Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations, 67419-67423 [2014-26897]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Notices • Import Tariff and Value-Added Tax (VAT) Exemptions for FIEs and Certain Domestic Enterprises Using Imported Equipment in Encouraged Industries • Export Incentive Payments Characterized as ‘‘VAT Rebates’’ • VAT Rebates to Welfare Enterprises • Provision of Green Tubes for LTAR • Provision of Steel Rounds for LTAR • Provision of Hot-Rolled Steel for LTAR • Provision of Coking Coal for LTAR • Provision of Land-Use Rights Within Designated Geographical Areas for LTAR • Provision of Land to SOEs for LTAR • Provision of Electricity at LTAR To Drill Pipe Producers Located in Jiangsu Province • Provision of Water at LTAR To Drill Pipe Producers Located in Jiangsu Province • Technology To Improve Trade R&D Fund • Outstanding Growth Private Enterprise and Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises • Development in Jiangyin Fund • GOC and Sub-Central Government Grants, Loans, and Other Incentives for Development of Famous Brands and China World Top Brands • Scientific Innovation Award • Development Fund Grant • State Key Technology Project Fund • Export Assistance Grants • Programs To Rebate Antidumping Legal Fees • Grants and Tax Benefits to Loss-Making SOEs at National and Local Level • Subsidies Provided To Drill Pipe Producers Located in Economic and Technological Development Zones (ETDZs) in Tianjin Binhai New Area • Subsidies Provided To Drill Pipe Producers Located in ETDZs in Tianjin Economic and Technological Development Areas • Subsidies Provided To Drill Pipe Producers Located in High-Tech Industrial Development Zones 8. Conclusion [FR Doc. 2014–26787 Filed 11–12–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–580–877, C–489–823] Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: November 13, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Trainor at (202) 482–4007 or Reza Karamloo at (202) 482–4470 (Republic of Korea); Elizabeth Eastwood at (202) 482–3874 or Dennis McClure at (202) 482–5973 (Republic of Turkey), tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:16 Nov 12, 2014 Jkt 235001 AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petitions On October 16, 2014, the Department of Commerce (the Department) received countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of welded line pipe from the Republic of Korea (Korea) and the Republic of Turkey (Turkey) filed in proper form on behalf of American Cast Iron Pipe Company, Energex (a division of JMC Steel Group), Maverick Tube Corporation, Northwest Pipe Company, Stupp Corporation (a division of Stupp Bros., Inc.), Tex-Tube Company, TMK IPSCO, and Welspun Tubular LLC USA (collectively, the petitioners). The CVD petitions were accompanied by two antidumping duty (AD) petitions.1 The petitioners are domestic producers of welded line pipe.2 On October 21, 2014, the Department requested information and clarification for certain areas of the Petitions.3 The petitioners filed responses to these requests on October 24, 2014, and October 29, 2014.4 On October 27 and October 31, 2014, we received submissions from United States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel), a domestic producer of welded line pipe, in support of the Petitions. In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that the 1 See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Welded API Line Pipe from South Korea and Turkey, dated October 16, 2014 (the Petitions). 2 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2–3. 3 See Letter from the Department to the petitioners entitled ‘‘Re: Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated October 21, 2014 (General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire), Letter from the Department to the petitioners entitled ‘‘Re: Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated October 21, 2014, and Letter from the Department to the petitioners entitled ‘‘Re: Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Turkey: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated October 21, 2014. 4 See ‘‘Welded API Line Pipe from Korea and Turkey: Response to Supplemental Questions,’’ dated October 24, 2014 (General Issues Supplement), ‘‘Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Response to the Department’s Supplemental Questions,’’ dated October 24, 2014, ‘‘Welded API Line Pipe from Turkey: Response to Supplemental Questions,’’ dated October 24, 2014, and ‘‘Welded API Line Pipe from Korea and Turkey: Submission of CSI Letter of Support with 2013 Production and Revised Scope Language,’’ dated October 29, 2014 (Second General Issues Supplement). PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 67419 Government of Korea (GOK) and the Government of Turkey (GOT) are providing countervailable subsidies (within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act) to imports of welded line pipe from Korea and Turkey, respectively, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners supporting their allegations. The Department finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the CVD investigations that the petitioners are requesting.5 Periods of Investigation The period of the investigation for both Korea and Turkey is January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013. Scope of the Investigations The product covered by these investigations is welded line pipe from Korea and Turkey. For a full description of the scope of these investigations, see the ‘‘Scope of the Investigations’’ in Appendix I of this notice. Comments on Scope of the Investigations During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions to, and received responses from, the petitioners pertaining to the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions would be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.6 As discussed in the preamble to the Department’s regulations,7 we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (scope). The period for scope comments is intended to provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider all comments and to consult with parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determination. If scope comments include factual information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), all such factual information should be limited to public information. All such comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. Eastern 5 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions’’ section below. 