Definition of Factual Information and Time Limits for Submission of Factual Information, 21246-21256 [2013-08227]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 10, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21246-21256]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08227]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

19 CFR Part 351

[Docket No. 120618174-3303-01]
RIN 0625-AA91


Definition of Factual Information and Time Limits for Submission 
of Factual Information

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is modifying its 
regulations, which define ``factual information'' and establish time 
limits for the submission of factual information in antidumping (AD) 
and countervailing duty (CVD) proceedings. The modifications to the 
definition of factual information more clearly describe the types of 
information that can be submitted by a person or placed on the record 
by the Department in a segment of the proceeding. The modifications to 
the time limits enable the Department to efficiently determine the type 
of information being submitted and whether it is timely filed; they 
also ensure that the Department has sufficient opportunity to review 
submissions of factual information.

DATES: Effective date: May 10, 2013. Applicability date: This rule will 
apply to all segments initiated on or after this date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanna Theiss at (202) 482-5052 or 
Charles Vannatta at (202) 482-4036.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 10, 2012, the Department published a proposed modification 
of its regulations regarding the definition of factual information and 
time limits for submission of factual information. See Modification of 
Regulations Regarding the Definition of Factual Information and Time 
Limits for Submission of Factual Information, 77 FR 40534 (July 10, 
2012) (Proposed Rule). The Proposed Rule explained the Department's 
proposal to modify two of its regulations, to allow for a more accurate 
classification of factual information, and to establish time limits for 
the submission of factual information, which are based on the type of 
factual information that is being submitted. The Department received 
numerous comments on the Proposed Rule and has addressed those comments 
below. The Proposed Rule, comments received, and this final rule can be 
accessed using the Federal eRulemaking portal at https://www.Regulations.gov under Docket Number ITA-2012-0004. After analyzing 
and carefully considering all of the comments that the Department 
received in response to the Proposed Rule, the Department has adopted 
the modification, with certain changes, and amended its regulations 
accordingly.

Explanation of Regulatory Provision and Final Modification

    The Department is modifying two regulations related to AD and CVD 
proceedings: the definition of factual information (19 CFR 
351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits for the submission of factual 
information (19 CFR 351.301). Prior to this modification, 19 CFR 
351.102(b)(21) defined factual information as: ``(i) initial and 
supplemental questionnaire responses; (ii) data or statements of fact 
in support

[[Page 21247]]

of allegations; (iii) other data or statements of facts; and (iv) 
documentary evidence.'' The Department is modifying this definition in 
order to create distinct descriptive categories of factual information 
that can be submitted in a segment of a proceeding.
    The final rule identifies five categories of factual information, 
which are summarized as follows: (i) Evidence submitted in response to 
questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; 
(iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 
351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 
351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by the Department; 
and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)-(iv). 
The definition does not change the types of information that can be 
submitted in a segment of a proceeding; rather, it allows for more 
accurate classification of factual information.
    Prior to this modification, 19 CFR 351.301 set forth the time 
limits for submission of factual information, including general time 
limits, time limits for certain submissions such as responses to 
questionnaires, and time limits for certain allegations. The Department 
is modifying 19 CFR 351.301 so that, rather than providing general time 
limits, there are specific time limits based on the type of factual 
information being submitted, in accordance with the modification to 19 
CFR 351.102(b)(21). The modification enables the Department to review 
and analyze the factual information at the appropriate stage in the 
proceeding, based on the Department's experience in administering the 
AD and CVD laws, rather than being required to review large amounts of 
factual information on the record of a proceeding when it is too late 
to adequately examine, analyze, conduct follow-up inquiries regarding 
and, if necessary, verify the information. This modification provides 
clarity to persons concerning the deadlines for submissions of certain 
factual information in a segment of a proceeding, including the 
submission of factual information to rebut, clarify, or correct factual 
information that is already on the record.
    The final rule requires any person, when submitting factual 
information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) 
the information is being submitted and, if the information is submitted 
to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the 
record, to provide an explanation identifying the information already 
on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or 
correct. This enables the Department and interested parties to 
efficiently identify the factual information and to analyze it in 
accordance with the purpose for which it is being submitted.

Response to Comments on the Proposed Rule

    The Department received numerous comments on its Proposed Rule. 
Below is a summary of the comments, grouped by issue category, followed 
by the Department's response.

1. Time Limits Based on the Type of Factual Information Being Submitted

    Many commenters argue that the Department should maintain general 
time limits and should not base time limits on the type of factual 
information being submitted, arguing that there is no evidence that the 
time limits in the prior rule prevented the Department from 
sufficiently analyzing factual information; that the time limits in the 
final rule are arbitrary and abrogate the Department's responsibility 
to calculate accurate dumping margins; and that it is the Department 
that is responsible for the extent to which factual information in a 
segment is lacking, due to, for instance, the Department's habit of 
extending time limits for the preliminary results and delays in 
selecting respondents. One commenter suggests that there is more than 
sufficient time after the preliminary determination or preliminary 
results for the Department to make its determinations without changing 
the time limits.
    Response: The Department has not adopted this proposal in its final 
rule. The commenters' views are contrary to the Department's experience 
in administering the AD and CVD laws. The Department continues to 
believe that time limits based on the type of factual information being 
submitted will result in increased certainty and more effective 
administration of the AD and CVD laws. The Department never intended a 
general factual information time limit to permit the submission of 
factual information for which a specific time limit was applicable 
(e.g., submission of information responsive to a questionnaire). 
Because parties have used the general time limit as a means of 
submitting factual information that should have been submitted at an 
earlier stage in the proceeding, the Department often received factual 
information when there was insufficient time for adequate comment, 
rebuttal, verification, and analysis. In addition, the general time 
limits often resulted in large volumes of factual information being 
placed on the administrative record at such a late stage of a 
proceeding that parties did not have the opportunity to see how the 
Department used the information in its calculations until the final 
determination or final results.
    Further, although the commenters may perceive that the Department 
has adequate opportunity to consider factual information in an 
investigation or a review, this is a misperception of the operational 
procedures required to complete an investigation or review. For 
instance, Department officials must make certain internal decisions 
much earlier than the due date of the preliminary determination or 
preliminary results, in order to issue questionnaires, supplemental 
questionnaires, consider all allegations, determine whether critical 
factual information is missing from the record, conduct a complete and 
thorough analysis of all the factual information on the record as well 
as making a myriad of individual decisions with respect to the 
treatment of each of the facts on the record in relation to applicable 
regulatory, statutory, and case and legal precedent.
    Under the prior rule, the Department often could not fully analyze 
an issue because parties could submit factual information on that issue 
long after the issue became ripe for analysis. Given the necessity of 
allocating Department resources as efficiently as possible, the 
Department must complete the record for an issue when that issue 
arises, so that the parties and the Department are presented with all 
of the record facts to present their arguments and to analyze those 
arguments in light of the record facts, respectively. As the Department 
stated in response to a party's argument that the Department should not 
have rejected factual information to value factors after the time limit 
for such submissions had passed, ``because the submission of wholly new 
[surrogate value] information can generate the submission of yet more 
`rebuttal' information, it has the potential to seriously erode the 
finality of the record necessary for interested parties to make 
complete assessments of the record for purposes of the submission of 
complete briefs.'' Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip 
From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of the 2009-2010 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 
77 FR 14493 (March 12, 2012) and accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum at Issue 3. In other words, both the parties and the 
Department have an interest in finalizing the record at a stage in the 
segment of the proceeding when there is

