Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations, 37223-37228 [2015-16067]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 125 / Tuesday, June 30, 2015 / Notices Preliminary Results of the Changed Circumstances Review Based on the evidence reviewed, we preliminarily determine that Shanfu II is not the successor-in-interest to Shanfu I. Specifically, we find that material changes occurred after Shanfu I dissolved and Shanfu II was registered. These were changes in management, business scope, production facilities, supplier relationships, and ownership/ legal structure with respect to the production and sale of the subject merchandise.16 Thus, we preliminarily determine that Shanfu II does not operate as the same business entity as Shanfu I with respect to the subject merchandise. A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum appears in the Appendix to this notice. If the Department upholds these preliminary results in the final results, Yongjia and Shanfu will be assigned the cash deposit rate currently assigned to the PRC-wide entity with respect to the subject merchandise (i.e., the $4.71 per kilogram cash deposit rate currently assigned to the PRC-wide entity).17 If these preliminary results are adopted in the final results of this changed circumstances review, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation of entries of fresh garlic made by Shanfu II and exported by Yongjia, effective on the publication date of the final results, at the cash deposit rate assigned to the PRC-wide entity. Public Comment asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 16 See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 4. Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results and Rescission, In Part, of Twelfth New Shipper Reviews, 73 FR 56550 (September 29, 2008). 18 See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii). 19 See 19 CFR 351.309(d)(1). 20 See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) & (d)(2). 21 See 19 CFR 351.303(b) and (f). 17 See 17:34 Jun 29, 2015 Final Results of the Review In accordance with 19 CFR 351.216(e), the Department intends to issue the final results of this changed circumstances review not later than 270 days after the date on which the review is initiated. Notification to Parties The Department issues and publishes these results in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216 and 351.221. Dated: June 23, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix Interested parties may submit written comments by no later than 30 days after the date of publication of these preliminary results of review in the Federal Register.18 Rebuttals, limited to issues raised in the written comments, may be filed by no later than five days after the written comments are filed.19 Parties that submit written comments or rebuttals are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.20 All briefs are to be filed electronically using ACCESS.21 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by VerDate Sep<11>2014 ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the day on which it is due.22 Any interested party may submit a request for a hearing to the Assistant Secretary of Enforcement and Compliance using ACCESS within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.23 Hearing requests should contain the following information: (1) The party’s name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues to be discussed.24 Oral presentations will be limited to issues raised in the briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, parties will be notified of the time and date for the hearing to be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.25 Jkt 235001 List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. Preliminary Results of Changed Circumstances Review Successor-inInterest 1. Changes in Ownership And Management 2. Production Facilities and Equipment 3. Supplier Relationships 4. Customer Base 5. Other Material Considerations a. Dissolution b. Change in Corporate Form V. Summary of Preliminary Findings VI. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2015–16082 Filed 6–29–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 22 See 23 See 19 CFR 351.303(b) 19 CFR 351.310(c). 24 Id. 25 See PO 00000 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–027, C–533–864, C–475–833, C–580– 879, C–583–857] Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People’s Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: June 30, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myrna Lobo at (202) 482–2371 (the People’s Republic of China, and the Republic of Korea); Matt Renkey or Jerry Huang at (202) 482–2312 and (202) 482– 4047, respectively (India); Robert Palmer at (202) 482–9068 (Italy); Kristen Johnson at (202) 482–4793 (Taiwan), 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: AGENCY: The Petitions On June 3, 2015, the Department of Commerce (Department) received countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of certain corrosionresistant steel products (corrosionresistant steel) from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), India, Italy, the Republic of Korea (Korea), and Taiwan, filed in proper form on behalf of United States Steel Corporation, Nucor Corporation, Steel Dynamics, Inc., ArcelorMittal USA, LLC, AK Steel Corporation, and California Steel Industries, (collectively, Petitioners). The CVD petitions were accompanied by antidumping duty (AD) petitions also concerning imports of corrosionresistant steel from all of the above countries.1 Petitioners are domestic producers of corrosion-resistant steel.2 On June 9 and 10, 2015, the Department requested information and clarification for certain areas of the Petitions.3 Petitioners filed responses to 1 See ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, India Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan,’’ dated June 3, 2015 (Petitions). 2 See Volume I of the Petitions, at I–2 and Exhibit I–1. 3 See Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China (PRC): Supplemental 19 CFR 351.310(d). Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 37223 Continued Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1 37224 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 125 / Tuesday, June 30, 2015 / Notices asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES these requests on June 12, 2015.4 In addition, Petitioners filed a new subsidy allegation with respect to Korea as an Amendment to Volume V of the petition.5 Questions,’’ dated June 9, 2015 (PRC Questionnaire); Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated June 9, 2015 (India Questionnaire); Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated June 9, 2015 (Italy Questionnaire); Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the Republic of Korea: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated June 9, 2015 (Korea Questionnaire); Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated June 10, 2015 (Taiwan Questionnaire); Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated June 9, 2015 (General Issues Questionnaire). 