous year may offset 150 percent of the research expenditures
from their income tax obligations. The petitioners have not
sufficiently established that this tax reduction program is specific.
Consequently, we do not plan to investigate this program.
C. Provision of Inputs for Less than Adequate Remuneration
1. Provision of Natural Gas for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
The petitioners allege that, in 2007, the Chinese Vice Premier
indicated that the central government would increase electricity rates
charged to steel enterprises that have outdated production capacities.
The petitioners further assert that this increase likely resulted in
OCTG producers receiving lower, preferential rates, because OCTG
producers have the largest and most advanced production capabilities.
The petitioners propose that OCTG producers, being among the largest
and most advanced producers of high-technology steel, would have
perhaps received similar benefits from the preferential provision of
natural gas. The petitioners have failed to show how the provision of
natural gas for less than adequate remuneration program is specific.
Consequently, we do not plan to investigate this program.
2. Provision of Scrap for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
The petitioners allege that the PRC imposes export restrictions,
such as export quotas, related export licensing and bidding
requirements, minimum export prices and duties, on the raw materials
used for producing OCTG. The petitioners contend that these
restrictions have resulted in artificially suppressing raw material
prices of scrap in the PRC. The petitioners have not provided
sufficient pricing data for scrap. In addition, the source documents
referenced by the petitioners do not provide any information that the
export restraints on scrap have resulted in lower Chinese domestic
scrap prices. Consequently, we do not plan to investigate this program.
Critical Circumstances
The petitioners have alleged that critical circumstances exist with
regard to imports of OCTG from the PRC, and have supported their
allegation with the following information.
Section 703(e)(1) of the Act states that if a petitioner alleges
critical circumstances, the Department will find that such critical
circumstances exist, at any time after the date of initiation,
[[Page 20681]]
when there is a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that under
paragraph (A), the alleged countervailable subsidies are inconsistent
with the Subsidies Agreement, and that, under paragraph (B), there have
been massive imports of the subject merchandise over a relatively short
period of time. Section 351.206(h) of the Department's regulations
defines ``massive imports'' as imports that have increased by at least
15 percent over the imports during an immediately preceding period of
comparable duration. Section 351.206(i) of the Department's regulations
states that a ``relatively short period'' will normally be defined as
the period beginning on the date the proceeding begins and ending at
least three months later.
As discussed above, the petitioners have provided documentation
supporting allegations of countervailable subsidies which are
inconsistent with the Subsidies Agreement.
The petitioners also have alleged that imports from the PRC have
been massive over a relatively short period. Arguing that there was
sufficient pre-filing notice of this CVD petition, the petitioners
contend that the Department should compare imports of OCTG from the PRC
from January through June 2008 to imports during July through December
2008 for purposes of this determination. The petitioners supported this
allegation with copies of news articles discussing the likelihood of
filing unfair trade complaints against producers of OCTG. In
particular, the petitioners cite to an international news article from
July 2008 discussing the likelihood that U.S. steel producers would
file unfair trade cases related to seamless pipe, and explaining that
OCTG makes up approximately half of total exports of Chinese seamless
pipe. Their comparison of the six month period prior to that article
(January-June 2008) with the six month period immediately following
(July-December 2008) shows that U.S. imports of OCTG from the PRC
increased 165 percent. In addition, the petitioners cite to a number of
other news articles, ITC decisions on other pipe and tube products, and
recent cases on the same or similar products in other countries.
Although the ITC has not yet made a preliminary decision with
respect to injury, the petitioners note that in the past the Department
has also considered the extent of the increase in the volume of imports
of the subject merchandise as one indicator of whether a reasonable
basis exists to impute knowledge that material injury was likely. In
this case involving the PRC, the petitioners note that the increase in
imports far exceeds the amount considered ``massive.''
We find that the petitioners have alleged the elements of critical
circumstances and supported them with information reasonably available
for purposes of initiating a critical circumstances inquiry. We will
investigate this matter further and will make a preliminary
determination at the appropriate time, in accordance with section
735(e)(1) of the Act and Department practice (see Policy Bulletin 98/4
(63 FR 55364, October 15, 1998)). The petitioners have also requested
an expedited review, which the Department will consider.