[[Page 21248]]

adequate opportunity to sufficiently analyze the record facts.
    If parties find that the administrative record is lacking factual 
information, the parties should explain what additional information 
they wish to submit, explain why it was not available for timely 
submission, and request that the Department accept the information. If 
there is adequate time for rebuttal, comment, analysis, and thorough 
consideration of the new, previously unavailable information and the 
Department could potentially verify this information, then the 
Department may elect to permit submission. Otherwise, the reliability 
of such late-submitted information cannot be assured.

2. Time Limits for the Submission of Factual Information to Value 
Factors Under 19 CFR 351.408(c)

    Several commenters argue that the time limits for the submission of 
factual information to value factors pursuant to 19 CFR 351.408(c) 
should not occur before the preliminary determination in an 
investigation, and preliminary results in an administrative review, 
because the selection of surrogate values has a significant impact on 
dumping margins in non-market economy cases, and establishing a time 
limit before the preliminary determination or preliminary results will 
result in either a deluge of factual information based on the parties' 
guesses as to what the case may require, or a lack of quality factual 
information. Several commenters argue that the Department has created 
uncertainty concerning the time limit for the submission of factual 
information to value factors because the time limit is based on the 
scheduled date of the preliminary determination or preliminary results, 
which can be extended by the Department. One commenter suggests that 
there be a separate rulemaking to address issues concerning the 
submission of factual information to value factors; that the burden be 
on domestic interested parties to make the initial suggestion of a 
surrogate country and factual information to value factors; that the 
Department explain why it was not using certain factual information in 
the preliminary determination or preliminary results; and that the 
Department should notify parties of ``deficiencies'' with their factual 
information to value factors, akin to the requirements of section 
782(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended (the Act). One commenter 
questions why the Department focused on small entities in the Proposed 
Rule, arguing that the negative effect will be the same for entities 
regardless of size.
    Response: We have not adopted these proposals. We agree that 
factual information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) is 
important in non-market economy cases, and consider that a time limit 
for the submission of this information before the preliminary 
determination or preliminary results will increase certainty to parties 
and result in better quality comments on the information. We note that 
parties are permitted to file multiple submissions of factual 
information to value factors. If the Department extends the date of the 
preliminary determination or preliminary results, parties may submit 
additional factual information to value factors any time before the new 
deadline, even if they have already filed a submission based on the 
original deadline.
    Under the prior rule, the Department routinely received submissions 
of factual information to value factors after the preliminary 
determination or preliminary results, and the Department may have used 
that information in the final determination without an opportunity for 
interested parties to review or comment upon the calculations 
incorporating such information. By requiring parties to submit this 
information before the preliminary determination or preliminary 
results, all parties will have the benefit of knowing all record 
information and what factual information the Department preliminarily 
relied upon, in order to more effectively comment upon the Department's 
selections. The purpose of this rulemaking is to improve 19 CFR 351.301 
so that the Department may review and analyze factual information at 
the appropriate stage in the proceeding, rather than be required to 
review large amounts of information when it is too late to adequately 
conduct its analysis. Whether or not the Department will undertake 
additional rulemakings on separate, albeit related, matters is beyond 
the scope of this rulemaking. Concerning the comment that the domestic 
interested parties should be required to make the initial suggestion of 
a surrogate country and factual information to value factors, it is to 
all parties' advantage to submit surrogate country and corresponding 
factual information to value factors early in the proceeding. We also 
note that all interested parties may submit factual information to 
rebut, clarify, or correct factual information to value factors, as 
long as that information is submitted solely for rebuttal and not for 
purposes of establishing new surrogate values. See 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(3)(iv). Concerning the comment that the Department should 
point out ``deficiencies'' in factual information to value factors and 
permit parties the opportunity to correct these deficiencies, we have 
not adopted this proposal. The Act provides that the Department shall 
value factors of production using ``the best available information,'' 
and the Department weighs many factors to determine what constitutes 
the best available information. See section 773(c)(1) of the Act. 
Information that is not selected is not necessarily deficient; it is 
simply not the best available information. Parties are not required to 
submit surrogate factual information to value factors, nor does the 
Department apply adverse inferences where a party does not submit 
surrogate factual information to value factors. We also note that the 
Department's discussion of the impact of the proposed rule on small 
entities was completed as part of its Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis, which is required by statute.

3. Time Limit for the Submission of Factual Information To Rebut, 
Clarify, or Correct Questionnaire Responses

    Several commenters oppose elimination of the general time limit for 
the submission of factual information to rebut, clarify, or correct 
questionnaire responses, and argue that the Proposed Rule does not 
provide sufficient time because it is time consuming to develop factual 
information for purposes of rebuttal, clarification, or correction, as 
parties must work with their clients using public versions of 
responses, and it often involves time-consuming market research. Some 
commenters argue that the time limit for the submission of factual 
information to rebut, clarify, or correct questionnaire responses 
should be extended to at least 30 days. Significant facts may become 
apparent only in later submissions, by which point the time limit may 
be passed. If the Department does not ask questions relevant to an 
issue in supplemental questionnaires, then the parties are prevented 
from submitting rebuttal factual information. The incentive will be for 
parties to submit voluminous rebuttal information early on, in case it 
becomes relevant later. The commenters argue that the Department's 
certification requirements under 19 CFR 351.303(g) require additional 
time for the preparation of the submission of rebuttal factual 
information.
    Response: The Department has not adopted these proposals. We find 
that the rebuttal time limit provides sufficient time to develop 
rebuttal factual information, and the

[[Page 21249]]

development of a complete record early in the proceeding is an 
advantage, not a disadvantage. The early stages of a segment of a 
proceeding should be used to develop a complete record on most issues 
and identify those issues where the record needs to be further 
developed. Later submissions afford opportunities to rebut those 
submissions. Parties are expected to consider how much time is required 
to comply with the Department's regulations as they prepare their 
submissions. The holding of relevant information until later stages of 
a segment of a proceeding to see whether submission of the information 
is advantageous to a party's interests is not a proper incentive to 
maintain general time limits from the Department's perspective. The 
Department can request information at any time from any party, and 
parties can argue at any point that the record is deficient on a 
particular issue and urge the Department to request or gather 
additional information. Further, parties can request an extension of a 
time limit pursuant to 19 CFR 351.302.

