Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 4667-4671 [2014-01743]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Notices tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES for company/government officials, as well as their representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of petitions filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final Rule.50 The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification requirements. Revised Extension of Time Limits Regulation On September 20, 2013, the Department modified its regulation concerning the extension of time limits for submissions in AD and CVD proceedings. The modification clarifies that parties may request an extension of time limits before a time limit established under Part 351 expires, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the time limit established under Part 351 expires. For submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. on the due date. Examples include, but are not limited to: (1) Case and rebuttal briefs, filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309; (2) factual information to value factors under section 19 CFR 351.408(c), or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under section 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2), filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, clarification and correction filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(iv); (3) comments concerning the selection of a surrogate country and surrogate values and rebuttal; (4) comments concerning CBP data; and (5) Q&V questionnaires. Under certain circumstances, the Department may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, the Department will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. This modification also requires that an extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission, and 50 See Certification of Factual Information To Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_ info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:05 Jan 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 clarifies the circumstances under which the Department will grant untimelyfiled requests for the extension of time limits. These modifications are effective for all segments initiated on or after October 21, 2013. Please review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/201322853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in these segments. Notification to Interested Parties Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)). This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.203(c). Dated: January 22, 2014. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigations The merchandise covered by these investigations is crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, and modules, laminates and/or panels consisting of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not partially or fully assembled into other products, including building integrated materials. For purposes of these investigations, subject merchandise also includes modules, laminates and/or panels assembled in the subject country consisting of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells that are completed or partially manufactured within a customs territory other than that subject country, using ingots that are manufactured in the subject country, wafers that are manufactured in the subject country, or cells where the manufacturing process begins in the subject country and is completed in a non-subject country. Subject merchandise includes crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells of thickness equal to or greater than 20 micrometers, having a p/n junction formed by any means, whether or not the cell has undergone other processing, including, but not limited to, cleaning, etching, coating, and/or addition of materials (including, but not limited to, metallization and conductor patterns) to collect and forward the electricity that is generated by the cell. Excluded from the scope of these investigations are thin film photovoltaic products produced from amorphous silicon (a-Si), cadmium telluride (CdTe), or copper PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 4667 indium gallium selenide (CIGS). Also excluded from the scope of these investigations are any products covered by the existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from the People’s Republic of China. See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People’s Republic of China: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 73018 (December 7, 2012); Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People’s Republic of China: Countervailing Duty Order, 77 FR 73017 (December 7, 2012). Also excluded from the scope of these investigations are crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, not exceeding 10,000mm2 in surface area, that are permanently integrated into a consumer good whose function is other than power generation and that consumes the electricity generated by the integrated crystalline silicon photovoltaic cell. Where more than one cell is permanently integrated into a consumer good, the surface area for purposes of this exclusion shall be the total combined surface area of all cells that are integrated into the consumer good. Merchandise covered by these investigations is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 8501.61.0000, 8507.20.8030, 8507.20.8040, 8507.20.8060, 8507.20.8090, 8541.40.6020, 8541.40.6030 and 8501.31.8000. These HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the scope of these investigations is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2014–01738 Filed 1–28–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–011] Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products From the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation Enforcement & Compliance, formerly Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: January 29, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Justin Neuman or Milton Koch, Office VII, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement & Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone; (202) 482–0486 or (202) 482– 2584, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\29JAN1.SGM 29JAN1 4668 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Notices The Petition On December 31, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the Department) received a countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic products (certain solar cells and panels) from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), filed in proper form by SolarWorld Industries America, Inc. (Petitioner), a domestic producer of certain solar cells and panels. The CVD petition was accompanied by an antidumping duty (AD) petition concerning imports of certain solar cells and panels.1 Between January 3 and January 9, 2014, the Department requested additional information and clarification of certain areas of the Petition, and between January 7 and January 13, 2014, Petitioner filed a timely response to each request.2 In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Petitioner alleges that producers/exporters of certain solar cells and panels in the PRC received countervailable subsidies under thirtythree programs within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, and that imports from these producers/ exporters materially injure, or threaten material injury to, an industry in the United States. The Department finds that Petitioner filed this Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and that Petitioner has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that it is requesting the Department to initiate (see ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petition’’ below). Period of Investigation The period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2012, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2). Scope of the Investigation The products covered by this investigation are certain solar cells and panels the PRC.3 Comments on the Scope of the Investigation deadline established by the Department.7 During our review of the Petition, we solicited information from Petitioner to ensure that the proposed scope language is an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Also, on January 15, 2014, Suniva, Inc. (Suniva), a U.S. producer of certain solar cells and panels, submitted comments on the scope.4 Moreover, as discussed in the preamble to the Department’s regulations,5 we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage. Parties should note that when considering product coverage with respect to this investigation, the Department will be informed by the product coverage decisions that it made in the investigations that resulted in the existing orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from the PRC.6 The Department encourages all interested parties to submit such comments by February 11, 2014, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. All comments must be filed on the record of the CVD investigation, as well as the concurrent AD investigations. Consultations Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, on January 2, 2014, the Department invited representatives from the Government of China (GOC) for consultations with respect to the CVD Petition. Consultations were held with the GOC on January 10, 2014.8 Filing Requirements All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically using Enforcement & Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the Department’s electronic records system, IA ACCESS, by 5 p.m. on the due date. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the Enforcement & Compliance’s APO/ Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the 4 See tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 1 See ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties Pursuant to Sections 701 and 731 of the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended,’’ (December 31, 2013) (Petition). 2 See Petitioner’s filings, ‘‘Supplement to the China CVD Petition,’’ (January 7, 2014) (China CVD Supplement); ‘‘General Issues Supplement to the Petition,’’ (January 9, 2014) (General Issues Supplement); and ‘‘Second General Issues Supplement to the Petition,’’ (January 13, 2014) (Second General Issues Supplement). 3 See Appendix I of this notice for a full description of the scope of this investigation. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:05 Jan 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 Letter from Suniva, ‘‘Request for Comment Period on Scope for Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products From the People’s Republic of China,’’ (January 15, 2014). 5 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). 6 The AD and CVD Orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from the PRC, cover modules, laminates, and panels produced in a third-country from cells produced in the PRC; however, modules, laminates, and panels produced in the PRC from cells produced in a third-country are not covered by the scope of the Orders. PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Determination of Industry Support for the Petition Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, the Department shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method to poll the industry. Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether ‘‘the domestic industry’’ has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and the ITC must apply 7 See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1). Information on help using IAACCESS can be found at https:// iaaccess.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/ Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filing%20 Procedures.pdf. 8 See Ex-Parte Memorandum to the File from Justin Neuman, International Trade Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement & Compliance, ‘‘Consultations with Officials from the Government of the People’s Republic of China Regarding the Countervailing Duty Petition Concerning Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products,’’ (January 13, 2014) (Consultations Memorandum). E:\FR\FM\29JAN1.SGM 29JAN1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Notices the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,9 they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department’s determination is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may result in different definitions of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.10 Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ‘‘a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is ‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’ (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the petition). With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioner offers a definition of the domestic like product that includes certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells and modules and notes that the like product definition in this proceeding is identical to the definition of the like product in the Department’s and the ITC’s investigation of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from China.11 According to Petitioner, ‘‘{t}he definition of the domestic like product in the Petition differs only slightly from the proposed scope of the investigations . . .’’ and ‘‘slight differences in the definition of the domestic like product and the scope of an investigation are permissible under the statute. . . .’’ 12 Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells and modules constitute a single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.13 9 See section 771(10) of the Act. USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)). 11 See Volume I of the Petition, at 24; see, also General Issues Supplement, at Exhibit I–Supp–1; Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 76 FR 70960, 70961 (November 16, 2011); Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 76 FR 70966, 70967–8 (November 16, 2011); and Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells and Modules from the People’s Republic of China, Inv. Nos. 701–TA–481 and 731–TA–1190 (Final) USITC Pub. 4360 (December 2012), at 6–12. 12 See General Issues Supplement, at 4. 13 See Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Crystalline Silicon tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 10 See VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:05 Jan 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 In determining whether Petitioner has standing under section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petition with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the Petition. To establish industry support, Petitioner provided its own production of the domestic like product in 2012, and compared this to the estimated total production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.14 Petitioner obtained total 2012 production of the domestic like product using data published by Solar Energy Industries Association/Greentech Media Research in U.S. Solar Market Insight 2012 Year in Review and other publicly available data.15 We have relied upon data Petitioner provided for purposes of measuring industry support.16 On January 10, 2014, in its consultations with the Department, the GOC raised the issue of industry support.17 On January 15, 2014, we received comments on industry support from Yingli Green Energy Holding Company Limited, Yingli Green Energy Americas, Inc., and Canadian Solar Inc. (collectively, PRC Producers/ Exporters).18 Petitioner responded to the PRC Producers/Exporters’ comments on January 15, 2014.19 PRC Producers/ Exporters filed a rebuttal to Petitioner on January 17, 2014.20 For further discussion of these comments, see the PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. Based on information provided in the Petition, supplemental submissions, and other information readily available to the Department, we determine that Petitioner has met the statutory criteria for industry support under section Photovoltaic Products from the People’s Republic of China (PRC CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products from the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan (Attachment II). This checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via IA ACCESS. Access to documents filed via IA ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. 