Steel Threaded Rod From India: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Determination, 76815-76817 [2013-30113]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2013 / Notices necessary to prevent evasion of the Order. IV. This Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect until October 3, 2017. V. In accordance with Part 756 of the Regulations, Mahalaty may file an appeal of this Order with the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security. The appeal must be filed within 45 days from the date of this Order and must comply with the provisions of Part 756 of the Regulations. VI. A copy of this Order shall be delivered to the Mahalaty. This Order shall be published in the Federal Register. Issued this 13th day of December 2013. Eileen M. Albanese, Acting Director, Office of Exporter Services. [FR Doc. 2013–30211 Filed 12–18–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–997, C–580–873, C–583–852] Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Postponement of Preliminary Determinations in the Countervailing Duty Investigations Enforcement and Compliance, formerly Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. AGENCY: Austin Redington at (202) 482–1664 or Nancy Decker at (202) 482–0196, AD/ CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES Background On November 6, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated countervailing duty investigations on non-oriented electrical steel (NOES) from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan.1 Currently, the preliminary determinations are due no later than January 10, 2013. 1 See Non-Oriented Electrical Steel from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations, 78 FR 68412 (November 14, 2013). 16:41 Dec 18, 2013 Jkt 232001 Dated: December 13, 2013. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2013–30262 Filed 12–18–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: VerDate Mar<15>2010 Postponement of Due Date for Preliminary Determinations Section 703(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires the Department to issue the preliminary determination in a countervailing duty investigation within 65 days after the date on which the Department initiated the investigation. However, if the petitioner makes a timely request for a postponement, section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act allows the Department to postpone making the preliminary determination until no later than 130 days after the date on which the administering authority initiated the investigation. On November 26, 2013, AK Steel Corporation, the petitioner in these investigations, requested that the deadline for the preliminary determination in each of these cases be postponed in accordance with 19 CFR 351.205(b)(2). Therefore, in accordance with section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act, we are fully postponing the due date for the preliminary determinations to no later than 130 days after the day on which the investigations were initiated. However, as that date falls on a Sunday (i.e., March 16, 2014), the deadline for completion of the preliminary determinations is now March 17, 2014, the next business day. This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 703(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1). DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–533–856] Steel Threaded Rod From India: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Determination Enforcement and Compliance, formerly Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) preliminarily determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of steel threaded rod from India. The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2012. For AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 76815 information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the ‘‘Suspension of Liquidation’’ section of this notice. DATES: Effective Date: December 19, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brooke Kennedy, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3818. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scope of the Investigation The merchandise covered by this investigation is steel threaded rod. Steel threaded rod is certain threaded rod, bar, or studs, of carbon quality steel, having a solid, circular cross section, of any diameter, in any straight length, that have been forged, turned, cold-drawn, cold-rolled, machine straightened, or otherwise cold-finished, and into which threaded grooves have been applied. In addition, the steel threaded rod, bar, or studs subject to this investigation are non-headed and threaded along greater than 25 percent of their total length. A variety of finishes or coatings, such as plain oil finish as a temporary rust protectant, zinc coating (i.e., galvanized, whether by electroplating or hotdipping), paint, and other similar finishes and coatings, may be applied to the merchandise. For a complete description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix 1 to this notice. Methodology The Department is conducting this countervailing duty (‘‘CVD’’) investigation in accordance with section 701 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.1 The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (‘‘IA ACCESS’’). IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http:// iaaccess.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of 1 See Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Senior Advisor for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation on Steel Threaded Rod from India,’’ dated concurrently with this notice (‘‘Preliminary Decision Memorandum’’). E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM 19DEN1 76816 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2013 / Notices emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at http:// www.trade.gov/enforcement/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content. In accordance with section 703(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, we calculated a CVD rate for each individually investigated producer/exporter of the subject merchandise. Sections 703(d) and 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act state that for companies not individually investigated, we will determine an allothers rate by weighting the individual company subsidy rate of each of the companies investigated by each company’s exports of subject merchandise to the United States. However, the all-others rate may not include zero and de minimis rates or any rates based solely on the facts available. In this investigation, the only rate that is not de minimis or based entirely on facts available is the rate