4. Opportunity for Surrebuttal

    Several commenters argue that the Department should allow 
interested parties an additional opportunity to submit factual 
information to rebut, clarify, or correct another interested party's 
rebuttal factual information (surrebuttal), arguing that: the volume of 
factual information on the record will greatly increase because parties 
must anticipate all potential challenges that may arise in another 
party's submission of rebuttal factual information; and by providing 
the opportunity of surrebuttal only to respondents, the respondents 
will be incentivized to submit incomplete data in their responses to 
questionnaires. Another commenter argues that respondents should have 
the ``final'' right of rebuttal of factual information, because 
respondents must respond to allegations of dumping in AD proceedings.
    Response: We have not adopted either proposal. Section 
351.301(c)(1)(v) of the Department's regulations, which permits the 
original submitter of a questionnaire response to submit factual 
information to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information submitted 
in another party's rebuttal, clarification, or correction factual 
information, is consistent with the Department's current practice. 
Currently and under the final rule, if a respondent submits incomplete 
factual information in its questionnaire response, the Department 
generally issues a supplemental questionnaire requesting that the 
respondent correct all deficiencies, noting the possible consequences 
of incomplete submissions, pursuant to section 776 of the Act. We also 
note that, in the final rule, parties retain the ability to submit 
factual information to rebut, clarify, or correct a respondent's 
factual information submitted in response to a supplemental 
questionnaire. See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(1)(v). Further, the final rule 
does not limit the parties' ability to argue that the record is 
deficient on a particular issue and to urge the Department to request 
and/or collect additional factual information as to that issue.
    Concerning one commenter's argument that respondents should have 
the ``final'' right of rebuttal of factual information, the Department 
has not adopted this proposal. As discussed above, the original 
submitter of a questionnaire response may submit surrebuttal factual 
information. Further, it is unclear how this proposal would operate 
where the respondent is not the original submitter of factual 
information, because the respondent has the opportunity to submit 
factual information to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information 
on the record under the final rule. To the extent that the commenter is 
arguing that a respondent would be able to submit factual information 
after other interested parties in all instances, this proposal has not 
been adopted because the Department has eliminated the general time 
limits for the submission of factual information.

5. Definition of Factual Information

    One commenter argues that, in revising 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21), the 
Department is substituting the term evidence for ``data or statements'' 
without defining evidence, and that it is not clear what the Department 
intends by 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)(v) (``evidence, including statements 
of fact, documents, and data, other than factual information described 
in (i)-(iv) of this section'').
    Response: As the commenter acknowledges, by revising 19 CFR 
351.102(b)(21), the Department is not changing the types of information 
that can be submitted. Rather, the definition of factual information 
allows for the more accurate classification of factual information 
using consistent terminology. The subsections of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) 
define evidence to include statements of fact, documents, and data. 
Section 351.102(b)(21)(v) of the Department's regulations is intended 
to include factual information that is not captured by subsections (i) 
through (iv). However, it is unlikely that parties will submit 
information under this subsection, because nearly all factual 
information submitted in a segment of an AD or CVD proceeding will fall 
into subsections (i) through (iv) of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21). The 
Department does not intend for this subsection to be used as a ``catch-
all'' category. Accordingly, if a party indicates that its factual 
information falls under this subsection, that party ``must explain why 
the information does not satisfy the definitions described in Sec.  
351.102(b)(21)(i)-(iv).'' See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(1).

6. Time Limits for the Allegation of New Subsidies

    One commenter stated that the time limits for the submission of 
allegations of new subsidies in the Proposed Rule do not take into 
account instances in which a respondent submits factual information 
after the time limits for new subsidy allegations (40 days before the 
preliminary determination in an investigation and 20 days after all 
responses to an initial questionnaire have been filed in an 
administrative review). The commenter argues that the Department should 
modify the time limits to allow domestic interested parties to allege 
new subsidies in an investigation or review within 15 days after 
receipt of factual information provided by a respondent.
    Response: The Department has not adopted this proposal. The final 
rule maintains the same time limits as before the modification because 
the Department has found that these time limits have been efficiently 
applied in CVD proceedings for many years. We note that both 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(2)(iv)(A) and (B) specify that the Department may extend or 
alter the time limits for new subsidy allegations in an investigation 
or administrative review, respectively, and parties may request 
extensions to these time limits pursuant to 19 CFR 351.302. We also 
note that the Department routinely grants extensions for the filing of 
new subsidy allegations in CVD proceedings.

7. Factual Information Submitted in Prior Segments

    Several commenters suggest that the Department incorporate the 
administrative record from prior segments of a proceeding into the 
record of an ongoing segment. The comments range from suggesting 
incorporation of the records of the two immediately preceding segments 
to the records from all preceding segments. The commenters argue that 
this would enable all parties to benefit from the information developed 
in prior

[[Page 21250]]

segments, the importance of which may not be recognized until well 
after the time limits for the submission of factual information in the 
ongoing segment. The commenters also argue that this practice would 
reduce the amount of factual information which would have to be 
submitted by parties in each segment of a proceeding and would allow 
the Department to rely on the information from preceding segments.
    Response: The Department has not adopted this proposal. Including 
the administrative records from some or all preceding segments of a 
proceeding would unnecessarily increase the volume of information on 
the record of the ongoing segment and would be burdensome for the 
Department to analyze. Further, the administrative record of a given 
segment is intended to reflect the specific facts for the period under 
review, and automatically transferring information from previous 
periods would be likely to introduce irrelevant factual information 
that may also be inaccurate, unsupported, or have changed in the period 
under review. If an interested party finds that factual information 
from a preceding segment is relevant to the ongoing segment, then the 
party may submit such factual information on the record of the ongoing 
segment, subject to certain limitations. See 19 CFR 351.306(b). If the 
time limit for the submission of that type of factual information has 
passed, then the party may request that the Department accept the 
factual information.

