Certain Steel Grating From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 30278-30281 [E9-15017]

Download as PDF 30278 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Notices imports of CSG from the PRC are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated; otherwise, this 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: June 18, 2009. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation The products covered by this investigation are certain steel grating, consisting of two or more pieces of steel, including load–bearing pieces and cross pieces, joined by any assembly process, regardless of: (1) size or shape; (2) method of manufacture; (3) metallurgy (carbon, alloy, or stainless); (4) the profile of the bars; and (5) whether or not they are galvanized, painted, coated, clad or plated. Steel grating is also commonly referred to as ‘‘bar grating,’’ although the components may consist of steel other than bars, such as hot–rolled sheet, plate, or wire rod. The scope of this investigation excludes expanded metal grating, which is comprised of a single piece or coil of sheet or thin plate steel that has been slit and expanded, and does not involve welding or joining of multiple pieces of steel. The scope of this investigation also excludes plank type safety grating which is comprised of a single piece or coil of sheet or thin plate steel, typically in thickness of 10 to 18 gauge, that has been pierced and cold formed, and does not involve welding or joining of multiple pieces of steel. Certain steel grating that is the subject of this investigation is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) under subheading 7308.90.7000. While the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive. Appendix II Format for Reporting Quantity and Value of Sales In providing the information in the chart below, please provide the total quantity in both pieces and kilograms (kg) (net weight) and total value (in U.S. Total Quantity (kg) (Net Weight) Market: United States dollars) of all your sales to the United States during the period October 1, 2008, through March 31, 2009, covered by the scope of this investigation (see Appendix I), produced in the PRC, i.e. CSG. Please provide the conversion factor used to convert pieces to kg (net weight). Please use the invoice date when determining which sales to include within the period noted above.1 Additionally, if you believe that you should be treated as a single entity along with other named exporters, please complete the chart, below, both in the aggregate for all named parties in your group and, in separate charts, individually for each named entity. Please label each chart accordingly. Please state whether you exported CSG to the United States during the POI. If you did export CSG to the United States during the POI, please state whether you produced 100 percent of the CSG that you exported to the United States during the POI. If you did produce 100 percent of the CSG that you exported to the United States during the POI, please provide the following: Total QuantityPieces Terms of Sale2 Total Value3 ($U.S.) 1. Export Price4. 2. Constructed Export Price5. 3. Further Manufactured6. Total. 2 To the extent possible, sales values should be reported based on the same terms (e.g., FOB). should be expressed in U.S. dollars. Indicate any exchange rates used and their respective dates and sources. 4 Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as an EP sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated person occurs before the goods are imported into the United States. 5 Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as a constructed export price sale when the first sale to an unaffiliated person occurs after importation. However, if the first sale to the unaffiliated person is made by a person in the United States affiliated with the foreign exporter, constructed export price applies even if the sale occurs prior to importation. Do not report the sale to the affiliated party in the United States, rather report the sale made by the affiliated party to the unaffiliated customer in the United States. 6 ‘‘Further manufactured’’ refers to merchandise that undergoes further manufacture or assembly in the United States before sale to the first unaffiliated customer. 3 Values Effective Date: June 25, 2009 [FR Doc. E9–15018 Filed 6–24–09; 8:45 am] DATES: BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–948] sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES Certain Steel Grating From the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. AGENCY: 1 If you believe that another date besides the invoice date would provide a more accurate VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Jun 24, 2009 Jkt 217001 Sean Carey or Justin Neuman, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3964 and (202) 482–0486, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petitions On May 29, 2009, the Department of Commerce (the Department) received representation of your company’s sales during the PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 countervailing duty (CVD) and antidumping (AD) petitions concerning imports of certain steel grating (CSG) from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) filed in proper form by Alabama Metal Industries Corp. (AMICO) and Fisher and Ludlow (collectively, the petitioners), domestic producers of CSG. See ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Certain Steel Grating from the People’s Republic of China’’ (the petitions). On June 4, 2009, the Department issued requests for additional information and clarification designated period, please provide a full explanation. E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Notices sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES of certain areas of the CVD petition involving countervailable subsidy allegations and further information and clarification concerning general issues common to the petitions. See Letter from Dana Mermelstein, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, to the petitioners, ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Steel Gratings Imported from the People’s Republic of China: Supplemental Questions, June 4, 2009.’’ See also Letter from Robert Bolling, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, to the petitioners, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Certain Steel Grating from the People’s Republic of China: Supplemental Questions, June 4, 2009.’’ Based on the Department’s requests, the petitioners timely filed additional information on June 9, 2009. A second request seeking additional information and clarification concerning general issues common to the petitions was sent to the petitioners on June 11, 2009. See Letter from Robert Bolling, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, to the petitioners, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Certain Steel Grating from the People’s Republic of China: Supplemental Questions, June 11, 2009.’’ Based on the Department’s request, the petitioners timely filed additional information pertaining to the petitions on June 15, 2009. Finally, the petitioners clarified the ‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ on June 16, 2009. In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that producers/exporters of CSG in the PRC received countervailable subsidies within the meaning of section 701 and 771(5) of the Act, and that imports materially injure, or threaten material injury to, an industry in the United States. The Department finds that the petitioners filed this CVD petition on behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and the petitioners have demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the countervailing duty investigation that they are requesting the Department to initiate (see ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the CVD Petition’’ below). Period of Investigation The anticipated period of investigation (POI) is calendar year 2008. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2). Scope of Investigation The products covered by this investigation are certain steel grating VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Jun 24, 2009 Jkt 217001 from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of the investigation, please see the ‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ in Appendix I to this notice. Comments on Scope of Investigation During our review of the CVD petition, we discussed the scope with 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 regulations (See 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 within twenty calendar days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Comments should be addressed to the Import Administration’s Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 1117, 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 held consultations with the government of the PRC (hereinafter, the GOC) with respect to the CVD petition on June 1, 2009. See Memorandum to the File, Countervailing Duty Petitions on PreStressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand and Certain Steel Grating from the People’s Republic of China: Consultations with the Government of the People’s Republic of China, on file in the CRU, Room 1117 of the main Department of Commerce building. Determination of Industry Support for the CVD 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 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 30279 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 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, 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 CSG constitutes 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: CSG from the PRC (CVD Initiation Checklist) E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES 30280 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Notices at Attachment II (Industry Support), dated concurrently with this notice and 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 petitioners have standing (i.e., those domestic workers and producers supporting the CVD 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 CVD petition), we considered the industry support data contained in the CVD petition with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ in Appendix I. To establish industry support, petitioners provided their production of the domestic like product for the year 2008, and compared this to total production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry. See Volume I of the AD/CVD petitions at 3–6, and Exhibit I– 3, and Supplement to the AD/CVD petitions filed June 9, 2009, at 8–10, and Exhibits 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. To estimate 2008 production of the domestic like product, the petitioners used their own data as well their own industry specific knowledge. Petitioners calculated total domestic production based on information provided by companies that are supporters of the CVD petition and that produce the domestic like product in the United States, as well as estimates of production of non-petitioning producers of the domestic like product. See Volume I of the AD/CVD petitions at 3–6, and Exhibit I–3, and Supplement to the AD/CVD petitions filed June 9, 2009, at 8–10, and Exhibits 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. See also CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II, Industry Support. Our review of the data provided in the CVD petition, supplemental submissions, and other information readily available to the Department indicates that petitioners have established industry support. First, the CVD 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). See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act and CVD 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 CVD petition VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Jun 24, 2009 Jkt 217001 account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product. See CVD 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 CVD 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 CVD petition. Accordingly, the Department determines that the CVD petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. See CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. The Department finds that petitioners filed the CVD petition on behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the countervailing investigation that they are requesting the Department initiate. See CVD 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 Petitioners allege that imports of CSG from the PRC are benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the domestic industry producing CSG. In addition, petitioners allege that subsidized imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act. 