calculated for Mangal Steel Enterprises Ltd. (‘‘Mangal’’). Accordingly, the rate calculated for Mangal is also assigned as the all-others rate. For further information, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. Use of Facts Otherwise Available— Babu Exports (‘‘Babu’’) Babu is a producer/exporter that was selected for investigation. On September 6, 2013, the Department issued a questionnaire to Babu and confirmed that Babu received the questionnaire.2 Babu never responded to the Department’s questionnaire. Sections 776(a)(1) and (2) of the Act provide that the Department shall apply ‘‘facts otherwise available’’ if, inter alia, necessary information is not on the record or an interested party or any other person: (A) Withholds information that has been requested; (B) fails to provide information within the deadlines established, or in the form and manner requested by the Department, subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 of the Act; (C) significantly impedes a proceeding; or (D) provides information that cannot be verified as provided by section 782(i) of the Act. Babu did not provide any of the information requested by the Department that is necessary to determine a CVD rate for this preliminary determination. As a result, 2 See the Department’s memorandum, ‘‘Babu Exports Original Questionnaire Delivery Confirmation,’’ dated September 14, 2013. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:41 Dec 18, 2013 Jkt 232001 we have none of the data necessary to calculate a subsidy rate for Babu. Accordingly, in reaching our preliminary determination, pursuant to section 776(a)(2)(A) and (C) of the Act, we have based Babu’s CVD rate on facts otherwise available. Section 776(b) of the Act provides that the Department may use an adverse inference in applying the facts otherwise available when a party has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with a request for information. Section 776(b) of the Act also authorizes the Department to use as adverse facts available (‘‘AFA’’) information derived from the petition, the final determination, a previous administrative review, or other information placed on the record. The Department preliminarily determines that an adverse inference is warranted, pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act because, by not responding to our requests for information, Babu failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability. Accordingly, our preliminary determination is based on AFA. For further information, see ‘‘Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences’’ in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. Selection of the Adverse Facts Available Rate In CVD proceedings, the Department computes a total AFA rate for the noncooperating company using the highest calculated program-specific rates determined for the cooperating respondents in the instant investigation, or, if not available, rates calculated in prior CVD cases involving the same country.3 Specifically, the Department applies the highest calculated rate for the identical program in the investigation if a responding company used the identical program, and the rate is not zero.4 If there is no identical program match within the investigation, or if the rate is zero, the Department uses the highest non-de minimis rate 3 See, e.g., Certain Tow-Behind Lawn Groomers and Certain Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 73 FR 70971, 70975 (November 24, 2008) (unchanged in Certain Tow-Behind Lawn Groomers and Certain Parts Thereof From the People’s Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 74 FR 29180, (June 19, 2009), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at ‘‘Application of Facts Available, Including the Application of Adverse Inferences’’). 4 There is an exception to this approach for income tax exemption and reduction programs; however, since there are no such programs in this investigation, the exception is not applicable here. PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 calculated for the same or similar program (based on treatment of benefit) in another CVD proceeding involving the same country. Absent an above de minimis subsidy rate calculated for the same or similar program in the same country, the Department applies the highest calculated subsidy rate for any program otherwise identified in a CVD case involving the same county that could be used by the non-cooperating company.5 For a discussion of the application of the individual AFA rates for programs preliminarily determined to be countervailable, see Preliminary Decision Memorandum. Corroboration of Secondary Information Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies on secondary information rather than on information obtained in the course of an investigation or review, it shall, to the extent practicable, corroborate that information from independent sources that are reasonably at its disposal. In the instant case, the Department preliminarily finds that the information used has been corroborated to the extent practicable. For further information, see ‘‘Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences’’ in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. Alignment of Final Determination On July 29, 2013, the Department initiated an antidumping (‘‘AD’’) investigation concurrent with this CVD investigation of steel threaded rod.6 The scope of the merchandise being covered is the same for both the AD and CVD investigations. On December 11, 2013, Petitioners submitted a letter, in accordance with section 705(a)(1) of the Act, requesting alignment of the final CVD determination with the final determination in the companion AD investigation. Therefore, in accordance with section 705(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(4), the final CVD determination will be issued on the same date as the final AD determination, which is currently scheduled to be issued on April 28, 2014. 5 See, e.g., Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 76 FR 18521, (April 4, 2011), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at ‘‘Application of Adverse Inferences: Non-Cooperative Companies.’’ 6 See Steel Threaded Rod from India and Thailand: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 78 FR 44526 (July 24, 2013). E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM 19DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2013 / Notices Preliminary Determination and Suspension of Liquidation We preliminarily determine the countervailable subsidy rates to be: Company Subsidy rate (percent) Mangal Steel Enterprises Ltd. (‘‘Mangal’’) ............................. Babu Exports (‘‘Babu’’) ............. All Others .................................. 