8. The Department's Placement of Factual Information on the Record

    One commenter argues that the Department is imposing discipline on 
interested parties that may be prone to exploit ambiguities in the time 
limits for the submission of factual information, but is reserving for 
itself the discretion to place factual information on the record at any 
time, and to set the time limits for the submission of factual 
information to rebut, clarify, or correct that information. This 
commenter proposes that the regulation provide that the Department may 
place factual information on the record of the proceeding only up to 14 
days before the time limit set forth in 19 CFR 351.301(c)(5).
    Response: The Department has not adopted this proposal. Although 
``the burden of creating an adequate record lies with respondents and 
not with Commerce,'' Longkou Maimeng Mach. Co. v. United States, 617 F. 
Supp. 2d 1363, 1372 (CIT 2009), the Department finds that adopting such 
a proposal would abrogate its responsibility as the administering 
authority of the AD and CVD laws. The Department is legally required to 
render administrative determinations under the Act on the basis of the 
record developed in and for the segment under consideration. Given the 
time constraints imposed by the Act, at any point in the proceeding 
when the Department finds that the administrative record is lacking 
factual information, the Department may appropriately place factual 
information on the record to ensure that its determination is supported 
by substantial evidence. To this end, and to ensure transparency and 
active and meaningful participation by parties, 19 CFR 351.301(c)(4) 
states that when the Department places factual information on the 
record, all interested parties are provided with an opportunity to 
submit factual information to rebut, clarify, or correct that factual 
information. We also note that the Department's practice permits it to 
place factual information on the record of a segment, and in such 
situations, it regularly provides interested parties with the 
opportunity to submit factual information to rebut, clarify, or correct 
that information; the final rule merely codifies this practice in the 
regulation.

9. Service Requirements

    One commenter argues that the Department should require that 
surrogate value submissions, apart from the petition, be served by hand 
by all interested parties within the business day that they are due (or 
by express mail for all parties not located in Washington, DC). Another 
commenter suggests that the proposed deadlines create difficulties 
arising from the service methods given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.303(f)(i), either personal service or service via first class mail 
can be chosen. This commenter is concerned that a respondent could 
choose service by mail for the purpose of limiting the rebuttal time 
for domestic interested parties. This commenter suggests that the time 
period for rebuttal should be triggered by the actual receipt of the 
submission by an interested party. In the alternative, this commenter 
suggests that the Department adopt an interim rule to clarify when the 
time period for rebuttal begins until implementation of Phase III of IA 
Access.
    Response: The Department has not adopted this proposal. The 
Department is not modifying 19 CFR 351.303(f)(i) at this time. Any 
changes in service requirements must be made through 19 CFR 
351.303(f)(i), not based on the implementation of phases of IA Access. 
We also note that although Phase III of IA Access will not address 
service requirements, it should give parties earlier access to 
submissions with business proprietary information. This change should 
mitigate the concern over delayed access resulting from service by 
mail. Further, to the extent that parties require an extension due to 
service delays, an extension request, citing this circumstance, may be 
filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.302.

10. Verification Exhibits

    One commenter suggests that the Department clarify whether 
verification exhibits will be considered evidence placed on the record 
by the Department, as defined by proposed 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)(iv), or 
evidence placed on the record by the interested party which was 
verified, as defined by 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)(i), so that parties may 
know the time limit for providing rebuttal factual information. The 
commenter argues that the Department should address late or incomplete 
service of verification exhibits, bracketing inconsistencies and 
failure to translate exhibits, and should clarify that the interested 
party which was verified may not later attempt to cure deficiencies in 
verification through the submission of a surrebuttal to the 
verification exhibits.
    Response: We have not adopted this suggestion because documents 
that are retained by the Department and designated as verification 
exhibits in the verification report serve only to support statements in 
the respondents' questionnaire responses and the Department's 
verification report; therefore, parties may not submit factual 
information to rebut, clarify, or correct verification exhibits and 
verification reports. This is consistent with Antidumping Duties; 
Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27332 (May 19, 1997), in which the 
Department declined to adopt a proposal that would permit interested 
parties to submit factual information to rebut, clarify, or correct 
factual information in the Department's verification report because 
``the Department is unable to verify post-verification submissions of 
new factual information.'' Under the final rule, parties are free to 
comment on the results of verification in case briefs filed pursuant to 
19 CFR 351.309, drawing on factual information already on the record. 
The Department has not adopted the commenter's suggestion that we 
address late or incomplete service of verification exhibits because, 
under Department practice, parties are required to serve verification 
exhibits as soon as possible after verification. See Antidumping 
Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR at 27338. Further, should

[[Page 21251]]

a party encounter difficulties such that the party requires additional 
time to submit its case brief, it may request an extension to that time 
limit pursuant to 19 CFR 351.302.

11. Clarifying That the Final Rule Does Not Apply to Argument

    One commenter notes that the Department's proposed 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(3)(iv) indicates that parties have one opportunity to submit 
arguments to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information pursuant to 
19 CFR 351.408(c) or 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2), and that arguments, normally 
governed by 19 CFR 351.309, should not be thus restricted.
    Response: We agree with the commenter and have adopted this 
proposal. Section 351.301 of the Department's regulations governs the 
submission of factual information, not argument, and thus have removed 
the word ``arguments'' from 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(iv) in the final rule.

12. Consideration of Holidays

    One commenter suggests that whenever a public holiday in the United 
States or relevant foreign country falls within the time limit for a 
response, the Department should be required to extend the time limit by 
the number of days of the intervening holiday, because time limits are 
unrealistic if they fail to account for the fact that personnel are 
unavailable on holidays.
    Response: The suggestion is unworkable because the time limits 
within which the Department must work do not expand by the number of 
holidays that occur during the segment. The Department understands that 
it is occasionally necessary to extend time limits on a case-by-case 
basis, and has provided procedures for parties to request such 
extensions when necessary. See 19 CFR 351.302.

13. Purpose and Effect of 19 CFR 351.301(b)

    Several commenters inquire as to the purpose and legal effect of 
failing to comply with the requirement in 19 CFR 351.301(b) that every 
submission of factual information be accompanied by a written 
explanation identifying the subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) under 
which the information is being submitted, and argue that it may be 
difficult for parties to comply with this requirement because company 
representatives will not have access to another party's business 
proprietary information (BPI), and so would not be able to certify what 
specific information is being rebutted, all of which could result in 
delays for the Department. Another commenter argues that, when 
submitting factual information, parties should explain how it is 
relevant in the segment of the proceeding.
    Response: Section 351.301(b) of the Department's regulations 
requires parties submitting factual information to indicate what type 
of information is being submitted, so that the Department may 
efficiently and quickly identify the factual information and analyze it 
in accordance with the purpose for which it is being submitted. 
Regarding the commenter's proposal that a party submitting factual 
information explain why it is relevant to the segment, we find that the 
requirement that the factual information be identified by type of 
information will enable the Department and other interested parties to 
determine the purpose for which the information is being submitted. 
Concerning the legal effect of failing to identify the type of 
information that is being submitted, the Department may reject the 
party's submission of factual information. We disagree that 19 CFR 
351.301(b) will be unduly burdensome or complicate participation in 
segments of proceedings, because a party submitting factual information 
should know what type of factual information it is submitting, and 19 
CFR 351.301(b) simply requires that the party identify the information 
by type. We do not find that a company representative's lack of access 
to another party's BPI will complicate compliance with19 CFR 
351.301(b)(2). The final rule does not require that counsel reveal 
protected information, but rather that the party identify the 
information by the interested party that submitted it, and the date on 
which it was submitted, with as much specificity as possible. The final 
rule does not impose any additional certification requirements because 
currently the company representative will certify rebuttal, correction, 
or clarification factual information without having access to BPI.