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 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 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 statutory requirements for initiation. See CVD 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 CVD 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 petitioners supporting the allegations. The Department has examined the CVD petition on CSG 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 producers/exporters of CSG in the PRC receive countervailable subsidies. For a discussion of evidence supporting our initiation determination, see CVD Initiation Checklist. We are including in our investigation the following programs alleged in the CVD petition to provide countervailable subsidies to producers/exporters of the subject merchandise: A. GOC Provision of Inputs for Less Than Adequate Remuneration 1. Provision of Hot-Rolled Steel for Less than Adequate Remuneration 2. Provision of Steel Bar for Less than Adequate Remuneration 3. Provision of Steel Plate for Less than Adequate Remuneration 4. Provision of Wire Rod for Less than Adequate Remuneration B. GOC Provision of Land-Use Rights to State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) for Less Than Adequate Remuneration C. GOC Income Tax Programs 1. ‘‘Two Free, Three Half’’ Program 2. Reduced Income Tax Rates for Export-Oriented Foreign-Invested Enterprises (FIEs) 3. Preferential Income Tax Policy for Enterprises in the Northeast Region 4. Forgiveness of Tax Arrears for Enterprises in the Old Industrial Bases of Northeast China 5. Tax Subsidies for FIEs in Specially Designated Geographic Areas 6. Local Income Tax Exemption and Reduction Programs for ‘‘Productive’’ FIEs 7. Income Tax Credits for Domestically Owned Companies Purchasing Domestically Produced Equipment E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Notices 8. Income Tax Credits for FIEs Purchasing Domestically Produced Equipment 9. Preferential Tax Programs for FIEs Recognized as High or New Technology Enterprises D. GOC VAT Programs 1. Import Tariff and Value Added Tax (VAT) Exemptions for Encouraged Industries Importing Equipment for Domestic Operations 2. VAT and Tariff Exemptions for Purchases of Fixed Assets Under the Foreign Trade Development Fund E. Other GOC Programs 1. Loans and Interest Subsidies Provided Pursuant to the Northeast Revitalization Program 2. Grants to ‘‘Third Line’’ Military Enterprises F. Provincial/Municipal Programs 1. Liaoning Province ‘‘Five Points, One Line’’ Program 2. Guangzhou City Famous Export Brands 3. Grants to Companies for ‘‘Outward Expansion’’ in Guangdong Province 4. Guangdong and Zhejiang Provinces Programs to Rebate Antidumping Fees For further information explaining why the Department is investigating these programs, see CVD Initiation Checklist. We are not including in our investigation the following programs alleged to benefit producers/exporters of the subject merchandise in the PRC: A. GOC Policy Lending and Directed Credit to Steel Producers B. Discounted Loans and Interest Rate Subsidies under the Liaoning Province Framework C. Grants to Steel Producers for Environmental Purposes. For further information explaining why the Department is not initiating an investigation of these programs, see CVD Initiation Checklist. sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES Respondent Selection For this investigation, the Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports during the POI (i.e., calendar year 2008). We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO within five days of the announcement of the initiation of this investigation. Interested parties may submit comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within seven calendar days of publication of VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Jun 24, 2009 Jkt 217001 this notice. We intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this notice. Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Instructions for filing such applications may be found on the Department’s website at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/apo. Distribution of Copies of the CVD Petition 30281 The scope of this investigation excludes expanded metal grating, which is comprised of a single piece or coil of sheet or thin plate steel that has been slit and expanded, and does not involve welding or joining of multiple pieces of steel. The scope of this investigation also excludes plank type safety grating which is comprised of a single piece or coil of sheet or thin plate steel, typically in thickness of 10 to 18 gauge, that has been pierced and cold formed, and does not involve welding or joining of multiple pieces of steel. Certain steel grating that is the subject of this investigation is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) under subheading 7308.90.7000. While the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive. 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 representatives of the GOC. Because of the particularly large number of producers/exporters identified in the petition, the Department considers the service of the public version of the petition to the foreign producers/ exporters satisfied by the delivery of the public version to the GOC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). [FR Doc. E9–15017 Filed 6–24–09; 8:45 am] ITC Notification BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 702(d) of the Act. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 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 CSG from the PRC materially injure, or threaten 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; see section 703(a)(1) of the Act. 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: June 18, 2009. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation The products covered by this investigation are certain steel grating, consisting of two or more pieces of steel, including load-bearing pieces and cross pieces, joined by any assembly process, regardless of: (1) Size or shape; (2) method of manufacture; (3) metallurgy (carbon, alloy, or stainless); (4) the profile of the bars; and (5) whether or not they are galvanized, painted, coated, clad or plated. Steel grating is also commonly referred to as ‘‘bar grating,’’ although the components may consist of steel other than bars, such as hot-rolled sheet, plate, or wire rod. PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request—Requirements for Baby-Bouncers, Walker-Jumpers, and Baby-Walkers AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission. ACTION: Notice. In the Federal Register of April 16, 2009 (74 FR 17638), the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC or Commission) published a notice in accordance with provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) to announce the CPSC’s intention to seek extension of approval of the collection of information in the requirements for baby-bouncers, walker-jumpers, and baby-walkers in regulations codified at 16 CFR 1500.18(a)(6) and 1500.86(a)(4). No comments were received in response to that notice. Therefore, by publication of this notice, the Commission announces that it has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for extension of approval of that collection of information without change. One CPSC regulation bans any product known as a baby-bouncer, walker-jumper, baby-walker or similar article if it is designed in such a way that exposed parts present hazards of amputations, crushing, lacerations, fractures, hematomas, bruises or other injuries to children’s fingers, toes, or SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 121 (Thursday, June 25, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30278-30281]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15017]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-948]