8.13 38.98 8.13 In accordance with sections 703(d)(1)(B) and (2) of the Act, we are directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation of all entries of steel threaded rod from India that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of the publication of this notice in the Federal Register, and to require a cash deposit for such entries of the merchandise in the amounts indicated above. Disclosure and Public Comment The Department intends to disclose to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with this preliminary determination within five days of public announcement of this determination.7 Interested parties may submit case and rebuttals briefs.8 For a schedule of the deadlines for filing case briefs, rebuttal briefs, and hearing request, see the Preliminary Determination Memorandum. This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 703(f) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: December 11, 2013. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES Appendix 1 Scope of the Investigation The merchandise covered by this investigation is steel threaded rod. Steel threaded rod is certain threaded rod, bar, or studs, of carbon quality steel, having a solid, circular cross section, of any diameter, in any straight length, that have been forged, turned, cold-drawn, cold-rolled, machine straightened, or otherwise cold-finished, and into which threaded grooves have been applied. In addition, the steel threaded rod, bar, or studs subject to this investigation are nonheaded and threaded along greater than 25 percent of their total length. A variety of finishes or coatings, such as plain oil finish as a temporary rust protectant, zinc coating (i.e., galvanized, whether by electroplating or hot-dipping), paint, and other similar finishes and coatings, may be applied to the merchandise. Included in the scope of this investigation are steel threaded rod, bar, or studs, in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; and (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated: • 1.80 percent of manganese, or • 1.50 percent of silicon, or • 1.00 percent of copper, or • 0.50 percent of aluminum, or • 1.25 percent of chromium, or • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or • 0.40 percent of lead, or • 1.25 percent of nickel, or • 0.30 percent of tungsten, or • 0.012 percent of boron, or • 0.10 percent of molybdenum, or • 0.10 percent of niobium, or • 0.41 percent of titanium, or • 0.15 percent of vanadium, or • 0.15 percent of zirconium. Steel threaded rod is currently classifiable under subheadings 7318.15.5051, 7318.15.5056, 7318.15.5090 and 7318.15.2095 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is dispositive. Excluded from the scope of this investigation are: (a) Threaded rod, bar, or studs which are threaded only on one or both ends and the threading covers 25 percent or less of the total length; and (b) threaded rod, bar, or studs made to American Society for Testing and Materials (‘‘ASTM’’) A193 Grade B7, ASTM A193 Grade B7M, ASTM A193 Grade B16, and ASTM A320 Grade L7. Appendix 2 List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 1. Scope Comments 2. Scope of the Investigation 3. Injury Test 4. Subsidies Valuation 5. Use of Facts Otherwise Available 6. Analysis of Programs 7. Calculation of the All Others Rate 8. ITC Notification 9. Disclosure and Public Comment 10. Verification [FR Doc. 2013–30113 Filed 12–18–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Limitation of Duty-Free Imports of Apparel Articles Assembled in Haiti Under the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity Through Partnership for Encouragement Act (HOPE) International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. AGENCY: 7 See 19 CFR 351.224(b). 8 See 19 CFR 351.309. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:41 Dec 18, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 76817 Notification of Annual Quantitative Limit on Certain Apparel under HOPE. ACTION: DATES: Effective Date: December 20, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maria Dybczak, International Trade Specialist, Office of Textiles and Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce, (202) 482–3651. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority: The Caribbean Basin Recovery Act (‘‘CBERA’’), as amended by the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity Through Partnership for Encouragement Act of 2006 (‘‘HOPE’’), Title V of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 and the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (‘‘HOPE II’’); the Haiti Economic Lift Program Act of 2010 (‘‘HELP’’); and implemented by Presidential Proclamations No. 8114, 72 FR 13655, 13659 (March 22, 2007), and No. 8596, 75 FR 68,153 (November 4, 2010). HOPE provides for duty-free treatment for certain apparel articles imported directly from Haiti. Section 213A(b)(1)(B) of HOPE outlines the requirements for certain apparel articles to qualify for duty-free treatment under a ‘‘value-added’’ program. In order to qualify for duty-free treatment, apparel articles must be wholly assembled, or knit-to-shape, in Haiti from any combination of fabrics, fabric components, components knit-to-shape, and yarns, as long as the sum of the cost or value of materials produced in Haiti or one or more countries, as described in HOPE, or any combination thereof, plus the direct costs of processing operations performed in Haiti or one or more countries, as described in HOPE, or any combination thereof, is not less than an applicable percentage of the declared customs value of such apparel articles. Pursuant to HELP, the applicable percentage for the period December 20, 2013 through December 19, 2014, is 50 percent or more. For every twelve month period following the effective date of HOPE, duty-free treatment under the valueadded program is subject to a quantitative limitation. HOPE provides that the quantitative limitation will be recalculated for each subsequent 12month period. Section 213A(b)(1)(C) of HOPE, as amended by HOPE II and HELP, requires that, for the twelvemonth period beginning on December 20, 2013, the quantitative limitation for qualifying apparel imported from Haiti under the value-added program will be an amount equivalent to 1.25 percent of the aggregate square meter equivalent of all apparel articles imported into the United States in the most recent 12month period for which data are E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM 19DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76815-76817]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30113]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-856]