14 See Volume I of the Petition, at 8–10 and Exhibits I–3, I–5, and I–6; see also General Issues Supplement, at 5–8 and Exhibits I–Supp–1, I–Supp–2, I–Supp–3 and I–Supp–6. 15 See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibits I–5 and I–6. 16 See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 17 See Consultations Memorandum. 18 See Letter from Yingli Green Energy Holding Company Limited, Yingli Green Energy Americas, Inc., and Canadian Solar Inc., (January 15, 2014). 19 See Letter from Petitioner, (January 15, 2014). 20 See Letter from Yingli Green Energy Holding Company Limited, Yingli Green Energy Americas, Inc., and Canadian Solar Inc., (January 17, 2014). PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 4669 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.21 Based on information provided in the Petition, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petition. Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act.22 The Department finds that Petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the countervailing duty investigation that it is requesting the Department initiate.23 Injury Test Because the PRC is a ‘‘Subsidies Agreement Country’’ within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from the PRC materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation Petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product. In addition, Petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.24 Petitioner contends that the industry’s injured condition is illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price depression or suppression; lost sales and revenues; shuttered production and hindered capacity utilization; reduced employment; and decline in industry financial 21 See CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 22 Id. 23 Id. 24 See General Issues Supplement, at 8 and Exhibit I–Supp–4. E:\FR\FM\29JAN1.SGM 29JAN1 4670 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Notices performance.25 We have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, and causation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.26 Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a CVD proceeding whenever an interested party files a CVD petition on behalf of an industry that: (1) Alleges the elements necessary for an imposition of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act; and (2) is accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners supporting the allegations. The Department has examined the Petition on certain solar cells and panels from the PRC and finds that it complies with the requirements of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Act, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether producers/exporters of certain solar cells and panels in the PRC receive countervailable subsidies. For a discussion of evidence supporting our initiation determination, see the CVD Initiation Checklist which accompanies this notice. Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 28 alleged programs. For the other five programs alleged by Petitioner, we have determined that the requirements for initiation have not been met. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the CVD Initiation Checklist. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Respondent Selection For this investigation, the Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports during the POI (i.e., calendar year 2012) under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers: 8501.61.0000, 8507.20.8030, 25 See Volume I of the Petition, at 5–7, 20–22, 33– 67 and Exhibits I–1, I–4, I–13 through I–14, I–16 through I–20, and I–22 through I–30; General Issues Supplement, at 8–9 and Exhibits I–Supp–1, I–Supp–4 and I–Supp–5; and Second General Issues Supplement, at 5–11 and Exhibits I–Supp–7 through I–Supp–15. 26 See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Petitions Covering Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products from the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:05 Jan 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 8507.20.8040, 8507.20.8060, 8507.20.8090, 8541.40.6020, 8541.40.6030, and 8501.31.8000. We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO within five days of the announcement of the initiation of this investigation. Interested parties may submit comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within seven calendar days of release of this data. We intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this Federal Register notice. Notification to Interested Parties Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may be found on the Department’s Web site at https://enforcement.trade.gov/ apo/. Distribution of Copies of the CVD Petition In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been provided to the representatives of the GOC. Because of the particularly large number of producers/exporters identified in the Petition, the Department considers the service of the public version of the petition to the foreign producers/ exporters satisfied by the delivery of the public version to the GOC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). ITC Notification We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 702(d) of the Act. Preliminary Determination by the ITC The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of subsidized certain solar cells and panels from the PRC materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.27 A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated.28 Otherwise, the investigation will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. Submission of Factual Information On April 10, 2013, the Department published Definition of Factual Information and Time Limits for 27 See 28 See PO 00000 section 703(a)(2) of the Act. section 703(a)(1) of the Act. Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Submission of Factual Information: Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 2013), which modified 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). The final rule identifies five categories of factual information in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21), 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 final rule requires any party, 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. The final rule also modified 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. These modifications are effective for all proceeding segments initiated on or after May 10, 2013, and thus are applicable to this investigation. Please review the final rule, available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/ 1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to submitting factual information in this investigation. Revised Extension of Time Limits Regulation On September 20, 2013, the Department modified its regulation concerning the extension of time limits for submissions in AD and CVD proceedings.29 The modification clarifies that parties may request an extension of time limits before a time limit established under Part 351 expires, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the time limit established under Part 351 expires. For submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. on the due date. Examples include, but are not limited 29 See Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013). E:\FR\FM\29JAN1.SGM 29JAN1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Notices to: (1) Case and rebuttal briefs, filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309; (2) factual information to value factors under section 19 CFR 351.408(c), or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under section 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2), filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, clarification and correction filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(iv); (3) comments concerning the selection of a surrogate country and surrogate values and rebuttal; (4) comments concerning CBP data; and (5) quantity and value questionnaires. Under certain circumstances, the Department may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, the Department will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. This modification also requires that an extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission, and clarifies the circumstances under which the Department will grant untimelyfiled requests for the extension of time limits. These modifications are effective for all segments initiated on or after October 21, 2013. Please review the Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, available at https://www.gpo.gov//fdsys// pkg//FR-2013-09-20//html//201322853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in this segment. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Certification Requirements Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.30 Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are in effect for company/government officials as well as their representatives in all AD or CVD investigations or proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, including this investigation.31 The formats for the revised certifications are provided at the end of the Final Rule. The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the revised certification requirements. This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. 30 See section 782(b) of the Act. 31 See Certification of Factual Information To Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:05 Jan 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 Dated: January 22, 2014. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation The merchandise covered by this investigation is crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, and modules, laminates and/or panels consisting of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not partially or fully assembled into other products, including building integrated materials. For purposes of this investigation, subject merchandise also includes modules, laminates and/or panels assembled in the subject country consisting of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells that are completed or partially manufactured within a customs territory other than that subject country, using ingots that are manufactured in the subject country, wafers that are manufactured in the subject country, or cells where the manufacturing process begins in the subject country and is completed in a non-subject country. Subject merchandise includes crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells of thickness equal to or greater than 20 micrometers, having a p/n junction formed by any means, whether or not the cell has undergone other processing, including, but not limited to, cleaning, etching, coating, and/or addition of materials (including, but not limited to, metallization and conductor patterns) to collect and forward the electricity that is generated by the cell. Excluded from the scope of this investigation are thin film photovoltaic products produced from amorphous silicon (a-Si), cadmium telluride (CdTe), or copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS). Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are any products covered by the existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from the People’s Republic of China. See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People’s Republic of China: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 73018 (December 7, 2012); Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People’s Republic of China: Countervailing Duty Order, 77 FR 73017 (December 7, 2012). Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, not exceeding 10,000mm2 in surface area, that are permanently integrated into a consumer good whose function is other than power generation and that consumes the electricity generated by the integrated crystalline silicon photovoltaic cell. Where more than one cell is permanently integrated into a consumer good, the surface area for purposes of this exclusion shall be the total combined surface area of all cells that are integrated into the consumer good. Merchandise covered by this investigation is currently classified in the Harmonized PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 4671 Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 8501.61.0000, 8507.20.8030, 8507.20.8040, 8507.20.8060, 8507.20.8090, 8541.40.6020, 8541.40.6030 and 8501.31.8000. These HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2014–01743 Filed 1–28–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [Application No. 97–12A003] Export Trade Certificate of Review Notice of Application (97– 12A003) to amend the Export Trade Certificate of Review held by the Association for the Administration of Rice Quotas, Inc. ACTION: The Office of Trade and Economic Analysis (‘‘OTEA’’) of the International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, has received an application to amend an Export Trade Certificate of Review (‘‘Certificate’’). This notice summarizes the proposed amendment and requests comments relevant to whether the amended Certificate should be issued. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Flynn, Director, Office of Trade and Economic Analysis, International Trade Administration, (202) 482–5131 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at etca@trade.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title III of the Export Trading Company Act of 1982 (15 U.S.C. 4001–21) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue Export Trade Certificates of Review. An Export Trade Certificate of Review protects the holder and the members identified in the Certificate from State and Federal government antitrust actions and from private treble damage antitrust actions for the export conduct specified in the Certificate and carried out in compliance with its terms and conditions. Section 302(b)(1) of the Export Trading Company Act of 1982 and 15 CFR 325.6(a) require the Secretary to publish a notice in the Federal Register identifying the applicant and summarizing its proposed export conduct. SUMMARY: Request for Public Comments Interested parties may submit written comments relevant to the determination whether an amended Certificate should be issued. If the comments include any privileged or confidential business E:\FR\FM\29JAN1.SGM 29JAN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 19 (Wednesday, January 29, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4667-4671]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01743]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-011]


Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products From the 
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty 
Investigation

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

DATES: Effective Date: January 29, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Justin Neuman or Milton Koch, Office 
VII, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement & Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone; (202) 482-
0486 or (202) 482-2584, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 4668]]

The Petition

    On December 31, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received a countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of 
certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic products (certain solar cells 
and panels) from the People's Republic of China (PRC), filed in proper 
form by SolarWorld Industries America, Inc. (Petitioner), a domestic 
producer of certain solar cells and panels. The CVD petition was 
accompanied by an antidumping duty (AD) petition concerning imports of 
certain solar cells and panels.\1\ Between January 3 and January 9, 
2014, the Department requested additional information and clarification 
of certain areas of the Petition, and between January 7 and January 13, 
2014, Petitioner filed a timely response to each request.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties Pursuant to Sections 701 and 731 of the Tariff 
Act of 1930, As Amended,'' (December 31, 2013) (Petition).
    \2\ See Petitioner's filings, ``Supplement to the China CVD 
Petition,'' (January 7, 2014) (China CVD Supplement); ``General 
Issues Supplement to the Petition,'' (January 9, 2014) (General 
Issues Supplement); and ``Second General Issues Supplement to the 
Petition,'' (January 13, 2014) (Second General Issues Supplement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), Petitioner alleges that producers/exporters of 
certain solar cells and panels in the PRC received countervailable 
subsidies under thirty-three programs within the meaning of sections 
701 and 771(5) of the Act, and that imports from these producers/
exporters materially injure, or threaten material injury to, an 
industry in the United States.
    The Department finds that Petitioner filed this Petition on behalf 
of the domestic industry because it is an interested party defined in 
section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and that Petitioner has demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that 
it is requesting the Department to initiate (see ``Determination of 
Industry Support for the Petition'' below).

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2012, through 
December 31, 2012, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).

Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are certain solar cells 
and panels the PRC.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Appendix I of this notice for a full description of the 
scope of this investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on the Scope of the Investigation