14. Adequate Time To Respond to Sections of an AD Questionnaire

    One commenter suggests that the Department should modify 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(1)(i) to indicate that a submitter will have ``adequate'' 
time to respond to individual sections of an initial questionnaire, if 
the time limit is less than the 30 days allotted for response to the 
full questionnaire. Another commenter argues that the final rule should 
specify a time limit for supplemental questionnaire responses, rather 
than a ``date specified by the Department.''
    Response: The Department has not incorporated these proposals into 
the final rule because the Department will continue to provide adequate 
time to respond to individual sections of an initial questionnaire, as 
under the prior rule. To the extent that an interested party requires 
additional time to complete individual sections of an initial 
questionnaire, it should request an extension of the time limit 
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.302. We have not adopted the proposal concerning 
the establishment of specific time limits for supplemental 
questionnaire responses, because the length and complexity of 
supplemental questionnaires--and the time available for providing a 
usable response--vary considerably, depending on the nature and extent 
of the deficiencies.

15. Time Limit for Initial Questionnaire Responses

    One commenter argues that the Proposed Rule underestimates the 
difficulties in compiling initial questionnaire responses, and so the 
Department should provide longer than 30 days to submit initial 
questionnaire responses, and permit extensions and the opportunity to 
submit corrections and clarifications to their own submissions.
    Response: The Department has not extended the time period for the 
submission of initial questionnaire responses. As under the prior 
regulation, interested parties are permitted 30 days to submit initial 
questionnaire responses and, contrary to the commenter's assumption, 
the final rule does not limit a party's ability to request an extension 
of this time limit under 19 CFR 351.302.

16. Factual Information Concerning Allegations

    One commenter argues that the Department failed to provide an 
opportunity for parties to rebut, clarify, or correct various 
allegations such as market viability, sales below cost, or targeted 
dumping, and inadvertently left out a provision concerning the 
submission of factual information in support of allegations concerning 
targeted dumping.
    Response: The Proposed Rule provides interested parties the 
opportunity to submit factual information to rebut, clarify or correct 
factual information submitted in support of allegations, and this 
remains unchanged in the final rule. See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(vi). In 
addition, the Proposed Rule permits parties to submit factual 
information in support of ``other allegations,'' and this also remains

[[Page 21252]]

unchanged in the final rule. See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v).

17. Limit Supplemental Questionnaires and Extensions for Supplemental 
Questionnaire Responses

    Two commenters argue that the Department's regulation should 
specify that the initial questionnaire response should be complete and 
include all requested materials, and one commenter suggests that the 
final rule should specify that, in general, the Department will issue 
only one supplemental questionnaire designed to meet the requirements 
of section 782(d) of the Act. Another commenter argues that the final 
rule should indicate that the Department will provide fewer and shorter 
extensions for the submission of initial and supplemental questionnaire 
responses.
    Response: We have not adopted these proposals. First, under 
Department practice interested parties are expected to respond in full 
to the Department's questionnaires. Second, we do not find that 
regulating, even as a general matter, the number of supplemental 
questionnaires that will be issued will improve the administration of 
AD and CVD proceedings, because each segment presents different 
circumstances. We note that, pursuant to section 776 of the Act, the 
Department will continue to resort to the application of facts 
available should an interested party fail to provide necessary 
information. Third, the Department will continue to grant extensions of 
time limits to the extent that they are warranted and deadlines for the 
segment permit. See 19 CFR 351.302; see also Modification of Regulation 
Regarding the Extension of Time Limits, 78 FR 3367 (January 16, 2013).

18. Restrict Reporting Methods

    One commenter argues that, where a respondent participating in an 
ongoing segment has participated in a preceding segment, the Department 
should require the respondent to report its factual information using 
the same method that the Department previously accepted. If the 
respondent wishes to report the information differently, this reporting 
will be provided only in addition to the reporting in the previous 
manner.
    Response: We have not incorporated this proposal into the final 
rule because it relies on a specific circumstance in which a respondent 
has participated in a prior segment and also assumes that the 
previously accepted reporting method is still relevant to the facts of 
the ongoing segment. It also could amount to increasing unnecessarily 
the reporting burden on the respondent where, for instance, facts have 
changed in the period under review such that the previously accepted 
reporting method has been rendered obsolete.

19. Enforce 19 CFR 351.304(c)

    One commenter urges the Department to increase the rigor of 
enforcement of 19 CFR 351.304(c), which requires parties to provide a 
public version of BPI.
    Response: The Department appreciates the importance of consistent 
enforcement of the requirements in 19 CFR 351.304(c), but notes that we 
are not modifying 19 CFR 351.304(c) in this rulemaking.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

    In the final rule, the Department has removed the word 
``arguments'' from section 351.301(c)(3)(iv).

Classification

Executive Order 12866
    This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of 
Executive Order 12866.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    The Department has prepared the following Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis.

1. A Statement of the Need for, and Objectives of, the Rule

    This final rule is intended to alter the Import Administration's 
regulations for AD and CVD proceedings; specifically, to change the 
definition of factual information and the deadlines for submitting 
information in AD and CVD proceedings.
    The final rule would alter several deadlines for submitting factual 
information in a segment of a proceeding. Information submitted to 
rebut, clarify, or correct factual information generally has a deadline 
of 10 days from the date that the initial factual information is served 
on the interested party or filed with the Department, except for 
factual information submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct information 
in an initial questionnaire response, which is due 14 days after the 
initial response is filed with the Department. Factual information 
voluntarily provided to support allegations regarding market viability 
and the basis for determining normal value is due 10 days after the 
respondent interested party files the response to the relevant section 
of the questionnaire. Factual information provided to support an 
allegation of an upstream subsidy is due no later than 60 days after 
the preliminary determination.
    Deadlines for submissions of factual information to value factors 
of production and to measure the adequacy of remuneration have been 
codified or shortened, as appropriate, but this is expected to have a 
beneficial impact on small entities that participate in AD and CVD 
proceedings because they will have the opportunity to review and 
comment on the Department's preliminary analysis of the information, 
which is not the case under the prior rule.

2. A Statement of Significant Issues Raised by the Public Comments in 
Response to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, a Statement of 
the Assessment of the Agency of Such Issues, and a Statement of Any 
Changes in the Proposed Rule as a Result of Such Comments.

    The Department received no comments concerning the Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.