Steel Threaded Rod From India: Preliminary Affirmative 
Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination 
With Final Antidumping Determination

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, formerly Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') preliminarily 
determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to 
producers and exporters of steel threaded rod from India. The period of 
investigation (``POI'') is January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2012. 
For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the ``Suspension of 
Liquidation'' section of this notice.

DATES: Effective Date: December 19, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brooke Kennedy, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
3818.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is steel threaded 
rod. Steel threaded rod is certain threaded rod, bar, or studs, of 
carbon quality steel, having a solid, circular cross section, of any 
diameter, in any straight length, that have been forged, turned, cold-
drawn, cold-rolled, machine straightened, or otherwise cold-finished, 
and into which threaded grooves have been applied. In addition, the 
steel threaded rod, bar, or studs subject to this investigation are 
non-headed and threaded along greater than 25 percent of their total 
length. A variety of finishes or coatings, such as plain oil finish as 
a temporary rust protectant, zinc coating (i.e., galvanized, whether by 
electroplating or hot-dipping), paint, and other similar finishes and 
coatings, may be applied to the merchandise. For a complete description 
of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix 1 to this notice.

Methodology

    The Department is conducting this countervailing duty (``CVD'') 
investigation in accordance with section 701 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 
as amended (``the Act''). For a full description of the methodology 
underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision 
Memorandum.\1\ The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document 
and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service 
System (``IA ACCESS''). IA ACCESS is available to registered users at 
http://iaaccess.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the 
Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of

[[Page 76816]]

Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary 
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum 
and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are 
identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Senior Advisor for 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ``Decision 
Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Countervailing 
Duty Investigation on Steel Threaded Rod from India,'' dated 
concurrently with this notice (``Preliminary Decision Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 703(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, we 
calculated a CVD rate for each individually investigated producer/
exporter of the subject merchandise. Sections 703(d) and 705(c)(5)(A) 
of the Act state that for companies not individually investigated, we 
will determine an all-others rate by weighting the individual company 
subsidy rate of each of the companies investigated by each company's 
exports of subject merchandise to the United States. However, the all-
others rate may not include zero and de minimis rates or any rates 
based solely on the facts available. In this investigation, the only 
rate that is not de minimis or based entirely on facts available is the 
rate calculated for Mangal Steel Enterprises Ltd. (``Mangal''). 
Accordingly, the rate calculated for Mangal is also assigned as the 
all-others rate. For further information, see the Preliminary Decision 
Memorandum.