    During our review of the Petition, we solicited information from 
Petitioner to ensure that the proposed scope language is an accurate 
reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking 
relief. Also, on January 15, 2014, Suniva, Inc. (Suniva), a U.S. 
producer of certain solar cells and panels, submitted comments on the 
scope.\4\ Moreover, as discussed in the preamble to the Department's 
regulations,\5\ we are setting aside a period for interested parties to 
raise issues regarding product coverage. Parties should note that when 
considering product coverage with respect to this investigation, the 
Department will be informed by the product coverage decisions that it 
made in the investigations that resulted in the existing orders on 
crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into 
modules, from the PRC.\6\ The Department encourages all interested 
parties to submit such comments by February 11, 2014, which is 20 
calendar days from the signature date of this notice. All comments must 
be filed on the record of the CVD investigation, as well as the 
concurrent AD investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Letter from Suniva, ``Request for Comment Period on 
Scope for Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products From the 
People's Republic of China,'' (January 15, 2014).
    \5\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \6\ The AD and CVD Orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic 
cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from the PRC, cover 
modules, laminates, and panels produced in a third-country from 
cells produced in the PRC; however, modules, laminates, and panels 
produced in the PRC from cells produced in a third-country are not 
covered by the scope of the Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement & Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). An electronically 
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the 
Department's electronic records system, IA ACCESS, by 5 p.m. on the due 
date. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements 
must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the Enforcement & 
Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 
14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, and 
stamped with the date and time of receipt by the deadline established 
by the Department.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1). Information on help using IAACCESS 
can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook 
can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filing%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, on January 2, 
2014, the Department invited representatives from the Government of 
China (GOC) for consultations with respect to the CVD Petition. 
Consultations were held with the GOC on January 10, 2014.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Ex-Parte Memorandum to the File from Justin Neuman, 
International Trade Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, 
Enforcement & Compliance, ``Consultations with Officials from the 
Government of the People's Republic of China Regarding the 
Countervailing Duty Petition Concerning Certain Crystalline Silicon 
Photovoltaic Products,'' (January 13, 2014) (Consultations 
Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department 
shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to 
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by 
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a 
statistically valid sampling method to poll the industry.
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), 
which is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' 
has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like 
product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and 
the ITC must apply

[[Page 4669]]

the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,\9\ 
they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and 
distinct authority. In addition, the Department's determination is 
subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may 
result in different definitions of the like product, such differences 
do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \10\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioner offers a 
definition of the domestic like product that includes certain 
crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells and modules and notes that the 
like product definition in this proceeding is identical to the 
definition of the like product in the Department's and the ITC's 
investigation of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not 
assembled into modules, from China.\11\ According to Petitioner, 
``{t{time} he definition of the domestic like product in the Petition 
differs only slightly from the proposed scope of the investigations . . 
.'' and ``slight differences in the definition of the domestic like 
product and the scope of an investigation are permissible under the 
statute. . . .'' \12\ Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that certain crystalline 
silicon photovoltaic cells and modules constitute a single domestic 
like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that 
domestic like product.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 24; see, also General 
Issues Supplement, at Exhibit I-Supp-1; Crystalline Silicon 
Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the 
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty 
Investigation, 76 FR 70960, 70961 (November 16, 2011); Crystalline 
Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, 
From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing 
Duty Investigation, 76 FR 70966, 70967-8 (November 16, 2011); and 
Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells and Modules from the People's 
Republic of China, Inv. Nos. 701-TA-481 and 731-TA-1190 (Final) 
USITC Pub. 4360 (December 2012), at 6-12.
    \12\ See General Issues Supplement, at 4.
    \13\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products from the People's 
Republic of China (PRC CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, 
Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Petitions Covering Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic 
Products from the People's Republic of China and Taiwan (Attachment 
II). This checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and on 
file electronically via IA ACCESS. Access to documents filed via IA 
ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 
7046 of the main Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether Petitioner has standing under section 
702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petition with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the Petition. To establish industry support, Petitioner 
provided its own production of the domestic like product in 2012, and 
compared this to the estimated total production of the domestic like 
product for the entire domestic industry.\14\ Petitioner obtained total 
2012 production of the domestic like product using data published by 
Solar Energy Industries Association/Greentech Media Research in U.S. 
Solar Market Insight 2012 Year in Review and other publicly available 
data.\15\ We have relied upon data Petitioner provided for purposes of 
measuring industry support.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 8-10 and Exhibits I-3, I-
5, and I-6; see also General Issues Supplement, at 5-8 and Exhibits 
I-Supp-1, I-Supp-2, I-Supp-3 and I-Supp-6.
    \15\ See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibits I-5 and I-6.
    \16\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 10, 2014, in its consultations with the Department, the 
GOC raised the issue of industry support.\17\ On January 15, 2014, we 
received comments on industry support from Yingli Green Energy Holding 
Company Limited, Yingli Green Energy Americas, Inc., and Canadian Solar 
Inc. (collectively, PRC Producers/Exporters).\18\ Petitioner responded 
to the PRC Producers/Exporters' comments on January 15, 2014.\19\ PRC 
Producers/Exporters filed a rebuttal to Petitioner on January 17, 
2014.\20\ For further discussion of these comments, see the PRC CVD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Consultations Memorandum.
    \18\ See Letter from Yingli Green Energy Holding Company 
Limited, Yingli Green Energy Americas, Inc., and Canadian Solar 
Inc., (January 15, 2014).
    \19\ See Letter from Petitioner, (January 15, 2014).
    \20\ See Letter from Yingli Green Energy Holding Company 
Limited, Yingli Green Energy Americas, Inc., and Canadian Solar 
Inc., (January 17, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on information provided in the Petition, supplemental 
submissions, and other information readily available to the Department, 
we determine that Petitioner has met the statutory criteria for 
industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the 
domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for at 
least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like 
product.\21\ Based on information provided in the Petition, the 
domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for 
industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the 
domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for 
more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product 
produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or 
opposition to, the Petition. Accordingly, the Department determines 
that the Petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within 
the meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that Petitioner filed the Petition on behalf 
of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined 
in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has demonstrated sufficient 
industry support with respect to the countervailing duty investigation 
that it is requesting the Department initiate.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because the PRC is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the 
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act 
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine 
whether imports of the subject merchandise from the PRC materially 
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    Petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are 
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are 
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry 
producing the domestic like product. In addition, Petitioner alleges 
that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for 
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See General Issues Supplement, at 8 and Exhibit I-Supp-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price depression 
or suppression; lost sales and revenues; shuttered production and 
hindered capacity utilization; reduced employment; and decline in 
industry financial