4 See Letter from Petitioners entitled ‘‘Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to the Department’s June 9, 2015 Questionnaire Regarding Volume I of the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,’’ dated June 12, 2015 (General Issues Supplement); Letter from Petitioners entitled ‘‘Certain CorrosionResistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to the Department’s June 9, 2015 Questionnaire Regarding Volume III of the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,’’ dated June 12, 2015 (PRC Supplement); Letter from Petitioners entitled ‘‘Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to the Department’s June 9, 2015 Questionnaire Regarding Volume VII of the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,’’ dated June 12, 2015 (India Supplement); Letter from Petitioners entitled ‘‘Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to the Department’s June 9, 2015 Questionnaire Regarding Volume IX of the Petitions for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties,’’ dated June 12, 2015 (Italy Supplement); Letter from Petitioners entitled ‘‘Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to the Department’s June 9, 2015 Questionnaire Regarding Volume V of the Petitions for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties,’’ dated June 12, 2015 (Korea Supplement); Letter from Petitioners entitled ‘‘Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to the Department’s June 10, 2015 Questionnaire Regarding Volume XI of the Petitions for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties,’’ dated June 12, 2015 (Taiwan Supplement). 5 See Letter from Petitioners entitled ‘‘Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: New Subsidy Allegation Amendment to Volume V of the Petitions for the VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Petitioners allege that the Governments of the PRC (GOC), India (GOIn), Italy (GOIt), and Korea (GOK) and the Taiwan Authorities (TA) are providing countervailable subsidies (within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act) to imports of corrosion-resistant steel from the PRC, India, Italy, Korea and Taiwan, 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 Petitioners supporting their allegations. The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because Petitioners are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also finds that Petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the CVD investigations that Petitioners are requesting.6 Period of Investigations The period of investigations is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.7 Scope of the Investigations The product covered by these investigations is corrosion-resistant steel from the PRC, India, Italy, Korea and Taiwan. 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, 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.8 As discussed in the preamble to the Department’s regulations,9 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 Imposition of Countervailing Duties,’’ dated June 12, 2015 (Korea NSA). 6 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions’’ section below. 7 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2). 8 See General Issues Questionnaire; see also General Issues Supplement. 9 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Department with ample opportunity to consider all comments and to consult with parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. 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 Time (ET) on July 13, 2015, 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. ET on July 23, 2015, which is 10 calendar days after the initial comments deadline. 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 PRC, India, Italy, Korea, and Taiwan CVD investigations, as well as the concurrent PRC, India, Italy Korea, and Taiwan AD 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 (ACCESS). 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 18022, 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. Consultations Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, the Department notified representatives of the GOC, GOIn, GOIt, GOK, and TA 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 GOC, GOIn, GOIt, GOK, and TA the opportunity for consultations with respect to the Petitions.10 Consultations were held with the TA on June 17, 2015, 10 See Letters of Invitation from the Department to the GOC (dated June 9, 2015), GOIn (dated June 5, 2015), GOIt (dated June 5, 2015), GOK (dated June 9, 2015), and the TA (dated June 4, 2015). E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 125 / Tuesday, June 30, 2015 / Notices asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES with the GOIt on June 19, 2015, and with the GOK and the GOC on June 22, 2015. All memoranda regarding these consultations are on file electronically via 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. 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,11 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.12 Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ‘‘a product which is like, or in the absence of like, 11 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)). 12 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 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 Petitions). With regard to the domestic like product, 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 corrosion-resistant steel constitutes a single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.13 In determining whether 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. Petitioners provided their shipments of the domestic like product in 2014, and estimated total shipments of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry using data from the American Iron and Steel Institute and the ITC.14 To establish industry support, Petitioners compared their own shipments to estimated total shipments of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.15 Because data 13 For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in this case, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel 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 Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan (Attachment II); Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India (India CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy (Italy CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the Republic of Korea (Korea CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; and Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan (Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist). These checklists are dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. 14 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2–3 and Exhibits I–3 to I–5; see also General Issues Supplement, at 12–14 and Exhibits Supp. I–3, Supp. I–40 to Supp. I–42, and Supp. I–45. 