Use of Facts Otherwise Available--Babu Exports (``Babu'')

    Babu is a producer/exporter that was selected for investigation. On 
September 6, 2013, the Department issued a questionnaire to Babu and 
confirmed that Babu received the questionnaire.\2\ Babu never responded 
to the Department's questionnaire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See the Department's memorandum, ``Babu Exports Original 
Questionnaire Delivery Confirmation,'' dated September 14, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sections 776(a)(1) and (2) of the Act provide that the Department 
shall apply ``facts otherwise available'' if, inter alia, necessary 
information is not on the record or an interested party or any other 
person: (A) Withholds information that has been requested; (B) fails to 
provide information within the deadlines established, or in the form 
and manner requested by the Department, subject to subsections (c)(1) 
and (e) of section 782 of the Act; (C) significantly impedes a 
proceeding; or (D) provides information that cannot be verified as 
provided by section 782(i) of the Act.
    Babu did not provide any of the information requested by the 
Department that is necessary to determine a CVD rate for this 
preliminary determination. As a result, we have none of the data 
necessary to calculate a subsidy rate for Babu. Accordingly, in 
reaching our preliminary determination, pursuant to section 
776(a)(2)(A) and (C) of the Act, we have based Babu's CVD rate on facts 
otherwise available.
    Section 776(b) of the Act provides that the Department may use an 
adverse inference in applying the facts otherwise available when a 
party has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability 
to comply with a request for information. Section 776(b) of the Act 
also authorizes the Department to use as adverse facts available 
(``AFA'') information derived from the petition, the final 
determination, a previous administrative review, or other information 
placed on the record.
    The Department preliminarily determines that an adverse inference 
is warranted, pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act because, by not 
responding to our requests for information, Babu failed to cooperate by 
not acting to the best of its ability. Accordingly, our preliminary 
determination is based on AFA. For further information, see ``Use of 
Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences'' in the Preliminary 
Decision Memorandum.

Selection of the Adverse Facts Available Rate

    In CVD proceedings, the Department computes a total AFA rate for 
the non-cooperating company using the highest calculated program-
specific rates determined for the cooperating respondents in the 
instant investigation, or, if not available, rates calculated in prior 
CVD cases involving the same country.\3\ Specifically, the Department 
applies the highest calculated rate for the identical program in the 
investigation if a responding company used the identical program, and 
the rate is not zero.\4\ If there is no identical program match within 
the investigation, or if the rate is zero, the Department uses the 
highest non-de minimis rate calculated for the same or similar program 
(based on treatment of benefit) in another CVD proceeding involving the 
same country. Absent an above de minimis subsidy rate calculated for 
the same or similar program in the same country, the Department applies 
the highest calculated subsidy rate for any program otherwise 
identified in a CVD case involving the same county that could be used 
by the non-cooperating company.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See, e.g., Certain Tow-Behind Lawn Groomers and Certain 
Parts Thereof from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary 
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final 
Countervailing Duty Determination with Final Antidumping Duty 
Determination, 73 FR 70971, 70975 (November 24, 2008) (unchanged in 
Certain Tow-Behind Lawn Groomers and Certain Parts Thereof From the 
People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty 
Determination, 74 FR 29180, (June 19, 2009), and accompanying Issues 
and Decision Memorandum at ``Application of Facts Available, 
Including the Application of Adverse Inferences'').
    \4\ There is an exception to this approach for income tax 
exemption and reduction programs; however, since there are no such 
programs in this investigation, the exception is not applicable 
here.
    \5\ See, e.g., Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic of 
China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 76 FR 
18521, (April 4, 2011), and accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum at ``Application of Adverse Inferences: Non-Cooperative 
Companies.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For a discussion of the application of the individual AFA rates for 
programs preliminarily determined to be countervailable, see 
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Corroboration of Secondary Information

    Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies 
on secondary information rather than on information obtained in the 
course of an investigation or review, it shall, to the extent 
practicable, corroborate that information from independent sources that 
are reasonably at its disposal. In the instant case, the Department 
preliminarily finds that the information used has been corroborated to 
the extent practicable. For further information, see ``Use of Facts 
Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences'' in the Preliminary 
Decision Memorandum.