[[Page 4670]]

performance.\25\ We have assessed the allegations and supporting 
evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, and 
causation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly 
supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for 
initiation.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 5-7, 20-22, 33-67 and 
Exhibits I-1, I-4, I-13 through I-14, I-16 through I-20, and I-22 
through I-30; General Issues Supplement, at 8-9 and Exhibits I-Supp-
1, I-Supp-4 and I-Supp-5; and Second General Issues Supplement, at 
5-11 and Exhibits I-Supp-7 through I-Supp-15.
    \26\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Petitions Covering Certain Crystalline Silicon 
Photovoltaic Products from the People's Republic of China and 
Taiwan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a 
CVD proceeding whenever an interested party files a CVD petition on 
behalf of an industry that: (1) Alleges the elements necessary for an 
imposition of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act; and (2) is 
accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners 
supporting the allegations.
    The Department has examined the Petition on certain solar cells and 
panels from the PRC and finds that it complies with the requirements of 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 
702(b)(1) of the Act, we are initiating a CVD investigation to 
determine whether producers/exporters of certain solar cells and panels 
in the PRC receive countervailable subsidies. For a discussion of 
evidence supporting our initiation determination, see the CVD 
Initiation Checklist which accompanies this notice.
    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 28 alleged 
programs. For the other five programs alleged by Petitioner, we have 
determined that the requirements for initiation have not been met. For 
a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not 
initiate on each program, see the CVD Initiation Checklist.

Respondent Selection

    For this investigation, the Department intends to select 
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for 
U.S. imports during the POI (i.e., calendar year 2012) under the 
following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers: 
8501.61.0000, 8507.20.8030, 8507.20.8040, 8507.20.8060, 8507.20.8090, 
8541.40.6020, 8541.40.6030, and 8501.31.8000. We intend to release the 
CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties 
with access to information protected by APO within five days of the 
announcement of the initiation of this investigation. Interested 
parties may submit comments regarding the CBP data and respondent 
selection within seven calendar days of release of this data. We intend 
to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of 
publication of this Federal Register notice.

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such 
applications may be found on the Department's Web site at https://enforcement.trade.gov/apo/.

Distribution of Copies of the CVD Petition

    In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been 
provided to the representatives of the GOC. Because of the particularly 
large number of producers/exporters identified in the Petition, the 
Department considers the service of the public version of the petition 
to the foreign producers/exporters satisfied by the delivery of the 
public version to the GOC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
702(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of subsidized certain solar cells and panels 
from the PRC materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. 
industry.\27\ A negative ITC determination will result in the 
investigation being terminated.\28\ Otherwise, the investigation will 
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
    \28\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    On April 10, 2013, the Department published Definition of Factual 
Information and Time Limits for Submission of Factual Information: 
Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 2013), which modified 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). The final rule 
identifies five categories of factual information in 19 CFR 
351.102(b)(21), 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 final rule requires any party, 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. The final rule also modified 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. These 
modifications are effective for all proceeding segments initiated on or 
after May 10, 2013, and thus are applicable to this investigation. 
Please review the final rule, available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to 
submitting factual information in this investigation.