Certain Steel Grating From the People's Republic of China: 
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

DATES: Effective Date: June 25, 2009

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Carey or Justin Neuman, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
3964 and (202) 482-0486, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions

    On May 29, 2009, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received countervailing duty (CVD) and antidumping (AD) petitions 
concerning imports of certain steel grating (CSG) from the People's 
Republic of China (PRC) filed in proper form by Alabama Metal 
Industries Corp. (AMICO) and Fisher and Ludlow (collectively, the 
petitioners), domestic producers of CSG. See ``Petitions for the 
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Certain Steel 
Grating from the People's Republic of China'' (the petitions). On June 
4, 2009, the Department issued requests for additional information and 
clarification

[[Page 30279]]

of certain areas of the CVD petition involving countervailable subsidy 
allegations and further information and clarification concerning 
general issues common to the petitions. See Letter from Dana 
Mermelstein, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, to the 
petitioners, ``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on 
Steel Gratings Imported from the People's Republic of China: 
Supplemental Questions, June 4, 2009.'' See also Letter from Robert 
Bolling, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, to the 
petitioners, ``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties: Certain Steel Grating from the People's Republic 
of China: Supplemental Questions, June 4, 2009.'' Based on the 
Department's requests, the petitioners timely filed additional 
information on June 9, 2009. A second request seeking additional 
information and clarification concerning general issues common to the 
petitions was sent to the petitioners on June 11, 2009. See Letter from 
Robert Bolling, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, to the 
petitioners, ``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties: Certain Steel Grating from the People's Republic 
of China: Supplemental Questions, June 11, 2009.'' Based on the 
Department's request, the petitioners timely filed additional 
information pertaining to the petitions on June 15, 2009. Finally, the 
petitioners clarified the ``Scope of Investigation'' on June 16, 2009.
    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that producers/exporters of 
CSG in the PRC received countervailable subsidies within the meaning of 
section 701 and 771(5) of the Act, and that imports materially injure, 
or threaten material injury to, an industry in the United States.
    The Department finds that the petitioners filed this CVD petition 
on behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties 
as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and the petitioners have 
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the 
countervailing duty investigation that they are requesting the 
Department to initiate (see ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
CVD Petition'' below).

Period of Investigation

    The anticipated period of investigation (POI) is calendar year 
2008. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).