Alignment of Final Determination

    On July 29, 2013, the Department initiated an antidumping (``AD'') 
investigation concurrent with this CVD investigation of steel threaded 
rod.\6\ The scope of the merchandise being covered is the same for both 
the AD and CVD investigations. On December 11, 2013, Petitioners 
submitted a letter, in accordance with section 705(a)(1) of the Act, 
requesting alignment of the final CVD determination with the final 
determination in the companion AD investigation. Therefore, in 
accordance with section 705(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(4), 
the final CVD determination will be issued on the same date as the 
final AD determination, which is currently scheduled to be issued on 
April 28, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Steel Threaded Rod from India and Thailand: Initiation 
of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 78 FR 44526 (July 24, 2013).

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

[[Page 76817]]

Preliminary Determination and Suspension of Liquidation

    We preliminarily determine the countervailable subsidy rates to be:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Subsidy
                          Company                                rate
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mangal Steel Enterprises Ltd. (``Mangal'').................         8.13
Babu Exports (``Babu'')....................................        38.98
All Others.................................................         8.13
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with sections 703(d)(1)(B) and (2) of the Act, we are 
directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation of 
all entries of steel threaded rod from India that are entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of the 
publication of this notice in the Federal Register, and to require a 
cash deposit for such entries of the merchandise in the amounts 
indicated above.

Disclosure and Public Comment

    The Department intends to disclose to interested parties the 
calculations performed in connection with this preliminary 
determination within five days of public announcement of this 
determination.\7\ Interested parties may submit case and rebuttals 
briefs.\8\ For a schedule of the deadlines for filing case briefs, 
rebuttal briefs, and hearing request, see the Preliminary Determination 
Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 19 CFR 351.224(b).
    \8\ See 19 CFR 351.309.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 
703(f) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: December 11, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix 1

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is steel threaded 
rod. Steel threaded rod is certain threaded rod, bar, or studs, of 
carbon quality steel, having a solid, circular cross section, of any 
diameter, in any straight length, that have been forged, turned, 
cold-drawn, cold-rolled, machine straightened, or otherwise cold-
finished, and into which threaded grooves have been applied. In 
addition, the steel threaded rod, bar, or studs subject to this 
investigation are nonheaded and threaded along greater than 25 
percent of their total length. A variety of finishes or coatings, 
such as plain oil finish as a temporary rust protectant, zinc 
coating (i.e., galvanized, whether by electroplating or hot-
dipping), paint, and other similar finishes and coatings, may be 
applied to the merchandise.
    Included in the scope of this investigation are steel threaded 
rod, bar, or studs, in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over 
each of the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is 2 
percent or less, by weight; and (3) none of the elements listed 
below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:
     1.80 percent of manganese, or
     1.50 percent of silicon, or
     1.00 percent of copper, or
     0.50 percent of aluminum, or
     1.25 percent of chromium, or
     0.30 percent of cobalt, or
     0.40 percent of lead, or
     1.25 percent of nickel, or
     0.30 percent of tungsten, or
     0.012 percent of boron, or
     0.10 percent of molybdenum, or
     0.10 percent of niobium, or
     0.41 percent of titanium, or
     0.15 percent of vanadium, or
     0.15 percent of zirconium.
    Steel threaded rod is currently classifiable under subheadings 
7318.15.5051, 7318.15.5056, 7318.15.5090 and 7318.15.2095 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). 
Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is 
dispositive.
    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are: (a) Threaded 
rod, bar, or studs which are threaded only on one or both ends and 
the threading covers 25 percent or less of the total length; and (b) 
threaded rod, bar, or studs made to American Society for Testing and 
Materials (``ASTM'') A193 Grade B7, ASTM A193 Grade B7M, ASTM A193 
Grade B16, and ASTM A320 Grade L7.

Appendix 2

List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum

    1. Scope Comments
    2. Scope of the Investigation
    3. Injury Test
    4. Subsidies Valuation
    5. Use of Facts Otherwise Available
    6. Analysis of Programs
    7. Calculation of the All Others Rate
    8. ITC Notification
    9. Disclosure and Public Comment
    10. Verification

[FR Doc. 2013-30113 Filed 12-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P