Revised Extension of Time Limits Regulation

    On September 20, 2013, the Department modified its regulation 
concerning the extension of time limits for submissions in AD and CVD 
proceedings.\29\ The modification clarifies that parties may request an 
extension of time limits before a time limit established under Part 351 
expires, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an 
extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the 
time limit established under Part 351 expires. For submissions which 
are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will 
be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. on the due date. 
Examples include, but are not limited

[[Page 4671]]

to: (1) Case and rebuttal briefs, filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309; (2) 
factual information to value factors under section 19 CFR 351.408(c), 
or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under section 19 CFR 
351.511(a)(2), filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, 
clarification and correction filed pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(3)(iv); (3) comments concerning the selection of a surrogate 
country and surrogate values and rebuttal; (4) comments concerning CBP 
data; and (5) quantity and value questionnaires. Under certain 
circumstances, the Department may elect to specify a different time 
limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for 
submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such 
a case, the Department will inform parties in the letter or memorandum 
setting forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which 
extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. This 
modification also requires that an extension request must be made in a 
separate, stand-alone submission, and clarifies the circumstances under 
which the Department will grant untimely-filed requests for the 
extension of time limits. These modifications are effective for all 
segments initiated on or after October 21, 2013. Please review the 
Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, available at https://www.gpo.gov//fdsys//pkg//FR-2013-09-20//html//2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting 
factual information in this segment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 
(September 20, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\30\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect for company/government officials as well as their 
representatives in all AD or CVD investigations or proceedings 
initiated on or after August 16, 2013, including this 
investigation.\31\ The formats for the revised certifications are 
provided at the end of the Final Rule. The Department intends to reject 
factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the 
revised certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \31\ See Certification of Factual Information To Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.

    Dated: January 22, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is crystalline 
silicon photovoltaic cells, and modules, laminates and/or panels 
consisting of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not 
partially or fully assembled into other products, including building 
integrated materials. For purposes of this investigation, subject 
merchandise also includes modules, laminates and/or panels assembled 
in the subject country consisting of crystalline silicon 
photovoltaic cells that are completed or partially manufactured 
within a customs territory other than that subject country, using 
ingots that are manufactured in the subject country, wafers that are 
manufactured in the subject country, or cells where the 
manufacturing process begins in the subject country and is completed 
in a non-subject country.
    Subject merchandise includes crystalline silicon photovoltaic 
cells of thickness equal to or greater than 20 micrometers, having a 
p/n junction formed by any means, whether or not the cell has 
undergone other processing, including, but not limited to, cleaning, 
etching, coating, and/or addition of materials (including, but not 
limited to, metallization and conductor patterns) to collect and 
forward the electricity that is generated by the cell.
    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are thin film 
photovoltaic products produced from amorphous silicon (a-Si), 
cadmium telluride (CdTe), or copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS). 
Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are any products 
covered by the existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders 
on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled 
into modules, from the People's Republic of China. See Crystalline 
Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, 
From the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 
73018 (December 7, 2012); Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, 
Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of 
China: Countervailing Duty Order, 77 FR 73017 (December 7, 2012).
    Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are 
crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, not exceeding 10,000mm\2\ in 
surface area, that are permanently integrated into a consumer good 
whose function is other than power generation and that consumes the 
electricity generated by the integrated crystalline silicon 
photovoltaic cell. Where more than one cell is permanently 
integrated into a consumer good, the surface area for purposes of 
this exclusion shall be the total combined surface area of all cells 
that are integrated into the consumer good.
    Merchandise covered by this investigation is currently 
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) under subheadings 8501.61.0000, 8507.20.8030, 8507.20.8040, 
8507.20.8060, 8507.20.8090, 8541.40.6020, 8541.40.6030 and 
8501.31.8000. These HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience 
and customs purposes; the written description of the scope of this 
investigation is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2014-01743 Filed 1-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.