Scope of Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are certain steel 
grating from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of the 
investigation, please see the ``Scope of Investigation'' in Appendix I 
to this notice.

Comments on Scope of Investigation

    During our review of the CVD petition, we discussed the scope with 
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 regulations (See 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 within twenty calendar days of the date 
of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Comments should 
be addressed to the Import Administration's Central Records Unit (CRU), 
Room 1117, 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 
held consultations with the government of the PRC (hereinafter, the 
GOC) with respect to the CVD petition on June 1, 2009. See Memorandum 
to the File, Countervailing Duty Petitions on Pre-Stressed Concrete 
Steel Wire Strand and Certain Steel Grating from the People's Republic 
of China: Consultations with the Government of the People's Republic of 
China, on file in the CRU, Room 1117 of the main Department of Commerce 
building.

Determination of Industry Support for the CVD 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 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, 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 CSG constitutes 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: CSG from the PRC (CVD Initiation Checklist)

[[Page 30280]]

at Attachment II (Industry Support), dated concurrently with this 
notice and 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 
petitioners have standing (i.e., those domestic workers and producers 
supporting the CVD 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 
CVD petition), we considered the industry support data contained in the 
CVD petition with reference to the domestic like product as defined in 
the ``Scope of Investigation'' in Appendix I. To establish industry 
support, petitioners provided their production of the domestic like 
product for the year 2008, and compared this to total production of the 
domestic like product for the entire domestic industry. See Volume I of 
the AD/CVD petitions at 3-6, and Exhibit I-3, and Supplement to the AD/
CVD petitions filed June 9, 2009, at 8-10, and Exhibits 3, 4, 5, 6, and 
7. To estimate 2008 production of the domestic like product, the 
petitioners used their own data as well their own industry specific 
knowledge. Petitioners calculated total domestic production based on 
information provided by companies that are supporters of the CVD 
petition and that produce the domestic like product in the United 
States, as well as estimates of production of non-petitioning producers 
of the domestic like product. See Volume I of the AD/CVD petitions at 
3-6, and Exhibit I-3, and Supplement to the AD/CVD petitions filed June 
9, 2009, at 8-10, and Exhibits 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. See also CVD 
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II, Industry Support.
    Our review of the data provided in the CVD petition, supplemental 
submissions, and other information readily available to the Department 
indicates that petitioners have established industry support. First, 
the CVD 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). See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act and CVD 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 CVD petition account for at least 25 percent of the 
total production of the domestic like product. See CVD 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 CVD 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 CVD 
petition. Accordingly, the Department determines that the CVD petition 
was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act. See CVD Initiation Checklist at 
Attachment II.
    The Department finds that petitioners filed the CVD petition on 
behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the countervailing 
investigation that they are requesting the Department initiate. See CVD 
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

    Petitioners allege that imports of CSG from the PRC are benefitting 
from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are causing, or 
threaten to cause, material injury to the domestic industry producing 
CSG. In addition, petitioners allege that subsidized imports exceed the 
negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the 
Act.
    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 
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 CVD 
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 CVD 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 petitioners 
supporting the allegations.
    The Department has examined the CVD petition on CSG 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 producers/
exporters of CSG in the PRC receive countervailable subsidies. For a 
discussion of evidence supporting our initiation determination, see CVD 
Initiation Checklist.
    We are including in our investigation the following programs 
alleged in the CVD petition to provide countervailable subsidies to 
producers/exporters of the subject merchandise:

A. GOC Provision of Inputs for Less Than Adequate Remuneration

1. Provision of Hot-Rolled Steel for Less than Adequate Remuneration
2. Provision of Steel Bar for Less than Adequate Remuneration
3. Provision of Steel Plate for Less than Adequate Remuneration
4. Provision of Wire Rod for Less than Adequate Remuneration

B. GOC Provision of Land-Use Rights to State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) 
for Less Than Adequate Remuneration