6 See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also General Issues Supplement. 7 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). E:\FR\FM\13NON1.SGM 13NON1 67420 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Notices Standard Time (EST) on November 25, 2014, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. EST on December 5, 2014, which is 10 calendar days after the initial comments. The Department requests that any factual information the parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may be relevant, the party may contact the Department and request permission to submit the additional information. All such comments must be filed on the records of the Korea and Turkey AD and CVD investigations. Filing Requirements All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS).8 An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement and 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 applicable deadlines. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Consultations Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, the Department notified representatives of the GOK and the GOT of the receipt of the Petitions. Also, in accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, the Department provided representatives of the GOK and the GOT the opportunity for consultations with respect to the Petitions.9 Consultations were held separately with the GOK and GOT on November 4, 2014.10 All 8 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011) for details of the Department’s electronic filing requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. Information on help using IA ACCESS 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%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf. 9 See Letters of invitation from the Department to the GOK and the GOT, both dated October 17, 2014. 10 See Memorandum to the File, ‘‘Consultations with Officials from the Government of the Republic of Korea Regarding the Countervailing Duty Petition Concerning Welded Line Pipe,’’ dated November 5, VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:16 Nov 12, 2014 Jkt 235001 memoranda are on file electronically via IA ACCESS.11 Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions 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, or those producers whose collective output of a domestic like product constitutes a major proportion of the total domestic production of the 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 International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether ‘‘the domestic industry’’ has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,12 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 2014; see also Memorandum to the File, ‘‘Consultations with Officials from the Government of the Republic of Turkey Regarding the Countervailing Duty Petition Concerning Welded Line Pipe,’’ dated November 4, 2014. 11 See supra note 8 for information pertaining to IA ACCESS. 12 See section 771(10) of the Act. PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 render the decision of either agency contrary to law.13 Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ‘‘a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is ‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’ (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the petition). With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that welded line pipe, as defined in the scope of the investigations, constitutes a single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.14 In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ in Appendix I of this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioners provided their production of the domestic like product in 2013, as well as the production of a company that supports the Petitions, and compared this to the total production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.15 On October 27, 2014, we received a submission from U.S. Steel, a domestic producer of welded line pipe. In the submission, U.S. Steel states that it supports the AD and CVD petitions on welded line pipe from Korea and 13 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)). 14 For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in this case, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea (Korea CVD Initiation Checklist) at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey (Attachment II); and Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Turkey (Turkey CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are dated concurrently with this notice and are on file electronically via IA ACCESS. Access to documents filed via IA ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. 15 See General Issues Supplement, at 3–5 and Exhibits 3 and 4; see also Second General Issues Supplement, at Attachment 1. E:\FR\FM\13NON1.SGM 13NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Notices Turkey.16 In an additional submission on October 31, 2014, U.S. Steel provided its 2013 production of the domestic like product.17 We have relied upon data that the petitioners and U.S. Steel provided for purposes of measuring industry support.18 Based on information provided in the Petitions, supplemental submissions, and other information readily available to the Department, we determine that the petitioners have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.19 Based on information provided in the Petitions, supplemental submissions, and submissions from U.S. Steel, 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 Petitions 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 Petitions. Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act.20 The Department finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigations that they are requesting the Department initiate.21 Injury Test tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Because Korea and Turkey are ‘‘Subsidies Agreement Countries’’ within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to these investigations. Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from Korea and Turkey materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. 16 See Letter from U.S. Steel, dated October 27, 2014, at 1–2. 17 See Letter from U.S. Steel to the Department entitled ‘‘Re: Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey,’’ dated October 31, 2014. 18 See Korea CVD Initiation Checklist and Turkey CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 19 Id. 20 Id. 21 Id. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:16 Nov 12, 2014 Jkt 235001 67421 Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation governments of these countries, respectively. The petitioners allege 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, the petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.22 The petitioners contend that the industry’s injured condition is illustrated by reduced market share, underselling and price depression or suppression, lost sales and revenues, declining shipments, reduced production capacity, and a decline in financial performance.23 We assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, and causation, and we determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.24 Korea Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 22 of the 23 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see Korea CVD Initiation Checklist. Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a CVD investigation 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 petitioner supporting the allegations. In the Petitions, the petitioners allege that producers/exporters of welded line pipe in Korea and Turkey benefited from countervailable subsidies bestowed by the governments of these countries, respectively. The Department has examined the Petitions and finds that they comply 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 CVD investigations to determine whether manufacturers, producers, or exporters of welded line pipe from Korea and Turkey receive countervailable subsidies from the 22 See General Issues Supplement, at 6 and Exhibit 7. 23 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 14–18, 21–27, and Exhibits I–2, I–6, and I–8 through I–10; see also General Issues Supplement, at 6–7 and Exhibits 7 and 8. 24 See Korea CVD Initiation Checklist and Turkey CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey. PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Turkey Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 16 of the 18 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see Turkey CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for each investigation is available on IA ACCESS and at http:// trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation. Respondent Selection The petitioners named 13 companies as producers/exporters of welded line pipe from Korea and 13 companies as producers/exporters of welded line pipe from Turkey.25 Following standard practice in CVD investigations, the Department will, where appropriate, select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of welded line pipe during the period of investigation under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) numbers: 7305.11.10.30, 7305.11.50.00, 7305.12.10.30, 7305.12.50.00, 7305.19.10.30, 7306.19.10.10, 7306.19.10.50, 7306.19.51.10, and 7306.19.51.50. We intend to release CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO shortly after the announcement of these case initiations. The Department invites comments regarding CBP data and respondent selection within five calendar days of publication of this Federal Register notice. Comments must be filed electronically using 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. Eastern time by the date noted 25 See E:\FR\FM\13NON1.SGM Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I–4. 13NON1 67422 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Notices above. We intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this Federal Register notice. 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 http:// enforcement.trade.gov/apo. Distribution of Copies of the Petitions In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been provided to the GOK and GOT via IA ACCESS. Because of the particularly large number of producers/exporters identified in the Petitions, the Department considers the service of the public version of the Petitions to the foreign producers/ exporters to be satisfied by the provision of the public version of the Petitions to the GOK and GOT, 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. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Preliminary Determinations by the ITC The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of welded line pipe from Korea and/or Turkey are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.26 A negative ITC determination for either country will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country; 27 otherwise, these investigations 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 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 26 See section 703(a) of the Act. 17:16 Nov 12, 2014 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.28 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 19 CFR 351.408(c), or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2), filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, clarification and correction information 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 28 See Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013). 27 Id. VerDate Sep<11>2014 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 these investigations. Interested parties should review the final rule, available at http:// enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/ 1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to submitting factual information in these investigations. Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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. Interested parties should review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, available at http:// www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/ html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in these investigations. Certification Requirements Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.29 Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are in effect 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.30 The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable revised certification requirements. 