Respondent Selection
For this investigation, the Department expects to select
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') data
for U.S. imports during the period of investigation. We intend to make
our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of
publication of this Federal Register notice. The Department invites
comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within seven
calendar days of publication of this Federal Register notice.
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, a copy of
the public version of the petition has been provided to the Government
of the PRC. As soon as and 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, consistent with section 351.203(c)(2)
of the Department's regulations.
ITC Notification
We have notified 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 25 days after the date
on which it receives notice of the initiation, whether there is a
reasonable indication that imports of subsidized OCTG from the PRC are
causing material injury, or threatening to cause material injury, to a
U.S. industry. See section 703(a)(2) of the Act. A negative ITC
determination will result in the investigation being terminated;
otherwise, the investigation will proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: April 28, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by this investigation consists of certain oil
country tubular goods (OCTG), which are hollow steel products of
circular cross-section, including oil well casing and tubing, of iron
(other than cast iron) or steel (both carbon and alloy), whether
seamless or welded, regardless of end finish (e.g., whether or not
plain end, threaded, or threaded and coupled) whether or not conforming
to American Petroleum Institute (API) or non-API specifications,
whether finished (including limited service OCTG products) or
unfinished (including green tubes and limited service OCTG products),
whether or not thread protectors are attached. The scope of the
investigation also covers OCTG coupling stock. Excluded from the scope
of the investigation are casing or tubing containing 10.5 percent or
more by weight of chromium; drill pipe; unattached couplings; and
unattached thread protectors.
The merchandise covered by the investigation is currently classified in
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item
numbers:
7304.29.10.10, 7304.29.10.20, 7304.29.10.30, 7304.29.10.40,
7304.29.10.50, 7304.29.10.60, 7304.29.10.80, 7304.29.20.10,
7304.29.20.20, 7304.29.20.30, 7304.29.20.40, 7304.29.20.50,
7304.29.20.60, 7304.29.20.80, 7304.29.31.10, 7304.29.31.20,
7304.29.31.30, 7304.29.31.40, 7304.29.31.50, 7304.29.31.60,
7304.29.31.80, 7304.29.41.10, 7304.29.41.20, 7304.29.41.30,
7304.29.41.40, 7304.29.41.50, 7304.29.41.60, 7304.29.41.80,
7304.29.50.15, 7304.29.50.30, 7304.29.50.45, 7304.29.50.60,
7304.29.50.75, 7304.29.61.15, 7304.29.61.30, 7304.29.61.45,
7304.29.61.60, 7304.29.61.75, 7305.20.20.00, 7305.20.40.00,
7305.20.60.00, 7305.20.80.00, 7306.29.10.30, 7306.29.10.90,
7306.29.20.00, 7306.29.31.00, 7306.29.41.00, 7306.29.60.10,
7306.29.60.50, 7306.29.81.10, and 7306.29.81.50.
The OCTG coupling stock covered by the investigation may also enter
under the following HTSUS item numbers:
7304.39.00.24, 7304.39.00.28, 7304.39.00.32, 7304.39.00.36,
[[Page 20682]]
7304.39.00.40, 7304.39.00.44, 7304.39.00.48, 7304.39.00.52,
7304.39.00.56, 7304.39.00.62, 7304.39.00.68, 7304.39.00.72,
7304.39.00.76, 7304.39.00.80, 7304.59.60.00, 7304.59.80.15,
7304.59.80.20, 7304.59.80.25, 7304.59.80.30, 7304.59.80.35,
7304.59.80.40, 7304.59.80.45, 7304.59.80.50, 7304.59.80.55,
7304.59.80.60, 7304.59.80.65, 7304.59.80.70, and 7304.59.80.80.
The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes
only, the written description of the scope of the investigation is
dispositive.
[FR Doc. E9-10345 Filed 5-4-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S