3. The Response of the Agency to Any Comments Filed by the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in Response 
to the Proposed Rule, and a Detailed Statement of Any Change Made to 
the Proposed Rule in the Final Rule as a Result of the Comments

    The Department received no comments from the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

4. A Description of and an Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To 
Which the Rule Will Apply or an Explanation of Why No Such Estimate Is 
Available

    The final rule will apply to all persons submitting information to 
the Department in AD and CVD proceedings. This could include exporters 
and producers of merchandise subject to AD and CVD proceedings and 
their affiliates, importers of such merchandise, domestic producers of 
like products, and foreign governments.
    Exporters and producers of subject merchandise are rarely U.S. 
companies. Some producers and exporters of subject merchandise do have 
U.S. affiliates, some of which may be considered small entities under 
the appropriate Small Business Administration (SBA) small business size 
standard. The Department is not able to estimate the number of U.S. 
affiliates of foreign exporters and producers that may be considered 
small entities, but anticipates, based on its experience in these 
proceedings, that the number will not be substantial.
    Importers may be U.S. or foreign companies, and some of these 
entities may be considered small entities under

[[Page 21253]]

the appropriate SBA small business size standard. The Department does 
not anticipate that the final rule will impact a substantial number of 
small importers because importers of subject merchandise who are not 
also producers and exporters (or their affiliates) rarely submit 
factual information in the course of the Department's AD and CVD 
proceedings, and those that do tend to be larger entities.
    Some domestic producers of like products may be considered small 
entities under the appropriate SBA small business size standard. 
Although it is unable to estimate the number of producers that may be 
considered small entities, the Department does not anticipate that the 
number affected by the final rule will be substantial. Frequently, 
domestic producers that bring a petition account for a large amount of 
the domestic production within an industry, so it is unlikely that 
these domestic producers will be small entities.
    In sum, while recognizing that exporter and producer affiliates, 
importers, and domestic producers that submit information in AD and CVD 
proceedings will likely include some small entities, the Department, 
based on its experience with these proceedings and the participating 
parties, does not anticipate that the final rule would impact a 
substantial number of small entities.

5. A Description of the Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements of the Final Rule

    The final rule will require persons submitting factual information 
to the Department to specify under which subsection of the final 
definition the information is being submitted. If it is being submitted 
to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the 
record, the person will be required to identify the information already 
on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or 
correct. This will not amount to a significant burden as the submitter 
should already be aware of the relevant subsection pursuant to which it 
is submitting factual information; in addition, all of the required 
information should be readily available to any person submitting 
factual information to the Department.

6. A Description of the Steps the Agency Has Taken To Minimize the 
Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities Consistent With the 
Stated Objectives of Applicable Statutes, Including a Statement of the 
Factual, Policy, and Legal Reasons for Selecting the Alternative 
Adopted in the Final Rule and Why Each of the Other Significant 
Alternatives to the Rule Considered by the Agency Which Affect the 
Impact on Small Entities Was Rejected

    The Department has taken steps to minimize the significant economic 
impact on small entities. As discussed above, all parties may request 
an extension pursuant to section 351.302, and the Department will 
continue to grant extensions of time limits to the extent that they are 
warranted and deadlines for the segment permit. Further, the Department 
considered significant alternatives to the final rule. The alternatives 
are:
    (1) Modifying the definition of factual information and modifying 
the time limits as described in the final rule (the Department's 
preferred alternative);
    (2) Maintaining the status quo definition of factual information 
and the time limits for the submission of factual information;
    (3) Modifying the definition of factual information but maintaining 
all time limits; and
    (4) Modifying the definition of factual information and extending 
the time limits.
    First, the Department does not anticipate that the first, preferred 
alternative will have a significant economic impact on small entities. 
The changes to the definition of ``factual information'' do not impose 
any significant burden on the parties in AD or CVD proceedings; the 
changes do not alter the types of information that may be submitted, 
but merely re-categorize them into more logical groupings than the 
current definition. The changes to the deadlines for submitting factual 
information are also not expected to have a significant economic impact 
on small entities. Although some deadlines are shortened, these are 
either not expected to have a significant impact on small entities or 
will actually have a positive impact. For example, for the submission 
of factual information in support of allegations, or to rebut, clarify, 
or correct factual information, in the Department's experience the 
parties submitting these allegations or rebuttals/clarifications/
corrections will possess the relevant information with sufficient time 
to submit them before the information would be due.
    By contrast, shortening the time limits for the submission of 
factual information to value factors of production will have a 
beneficial impact on any small entities that are participating in an AD 
proceeding, because it will provide them with an opportunity to review 
and comment on the Department's preliminary analysis of this 
information. Because the time limits currently permit such information 
to be submitted after the Department issues its preliminary 
calculations, parties wishing to assess the significance of this 
information would need to undertake their own analysis of the often 
voluminous information submitted. Such analysis of the often voluminous 
information may be particularly burdensome for small entities. In 
addition, parties continue to have a significant amount of time to 
gather this type of information in advance of the time limit because 
the Department accepts only publicly available information pursuant to 
this provision. Further, establishing a time limit for the submission 
of factual information to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 
Sec.  351.511(a)(2), where the current regulation does not include any 
time limit, will provide certainty to parties, including those who wish 
to submit factual information to rebut, clarify or correct the factual 
information submitted under this provision.
    Under alternative two, the Department determined that maintaining 
the definition of factual information and the time limits provision 
would not serve the objective of the proposed rules to permit the 
Department and interested parties adequate opportunity to review and 
analyze submissions of factual information in an efficient manner. If 
the Department were to maintain the current rules, then persons would 
still be able to submit large amounts of factual information on the 
record of an AD or CVD segment very close to the Department's statutory 
deadlines for making certain determinations, thus limiting the 
Department's ability to consider, analyze and, if applicable, verify 
the information submitted. The current definition and time limits also 
do not provide sufficient clarity to persons participating in an AD or 
CVD proceeding, because the current rules do not require persons 
submitting information to identify the type of information which is 
being submitted. Although this alternative was considered, it was not 
adopted because it does not serve the Department's objectives of 
creating certainty for

[[Page 21254]]

participants in AD and CVD proceedings.
    The Department also considered modifying the definition of factual 
information without modifying the time limits provision, listed as 
alternative three. This alternative would serve the objective of the 
proposed rules to identify more clearly the types of factual 
information which are submitted in AD and CVD proceedings, but does not 
serve the goal of enabling the Department to efficiently examine 
factual information at an appropriate stage in the proceeding. For 
instance, the Department determined that continuing to allow factual 
information in an AD or CVD investigation ``seven days before the date 
on which verification of any person is scheduled to commence,'' 19 CFR 
351.301(b)(1), would run counter to the objectives of the proposed 
rules because the Department often does not have sufficient opportunity 
to review adequately submissions of factual information when they are 
submitted at this stage of the proceeding. In addition, maintaining the 
time limits for, for instance, the submission of factual information to 
value factors could deprive persons of the opportunity to comment on 
the Department's preliminary analysis of these submissions in their 
case briefs. The changes to the definition to more clearly describe the 
types of factual information which is submitted in an AD and CVD 
proceeding, without a corresponding modification to the time limits 
provision, would not serve the objectives of the Department and, thus, 
has not been adopted.
    Finally, as alternative four, the Department considered extending 
the time limits for the submission of factual information, but this 
alternative has not been adopted. The Department is required to make 
certain determinations for AD and CVD proceedings within prescribed 
statutory deadlines. The prior rule sometimes did not provide the 
Department with a sufficient opportunity to examine and analyze 
submissions of factual information before those statutory deadlines, 
and in some instances deprived parties of the opportunity to comment on 
the submissions of factual information in their case briefs. An 
extension of time limits would exacerbate the problem, which the 
proposed rules seek to address. Therefore, this alternative has not 
been adopted.
Small Business Compliance Guide
    In accordance with Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, the agency has published a guide to 
assist small entities in complying with the rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
    This final rule does not require a collection of information for 
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, as amended (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 351