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 29 See section 782(b) of the Act. 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 http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_ info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. 30 See E:\FR\FM\13NON1.SGM 13NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Notices 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 sections 702 and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: November 5, 2014. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigations The merchandise covered by these investigations is circular welded carbon and alloy steel (other than stainless steel) pipe of a kind used for oil or gas pipelines (welded line pipe), not more than 24 inches in nominal outside diameter, regardless of wall thickness, length, surface finish, end finish, or stenciling. Welded line pipe is normally produced to the American Petroleum Institute (API) specification 5L, but can be produced to comparable foreign specifications, to proprietary grades, or can be non-graded material. All pipe meeting the physical description set forth above, including multiple-stenciled pipe with an API or comparable foreign specification line pipe stencil is covered by the scope of these investigations. The welded line pipe that is subject to these investigations is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 7305.11.1030, 7305.11.5000, 7305.12.1030, 7305.12.5000, 7305.19.1030, 7305.19.5000, 7306.19.1010, 7306.19.1050, 7306.19.5110, and 7306.19.5150. The subject merchandise may also enter in HTSUS 7305.11.1060 and 7305.12.1060. While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of these investigations is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2014–26897 Filed 11–12–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–941] Certain Kitchen Appliance Shelving and Racks From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited First Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 1, 2014, the Department of Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’) published the notice of initiation of the first five-year (‘‘sunset’’) review of the antidumping duty order on certain kitchen appliance shelving and racks (‘‘KASR’’) from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:16 Nov 12, 2014 Jkt 235001 as amended (the ‘‘Act’’).1 As a result of this sunset review, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty order on KASR from the PRC would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping. The magnitude of the dumping margins likely to prevail is indicated in the ‘‘Final Results of Review’’ section of this notice. DATES: Effective Date: November 13, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Gorelik, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–6905. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background As noted above, on August 1, 2014, the Department published the initiation of the first sunset review of KASR from the PRC.2 On August 18, 2014, Nashville Wire Products, Inc. (‘‘Nashville Wire’’) and SSW Holding Company, Inc. (‘‘SSW’’) (collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’) timely notified the Department of their intent to participate within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i), claiming domestic interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act.3 On September 2, 2014, the Department received an adequate substantive response from Petitioners within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).4 We received no responses from respondent interested parties. As a result, the Department conducted an expedited (120-day) sunset review of the order, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). Scope of the Order The scope of the order consists of shelving and racks for refrigerators, freezers, combined refrigerator-freezers, other refrigerating or freezing equipment, cooking stoves, ranges, and ovens (‘‘certain kitchen appliance shelving and racks’’ or ‘‘the merchandise under order’’). The merchandise subject to the order is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) statistical reporting numbers 8418.99.8050, 8418.99.8060, 7321.90.5000, 7321.90.6090, 8516.90.8000 and 1 See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 79 FR 44743 (August 1, 2014). 2 Id. 3 See Petitioners’ August 18, 2014, submission. 4 See Petitioners’ September 2, 2014, submission. PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 67423 8419.90.9520. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.5 Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in this sunset review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. The issues discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum include the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail if the order were to be revoked. Parties may find a complete discussion of all issues raised in the review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which 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 Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http:// enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Final Results of Review Pursuant to section 752(c) of the Act, the Department determines that revocation of the order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at weighted-average margins up to 95.99 percent. Administrative Protective Order This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of the return of destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an 5 For the full scope of the Order, see ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Expedited First Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Kitchen Appliance Shelving and Racks from the People’s Republic of China’’ from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’). E:\FR\FM\13NON1.SGM 13NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 219 (Thursday, November 13, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67419-67423]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26897]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-580-877, C-489-823]


Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of Korea and the Republic of 
Turkey: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations

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

DATES: Effective Date: November 13, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Trainor at (202) 482-4007 or 
Reza Karamloo at (202) 482-4470 (Republic of Korea); Elizabeth Eastwood 
at (202) 482-3874 or Dennis McClure at (202) 482-5973 (Republic of 
Turkey), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petitions

    On October 16, 2014, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of 
welded line pipe from the Republic of Korea (Korea) and the Republic of 
Turkey (Turkey) filed in proper form on behalf of American Cast Iron 
Pipe Company, Energex (a division of JMC Steel Group), Maverick Tube 
Corporation, Northwest Pipe Company, Stupp Corporation (a division of 
Stupp Bros., Inc.), Tex-Tube Company, TMK IPSCO, and Welspun Tubular 
LLC USA (collectively, the petitioners). The CVD petitions were 
accompanied by two antidumping duty (AD) petitions.\1\ The petitioners 
are domestic producers of welded line pipe.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties: Welded API Line Pipe from South Korea and 
Turkey, dated October 16, 2014 (the Petitions).
    \2\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 21, 2014, the Department requested information and 
clarification for certain areas of the Petitions.\3\ The petitioners 
filed responses to these requests on October 24, 2014, and October 29, 
2014.\4\ On October 27 and October 31, 2014, we received submissions 
from United States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel), a domestic producer 
of welded line pipe, in support of the Petitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Letter from the Department to the petitioners entitled 
``Re: Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duties on Imports of Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea and 
the Republic of Turkey: Supplemental Questions,'' dated October 21, 
2014 (General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire), Letter from the 
Department to the petitioners entitled ``Re: Petition for the 
Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Welded Line Pipe 
from the Republic of Korea: Supplemental Questions,'' dated October 
21, 2014, and Letter from the Department to the petitioners entitled 
``Re: Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on 
Imports of Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Turkey: 
Supplemental Questions,'' dated October 21, 2014.
    \4\ See ``Welded API Line Pipe from Korea and Turkey: Response 
to Supplemental Questions,'' dated October 24, 2014 (General Issues 
Supplement), ``Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Response 
to the Department's Supplemental Questions,'' dated October 24, 
2014, ``Welded API Line Pipe from Turkey: Response to Supplemental 
Questions,'' dated October 24, 2014, and ``Welded API Line Pipe from 
Korea and Turkey: Submission of CSI Letter of Support with 2013 
Production and Revised Scope Language,'' dated October 29, 2014 
(Second General Issues Supplement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that the Government of Korea 
(GOK) and the Government of Turkey (GOT) are providing countervailable 
subsidies (within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act) to 
imports of welded line pipe from Korea and Turkey, respectively, and 
that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material 
injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, consistent with 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by 
information reasonably available to the petitioners supporting their 
allegations.
    The Department finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested 
parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also 
finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support 
with respect to the initiation of the CVD investigations that the 
petitioners are requesting.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petitions'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Periods of Investigation

    The period of the investigation for both Korea and Turkey is 
January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013.

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is welded line pipe 
from Korea and Turkey. For a full description of the scope of these 
investigations, see the ``Scope of the Investigations'' in Appendix I 
of this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigations

    During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions 
to, and received responses from, the petitioners pertaining to the 
proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions would 
be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic 
industry is seeking relief.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also 
General Issues Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,\7\ we 
are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage (scope). The period for scope comments is 
intended to provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider 
all comments and to consult with parties prior to the issuance of the 
preliminary determination. If scope comments include factual 
information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), all such factual information 
should be limited to public information. All such comments must be 
filed by 5:00 p.m. Eastern

[[Page 67420]]