C. GOC Income Tax Programs

1. ``Two Free, Three Half'' Program
2. Reduced Income Tax Rates for Export-Oriented Foreign-Invested 
Enterprises (FIEs)
3. Preferential Income Tax Policy for Enterprises in the Northeast 
Region
4. Forgiveness of Tax Arrears for Enterprises in the Old Industrial 
Bases of Northeast China
5. Tax Subsidies for FIEs in Specially Designated Geographic Areas
6. Local Income Tax Exemption and Reduction Programs for ``Productive'' 
FIEs
7. Income Tax Credits for Domestically Owned Companies Purchasing 
Domestically Produced Equipment

[[Page 30281]]

8. Income Tax Credits for FIEs Purchasing Domestically Produced 
Equipment
9. Preferential Tax Programs for FIEs Recognized as High or New 
Technology Enterprises

D. GOC VAT Programs

1. Import Tariff and Value Added Tax (VAT) Exemptions for Encouraged 
Industries Importing Equipment for Domestic Operations
2. VAT and Tariff Exemptions for Purchases of Fixed Assets Under the 
Foreign Trade Development Fund

E. Other GOC Programs

1. Loans and Interest Subsidies Provided Pursuant to the Northeast 
Revitalization Program
2. Grants to ``Third Line'' Military Enterprises

F. Provincial/Municipal Programs

1. Liaoning Province ``Five Points, One Line'' Program
2. Guangzhou City Famous Export Brands
3. Grants to Companies for ``Outward Expansion'' in Guangdong Province
4. Guangdong and Zhejiang Provinces Programs to Rebate Antidumping Fees
    For further information explaining why the Department is 
investigating these programs, see CVD Initiation Checklist.
    We are not including in our investigation the following programs 
alleged to benefit producers/exporters of the subject merchandise in 
the PRC:
A. GOC Policy Lending and Directed Credit to Steel Producers
B. Discounted Loans and Interest Rate Subsidies under the Liaoning 
Province Framework
C. Grants to Steel Producers for Environmental Purposes.
    For further information explaining why the Department is not 
initiating an investigation of these programs, see CVD Initiation 
Checklist.

Respondent Selection

    For this investigation, the Department intends to select 
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for 
U.S. imports during the POI (i.e., calendar year 2008). We intend to 
release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all 
parties with access to information protected by APO within five days of 
the announcement of the initiation of this investigation. Interested 
parties may submit comments regarding the CBP data and respondent 
selection within seven calendar days of publication of this notice. We 
intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 
days of publication of this notice. Interested parties must submit 
applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.305. Instructions for filing such applications may be found on the 
Department's website at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/apo.

Distribution of Copies of the CVD 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 representatives of the GOC. Because of the particularly 
large number of producers/exporters identified in the petition, the 
Department considers the service of the public version of the petition 
to the foreign producers/exporters satisfied by the delivery of the 
public version to the GOC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

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 CSG from the PRC 
materially injure, or threaten 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; see section 703(a)(1) of the 
Act. 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: June 18, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I--Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are certain steel 
grating, consisting of two or more pieces of steel, including load-
bearing pieces and cross pieces, joined by any assembly process, 
regardless of: (1) Size or shape; (2) method of manufacture; (3) 
metallurgy (carbon, alloy, or stainless); (4) the profile of the bars; 
and (5) whether or not they are galvanized, painted, coated, clad or 
plated. Steel grating is also commonly referred to as ``bar grating,'' 
although the components may consist of steel other than bars, such as 
hot-rolled sheet, plate, or wire rod.
    The scope of this investigation excludes expanded metal grating, 
which is comprised of a single piece or coil of sheet or thin plate 
steel that has been slit and expanded, and does not involve welding or 
joining of multiple pieces of steel. The scope of this investigation 
also excludes plank type safety grating which is comprised of a single 
piece or coil of sheet or thin plate steel, typically in thickness of 
10 to 18 gauge, that has been pierced and cold formed, and does not 
involve welding or joining of multiple pieces of steel.
    Certain steel grating that is the subject of this investigation is 
currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States (``HTSUS'') under subheading 7308.90.7000. While the HTSUS 
subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the 
written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

[FR Doc. E9-15017 Filed 6-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P