    Administrative practice and procedure, Antidumping, Business and 
industry, Cheese, Confidential business information, Countervailing 
duties, Freedom of information, Investigations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

     Dated: April 2, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

    For the reasons stated, 19 CFR part 351 is amended as follows:

PART 351--ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTIES

0
1. The authority citation for 19 CFR part 351 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 1202 note; 19 U.S.C. 1303 
note; 19 U.S.C. 1671 et seq.; and 19 U.S.C. 3538.


0
2. In Sec.  351.102, revise paragraph (b)(21) to read as follows:


Sec.  351.102  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (21) Factual information. ``Factual information'' means:
    (i) Evidence, including statements of fact, documents, and data 
submitted either in response to initial and supplemental 
questionnaires, or, to rebut, clarify, or correct such evidence 
submitted by any other interested party;
    (ii) Evidence, including statements of fact, documents, and data 
submitted either in support of allegations, or, to rebut, clarify, or 
correct such evidence submitted by any other interested party;
    (iii) Publicly available information submitted to value factors 
under Sec.  351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 
Sec.  351.511(a)(2), or, to rebut, clarify, or correct such publicly 
available information submitted by any other interested party;
    (iv) Evidence, including statements of fact, documents and data 
placed on the record by the Department, or, evidence submitted by any 
interested party to rebut, clarify or correct such evidence placed on 
the record by the Department; and
    (v) Evidence, including statements of fact, documents, and data, 
other than factual information described in paragraphs (b)(21)(i)-(iv) 
of this section, in addition to evidence submitted by any other 
interested party to rebut, clarify, or correct such evidence.
* * * * *
0
3. Revise Sec.  351.301 to read as follows:


Sec.  351.301  Time limits for submission of factual information.

    (a) Introduction. This section sets forth the time limits for 
submitting factual information, as defined by Sec.  351.102(b)(21). The 
Department obtains most of its factual information in antidumping and 
countervailing duty proceedings from submissions made by interested 
parties during the course of the proceeding. Notwithstanding paragraph 
(b) of this section, the Secretary may request any person to submit 
factual information at any time during a proceeding or provide 
additional opportunities to submit factual information. Section 351.302 
sets forth the procedures for requesting an extension of such time 
limits, and provides that, unless expressly precluded by statute, the 
Secretary may, for good cause, extend any time limit established in the 
Department's regulations. Section 351.303 contains the procedural rules 
regarding filing (including procedures for filing on non-business 
days), format, translation, service, and certification of documents. In 
the Secretary's written request to an interested party for a response 
to a questionnaire or for other factual information, the Secretary will 
specify the following: The time limit for the response; the information 
to be provided; the form and manner in which the interested party must 
submit the information; and that failure to submit the requested 
information in the requested form and manner by the date specified may 
result in use of the facts available under section 776 of the Act and 
Sec.  351.308.
    (b) Submission of factual information. Every submission of factual 
information must be accompanied by a written explanation identifying 
the subsection of Sec.  351.102(b)(21) under which the information is 
being submitted.
    (1) If an interested party states that the information is submitted 
under Sec.  351.102(b)(21)(v), the party must explain why the 
information does not satisfy the definitions described in Sec.  
351.102(b)(21)(i)-(iv).
    (2) If the factual information is being submitted to rebut, 
clarify, or correct factual information on the record, the submitter 
must provide a written explanation identifying the information which is 
already on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, 
clarify, or correct, including the name of

[[Page 21255]]