Standard Time (EST) on November 25, 2014, which is 20 calendar days 
from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which 
may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. EST on 
December 5, 2014, which is 10 calendar days after the initial comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department requests that any factual information the parties 
consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted 
during this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that 
additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the 
investigations may be relevant, the party may contact the Department 
and request permission to submit the additional information. All such 
comments must be filed on the records of the Korea and Turkey AD and 
CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS).\8\ An 
electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its 
entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents excepted from the 
electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in 
paper form) with Enforcement and 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 applicable deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order 
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011) for details of the 
Department's electronic filing requirements, which went into effect 
on August 5, 2011. Information on help using IA ACCESS 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%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, the Department 
notified representatives of the GOK and the GOT of the receipt of the 
Petitions. Also, in accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the 
Act, the Department provided representatives of the GOK and the GOT the 
opportunity for consultations with respect to the Petitions.\9\ 
Consultations were held separately with the GOK and GOT on November 4, 
2014.\10\ All memoranda are on file electronically via IA ACCESS.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Letters of invitation from the Department to the GOK and 
the GOT, both dated October 17, 2014.
    \10\ See Memorandum to the File, ``Consultations with Officials 
from the Government of the Republic of Korea Regarding the 
Countervailing Duty Petition Concerning Welded Line Pipe,'' dated 
November 5, 2014; see also Memorandum to the File, ``Consultations 
with Officials from the Government of the Republic of Turkey 
Regarding the Countervailing Duty Petition Concerning Welded Line 
Pipe,'' dated November 4, 2014.
    \11\ See supra note 8 for information pertaining to IA ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    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, or those producers 
whose collective output of a domestic like product constitutes a major 
proportion of the total domestic production of the 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 International Trade Commission 
(ITC), which is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic 
industry'' has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a 
domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the 
Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition 
regarding the domestic like product,\12\ 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.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \13\ 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, the petitioners do not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that welded line pipe, as 
defined in the scope of the investigations, constitutes a single 
domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of 
that domestic like product.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea (Korea CVD 
Initiation Checklist) at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support 
for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering 
Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea and the Republic of 
Turkey (Attachment II); and Countervailing Duty Investigation 
Initiation Checklist: Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Turkey 
(Turkey CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These 
checklists are dated concurrently with this notice and are on file 
electronically via IA ACCESS. Access to documents filed via IA 
ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room 7046 of 
the main Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 
702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in Appendix I of 
this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioners provided 
their production of the domestic like product in 2013, as well as the 
production of a company that supports the Petitions, and compared this 
to the total production of the domestic like product for the entire 
domestic industry.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See General Issues Supplement, at 3-5 and Exhibits 3 and 4; 
see also Second General Issues Supplement, at Attachment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 27, 2014, we received a submission from U.S. Steel, a 
domestic producer of welded line pipe. In the submission, U.S. Steel 
states that it supports the AD and CVD petitions on welded line pipe 
from Korea and

[[Page 67421]]

Turkey.\16\ In an additional submission on October 31, 2014, U.S. Steel 
provided its 2013 production of the domestic like product.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Letter from U.S. Steel, dated October 27, 2014, at 1-2.
    \17\ See Letter from U.S. Steel to the Department entitled ``Re: 
Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of Korea and the Republic of 
Turkey,'' dated October 31, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have relied upon data that the petitioners and U.S. Steel 
provided for purposes of measuring industry support.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Korea CVD Initiation Checklist and Turkey CVD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on information provided in the Petitions, supplemental 
submissions, and other information readily available to the Department, 
we determine that the petitioners have met the statutory criteria for 
industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the 
domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for 
at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like 
product.\19\ Based on information provided in the Petitions, 
supplemental submissions, and submissions from U.S. Steel, 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 Petitions 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 Petitions. Accordingly, the Department determines that the 
Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the 
meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Id.
    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigations that 
they are requesting the Department initiate.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because Korea and Turkey are ``Subsidies Agreement Countries'' 
within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of 
the Act applies to these investigations. Accordingly, the ITC must 
determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from Korea and 
Turkey materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. 
industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioners allege that imports of 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, the petitioners 
allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided 
for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See General Issues Supplement, at 6 and Exhibit 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share, underselling and price depression 
or suppression, lost sales and revenues, declining shipments, reduced 
production capacity, and a decline in financial performance.\23\ We 
assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material 
injury, threat of material injury, and causation, and we determined 
that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and 
meet the statutory requirements for initiation.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 14-18, 21-27, and 
Exhibits I-2, I-6, and I-8 through I-10; see also General Issues 
Supplement, at 6-7 and Exhibits 7 and 8.
    \24\ See Korea CVD Initiation Checklist and Turkey CVD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and 
Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Welded Line Pipe from the 
Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a 
CVD investigation 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 petitioner 
supporting the allegations.
    In the Petitions, the petitioners allege that producers/exporters 
of welded line pipe in Korea and Turkey benefited from countervailable 
subsidies bestowed by the governments of these countries, respectively. 
The Department has examined the Petitions and finds that they comply 
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 CVD 
investigations to determine whether manufacturers, producers, or 
exporters of welded line pipe from Korea and Turkey receive 
countervailable subsidies from the governments of these countries, 
respectively.

Korea

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 22 of the 23 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate or not initiate on each program, see Korea CVD Initiation 
Checklist.

Turkey

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 16 of the 18 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate or not initiate on each program, see Turkey CVD Initiation 
Checklist.
    A public version of the initiation checklist for each investigation 
is available on IA ACCESS and at http://trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp.
    In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary 
determinations no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation.

Respondent Selection

    The petitioners named 13 companies as producers/exporters of welded 
line pipe from Korea and 13 companies as producers/exporters of welded 
line pipe from Turkey.\25\ Following standard practice in CVD 
investigations, the Department will, where appropriate, select 
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for 
U.S. imports of welded line pipe during the period of investigation 
under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) numbers: 7305.11.10.30, 7305.11.50.00, 7305.12.10.30, 
7305.12.50.00, 7305.19.10.30, 7306.19.10.10, 7306.19.10.50, 
7306.19.51.10, and 7306.19.51.50. We intend to release CBP data under 
Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to 
information protected by APO shortly after the announcement of these 
case initiations. The Department invites comments regarding CBP data 
and respondent selection within five calendar days of publication of 
this Federal Register notice. Comments must be filed electronically 
using 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. Eastern time by the date noted

[[Page 67422]]

above. We intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection 
within 20 days of publication of this Federal Register notice. 
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 http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been 
provided to the GOK and GOT via IA ACCESS. Because of the particularly 
large number of producers/exporters identified in the Petitions, the 
Department considers the service of the public version of the Petitions 
to the foreign producers/exporters to be satisfied by the provision of 
the public version of the Petitions to the GOK and GOT, 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 Determinations by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of welded line pipe from Korea and/or Turkey 
are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. 
industry.\26\ A negative ITC determination for either country will 
result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that 
country; \27\ otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See section 703(a) of the Act.
    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 these investigations. 
Interested parties should review the final rule, available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to 
submitting factual information in these investigations.

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.\28\ 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 19 CFR 351.408(c), or to measure the adequacy of 
remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2), filed pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, clarification and correction information 
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. Interested parties should review Extension of Time 
Limits; Final Rule, available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in 
these investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 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.\29\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect 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.\30\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable revised 
certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \30\ 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 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[[Page 67423]]

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 sections 702 and 
777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: November 5, 2014.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigations

    The merchandise covered by these investigations is circular 
welded carbon and alloy steel (other than stainless steel) pipe of a 
kind used for oil or gas pipelines (welded line pipe), not more than 
24 inches in nominal outside diameter, regardless of wall thickness, 
length, surface finish, end finish, or stenciling. Welded line pipe 
is normally produced to the American Petroleum Institute (API) 
specification 5L, but can be produced to comparable foreign 
specifications, to proprietary grades, or can be non-graded 
material. All pipe meeting the physical description set forth above, 
including multiple-stenciled pipe with an API or comparable foreign 
specification line pipe stencil is covered by the scope of these 
investigations.
    The welded line pipe that is subject to these investigations is 
currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 7305.11.1030, 7305.11.5000, 
7305.12.1030, 7305.12.5000, 7305.19.1030, 7305.19.5000, 
7306.19.1010, 7306.19.1050, 7306.19.5110, and 7306.19.5150. The 
subject merchandise may also enter in HTSUS 7305.11.1060 and 
7305.12.1060. While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
scope of these investigations is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2014-26897 Filed 11-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P