the interested party that submitted the information and the date on 
which the information was submitted.
    (c) Time limits. The type of factual information determines the 
time limit for submission to the Department.
    (1) Factual information submitted in response to questionnaires. 
During a proceeding, the Secretary may issue to any person 
questionnaires, which includes both initial and supplemental 
questionnaires. The Secretary will not consider or retain in the 
official record of the proceeding unsolicited questionnaire responses, 
except as provided under Sec.  351.204(d)(2), or untimely filed 
questionnaire responses. The Secretary will reject any untimely filed 
or unsolicited questionnaire response and provide, to the extent 
practicable, written notice stating the reasons for rejection (see 
Sec.  351.302(d)).
    (i) Initial questionnaire responses are due 30 days from the date 
of receipt of such questionnaire. The time limit for response to 
individual sections of the questionnaire, if the Secretary requests a 
separate response to such sections, may be less than the 30 days 
allotted for response to the full questionnaire. In general, the date 
of receipt will be considered to be seven days from the date on which 
the initial questionnaire was transmitted.
    (ii) Supplemental questionnaire responses are due on the date 
specified by the Secretary.
    (iii) A notification by an interested party, under section 
782(c)(1) of the Act, of difficulties in submitting information in 
response to a questionnaire issued by the Secretary is to be submitted 
in writing within 14 days after the date of the questionnaire or, if 
the questionnaire is due in 14 days or less, within the time specified 
by the Secretary.
    (iv) A respondent interested party may request in writing that the 
Secretary conduct a questionnaire presentation. The Secretary may 
conduct a questionnaire presentation if the Secretary notifies the 
government of the affected country and that government does not object.
    (v) Factual information submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct 
questionnaire responses. Within 14 days after an initial questionnaire 
response and within 10 days after a supplemental questionnaire response 
has been filed with the Department, an interested party other than the 
original submitter is permitted one opportunity to submit factual 
information to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information contained 
in the questionnaire response. Within seven days of the filing of such 
rebuttal, clarification, or correction to a questionnaire response, the 
original submitter of the questionnaire response is permitted one 
opportunity to submit factual information to rebut, clarify, or correct 
factual information submitted in the interested party's rebuttal, 
clarification or correction. The Secretary will reject any untimely 
filed rebuttal, clarification, or correction submission and provide, to 
the extent practicable, written notice stating the reasons for 
rejection (see Sec.  351.302). If insufficient time remains before the 
due date for the final determination or final results of review, the 
Secretary may specify shorter deadlines under this section.
    (2) Factual information submitted in support of allegations. 
Factual information submitted in support of allegations must be 
accompanied by a summary, not to exceed five pages, of the allegation 
and supporting data.
    (i) Market viability and the basis for determining normal value. 
Allegations regarding market viability in an antidumping investigation 
or administrative review, including the exceptions in Sec.  
351.404(c)(2), are due, with all supporting factual information, 10 
days after the respondent interested party files the response to the 
relevant section of the questionnaire, unless the Secretary alters this 
time limit.
    (ii) Sales at prices below the cost of production. Allegations of 
sales at prices below the cost of production made by the petitioner or 
other domestic interested party are due within:
    (A) In an antidumping investigation, on a country-wide basis, 20 
days after the date on which the initial questionnaire was issued to 
any person, unless the Secretary alters this time limit; or, on a 
company-specific basis, 20 days after a respondent interested party 
files the response to the relevant section of the questionnaire, unless 
the relevant questionnaire response is, in the Secretary's view, 
incomplete, in which case the Secretary will determine the time limit;
    (B) In an administrative review, new shipper review, or changed 
circumstances review, on a company-specific basis, 20 days after a 
respondent interested party files the response to the relevant section 
of the questionnaire, unless the relevant questionnaire response is, in 
the Secretary's view, incomplete, in which case the Secretary will 
determine the time limit; or
    (C) In an expedited antidumping review, on a company-specific 
basis, 10 days after the date of publication of the notice of 
initiation of the review.
    (iii) Purchases of major inputs from an affiliated party at prices 
below the affiliated party's cost of production. An allegation of 
purchases of major inputs from an affiliated party at prices below the 
affiliated party's cost of production made by the petitioner or other 
domestic interested party is due within 20 days after a respondent 
interested party files the response to the relevant section of the 
questionnaire, unless the relevant questionnaire response is, in the 
Secretary's view, incomplete, in which case the Secretary will 
determine the time limits.
    (iv) Countervailable subsidy; upstream subsidy. A countervailable 
subsidy allegation made by the petitioner or other domestic interested 
party is due no later than:
    (A) In a countervailing duty investigation, 40 days before the 
scheduled date of the preliminary determination, unless the Secretary 
extends this time limit for good cause; or
    (B) In an administrative review, new shipper review, or changed 
circumstances review, 20 days after all responses to the initial 
questionnaire are filed with the Department, unless the Secretary 
alters this time limit.
    (C) Exception for upstream subsidy allegation in an investigation. 
In a countervailing duty investigation, an allegation of upstream 
subsidies made by the petitioner or other domestic interested party is 
due no later than 60 days after the date of the preliminary 
determination.
    (v) Other allegations. An interested party may submit factual 
information in support of other allegations not specified in paragraphs 
(c)(2)(i)-(iv) of this section. Upon receipt of factual information 
under this subsection, the Secretary will issue a memorandum accepting 
or rejecting the information and, to the extent practicable, will 
provide written notice stating the reasons for rejection. If the 
Secretary accepts the information, the Secretary will issue a schedule 
providing deadlines for submission of factual information to rebut, 
clarify or correct the factual information.
    (vi) Rebuttal, clarification, or correction of factual information 
submitted in support of allegations. An interested party is permitted 
one opportunity to submit factual information to rebut, clarify, or 
correct factual information submitted in support of allegations 10 days 
after the date such factual information is served on an interested 
party.
    (3) Factual information submitted to value factors under Sec.  
351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under Sec.  
351.511(a)(2).

[[Page 21256]]

    (i) Antidumping or countervailing duty investigations. All 
submissions of factual information to value factors of production under 
Sec.  351.408(c) in an antidumping investigation, or to measure the 
adequacy of remuneration under Sec.  351.511(a)(2) in a countervailing 
duty investigation, are due no later than 30 days before the scheduled 
date of the preliminary determination;
    (ii) Administrative review, new shipper review, or changed 
circumstances review. All submissions of factual information to value 
factors under Sec.  351.408(c), or to measure the adequacy of 
remuneration under Sec.  351.511(a)(2), are due no later than 30 days 
before the scheduled date of the preliminary results of review; and
    (iii) Expedited antidumping review. All submissions of factual 
information to value factors under Sec.  351.408(c) are due on a date 
specified by the Secretary.
    (iv) Rebuttal, clarification, or correction of factual information 
submitted to value factors under Sec.  351.408(c) or to measure the 
adequacy of remuneration under Sec.  351.511(a)(2). An interested party 
is permitted one opportunity to submit publicly available information 
to rebut, clarify, or correct such factual information submitted 
pursuant to Sec.  351.408(c) or Sec.  351.511(a)(2) 10 days after the 
date such factual information is served on the interested party. An 
interested party may not submit additional, previously absent-from-the-
record alternative surrogate value information under this subsection. 
Additionally, all factual information submitted under this subsection 
must be accompanied by a written explanation identifying what 
information already on the record of the ongoing proceeding the factual 
information is rebutting, clarifying, or correcting. Information 
submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information submitted 
pursuant to Sec.  351.408(c) will not be used to value factors under 
Sec.  351.408(c).
    (4) Factual information placed on the record of the proceeding by 
the Department. The Department may place factual information on the 
record of the proceeding at any time. An interested party is permitted 
one opportunity to submit factual information to rebut, clarify, or 
correct factual information placed on the record of the proceeding by 
the Department by a date specified by the Secretary.
    (5) Factual information not directly responsive to or relating to 
paragraphs (c)(1)-(4) of this section). Paragraph (c)(5) applies to 
factual information other than that described in Sec.  
351.102(b)(21)(i)-(iv). The Secretary will reject information filed 
under paragraph (c)(5) that satisfies the definition of information 
described in Sec.  351.102(b)(21)(i)-(iv) and that was not filed within 
the deadlines specified above. All submissions of factual information 
under this subsection are required to clearly explain why the 
information contained therein does not meet the definition of factual 
information described in Sec.  351.102(b)(21)(i)-(iv), and must provide 
a detailed narrative of exactly what information is contained in the 
submission and why it should be considered. The deadline for filing 
such information will be 30 days before the scheduled date of the 
preliminary determination in an investigation, or 14 days before 
verification, whichever is earlier, and 30 days before the scheduled 
date of the preliminary results in an administrative review, or 14 days 
before verification, whichever is earlier.
    (i) Upon receipt of factual information under this subsection, the 
Secretary will issue a memorandum accepting or rejecting the 
information and, to the extent practicable, will provide written notice 
stating the reasons for rejection.
    (ii) If the Secretary accepts the information, the Secretary will 
issue a schedule providing deadlines for submission of factual 
information to rebut, clarify or correct the factual information.

[FR Doc. 2013-08227 Filed 4-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P