15 Id. PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 37225 regarding total production of the domestic like product are not reasonably available to Petitioners and Petitioners have established that shipments are a reasonable proxy for production, we have relied on the shipment data provided by Petitioners for purposes of measuring industry support.16 On June 12, 2015, we received a submission from Thomas Steel Strip Corporation (Thomas) and Apollo Metals, Ltd. (Apollo), domestic producers of corrosion-resistant steel. In the submission, Thomas and Apollo state that they support the Petitions for the imposition of antidumping and countervailing duties on corrosionresistant steel from the PRC, Korea, Italy and Taiwan. Thomas and Apollo do not express a view with respect to the Petitions for the imposition of antidumping and countervailing duties on corrosion-resistant steel from India. In addition, Thomas and Apollo provide their 2014 production of the domestic like product.17 We have relied on the data provided by Petitioners, Thomas, and Apollo for purposes of measuring industry support.18 Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, General Issues supplement, the submission from Thomas and Apollo, and other information readily available to the Department indicates that Petitioners have established industry support for all of the Petitions.19 First, the Petitions established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).20 Second, the domestic 16 For further discussion, see PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, India CVD Initiation Checklist, Italy CVD Initiation Checklist, Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 17 See Letter to the Department from Thomas Steel Strip Corporation and Apollo Metals, Ltd., entitled ‘‘Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, Italy, and Taiwan: Statement of Support for the Petitions and Comments Concerning NickelPlated Steel Products,’’ dated June 12, 2015. 18 See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, India CVD Initiation Checklist, Italy CVD Initiation Checklist, Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 19 See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, India CVD Initiation Checklist, Italy CVD Initiation Checklist, Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 20 See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, India CVD Initiation Checklist, Italy CVD Initiation Checklist, Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1 37226 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 125 / Tuesday, June 30, 2015 / Notices producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act for all of the Petitions because the domestic producers (or workers) who support each of the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.21 Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act for all of the Petitions because the domestic producers (or workers) who support each of 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.22 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. The Department finds that 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.23 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Injury Test Because the PRC, India, Italy, Korea, and Taiwan 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 the PRC, India, Italy, Korea, and/or Taiwan materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation 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. Petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold of three percent provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.24 In CVD petitions, section 771(24)(B) of the Act provides that imports of subject 21 See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, India CVD Initiation Checklist, Italy CVD Initiation Checklist, Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 22 Id. 23 Id. 24 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 24 (footnote 87) and Exhibit I–27. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 merchandise from least developed countries must exceed the negligibility threshold of four percent. Petitioners also demonstrate that subject imports from India, which has been designated as a least developed country under section 771(36)(B) of the Act, exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(B) of the Act.25 Petitioners contend that the industry’s injured condition is illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price suppression or depression; lost sales and revenues; oversupply and inventory overhang in the U.S. market; and adverse impact on domestic industry performance.26 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.27 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 Petitioners supporting the allegations. Petitioners allege that producers/ exporters of corrosion-resistant steel in the PRC, India, Italy, Korea, and Taiwan benefited from countervailable subsidies bestowed by the governments/ authorities of these countries, respectively. The Department 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 corrosion-resistant steel from the PRC, India, Italy, Korea, and Taiwan receive countervailable subsidies from the governments/authorities of these countries, respectively. 25 Id. 26 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 17–19, 24–43 and Exhibits I–5, I–12 and I–18 through I–27; see also General Issues Supplement, at 1 and Exhibits Supp. I–18, Supp. I–25, Supp. I–26, and Supp. I–28. 27 See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, India CVD Initiation Checklist, Italy CVD Initiation Checklist, Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People’s Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan. PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 The PRC Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 47 of the 48 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the PRC CVD Initiation Checklist. India Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 52 of the 53 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the India CVD Initiation Checklist. Italy Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 12 of the 14 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the Italy CVD Initiation Checklist. Korea Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 39 of the 41 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the Korea CVD Initiation Checklist. Taiwan Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 20 of the 22 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for each investigation is available on ACCESS. 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 Petitioners named 146 companies as producers/exporters of corrosionresistant steel from the PRC, 26 from India, 7 from Italy, 11 from Korea, and 35 from Taiwan.28 Following standard 28 See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibits I–7 to I–11. For Taiwan, see also Volume XI at Exhibit XI–1. E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 125 / Tuesday, June 30, 2015 / Notices 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 corrosionresistant steel during the periods of investigation under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) numbers: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, and 7212.60.0000. We intend to release CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO within five-business days of publication of this Federal Register notice. The Department invites comments regarding respondent selection within seven days of publication of this Federal Register notice. Comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS, by 5 p.m. ET by the date noted above. We intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this notice. Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may be found on the Department’s Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 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 GOC, GOIn, GOIt, GOK and TA via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petitions to each known exporter (as named in the Petitions), consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). ITC Notification We will notify 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 corrosion-resistant steel from the VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 PRC, India, Italy, Korea, and Taiwan are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.29 A negative ITC determination for any country will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country; 30 otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. Submission of Factual Information Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (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 regulation 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. Time limits for the submission of factual information are addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based on the type of factual information being submitted. Parties should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information in these investigations. Extension of Time Limits Regulation Parties may request an extension of time limits before the expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301 expires. For submissions that 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. Under certain circumstances, we 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, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be 29 See section 703(a) of the Act. 30 Id. PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 37227 filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-201309-20/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.31 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.32 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 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: June 23, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Attachment I Scope of the Investigation The products covered by this investigation are certain flat-rolled steel products, either 31 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. 32 See E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37228 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 125 / Tuesday, June 30, 2015 / Notices clad, plated, or coated with corrosionresistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated or painted, varnished, laminated, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating. The products covered include coils that have a width of 12.7 mm or greater, regardless of form of coil (e.g., in successively superimposed layers, spirally oscillating, etc.). The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness less than 4.75 mm and a width that is 12.7 mm or greater and that measures at least 10 times the thickness. The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness of 4.75 mm or more and a width exceeding 150 mm and measuring at least twice the thickness. The products described above may be rectangular, square, circular, or other shape and include products of either rectangular or non-rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been ‘‘worked after rolling’’ (e.g., products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges). For purposes of the width and thickness requirements referenced above: (1) Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions set forth above, and (2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific product (e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-rectangular crosssection, the width of certain products with non-rectangular shape, etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or thickness applies. Steel products included in the scope of this investigation are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; and (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated: • 2.50 percent of manganese, or • 3.30 percent of silicon, or • 1.50 percent of copper, or • 1.50 percent of aluminum, or • 1.25 percent of chromium, or • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or • 0.40 percent of lead, or • 2.00 percent of nickel, or • 0.30 percent of tungsten (also called wolfram), or • 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or • 0.10 percent of niobium (also called columbium), or • 0.30 percent of vanadium, or • 0.30 percent of zirconium Unless specifically excluded, products are included in this scope regardless of levels of boron and titanium. For example, specifically included in this scope are vacuum degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to as interstitial-free (IF)) steels and high strength low alloy (HSLA) steels. IF steels are recognized as low carbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium and/or niobium added to VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 29, 2015 Jkt 235001 stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum. Furthermore, this scope also includes Advanced High Strength Steels (AHSS) and Ultra High Strength Steels (UHSS), both of which are considered high tensile strength and high elongation steels. All products that meet the written physical description, and in which the chemistry quantities do not exceed any one of the noted element levels listed above, are within the scope of this investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation: • Flat-rolled steel products either plated or coated with tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (‘‘terne plate’’), or both chromium and chromium oxides (‘‘tin free steel’’), whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating; • Clad products in straight lengths of 4.7625 mm or more in composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures at least twice the thickness; and • Certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are three-layered corrosion-resistant flat-rolled steel products less than 4.75 mm in composite thickness that consist of a flat-rolled steel product clad on both sides with stainless steel in a 20%–60%–20% ratio. The products subject to the investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, and 7212.60.0000. The products subject to the investigation may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7210.90.1000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090, 7225.91.0000, 7225.92.0000, 7225.99.0090, 7226.99.0110, 7226.99.0130, 7226.99.0180, 7228.60.6000, 7228.60.8000, and 7229.90.1000. The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2015–16067 Filed 6–29–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–475–832, A–533–863, A–570–026, A–580– 878, A–583–856] Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From Italy, India, the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: June 30, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia Hancock or Susan Pulongbarit at (202) 482–1394 and (202) 482–4031, respectively (Italy), Alexis Polovina at (202) 482–3927 (India); David Lindgren at (202) 482–3870 (the People’s Republic of China (PRC)); David Lindgren at (202) 482–3870 (the Republic of Korea (Korea)); or Brendan Quinn or Paul Stolz at (202) 482–5848 and (202) 482–4474, respectively (Taiwan), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: The Petitions On June 3, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the Department) received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of certain corrosionresistant steel products (corrosionresistant steel) from Italy, India, the PRC, Korea, and Taiwan, filed in proper form on behalf of United States Steel Corporation, Nucor Corporation, ArcelorMittal USA, AK Steel Corporation, Steel Dynamics, Inc., and California Steel Industries, Inc., (Petitioners).1 The AD petitions were accompanied by five countervailing duty (CVD) petitions.2 Petitioners are domestic producers of corrosionresistant steel.3 On June 9, 2015, and June 10, 2015, the Department requested additional information and clarification of certain areas of the Petitions.4 Petitioners filed 1 See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy, India, the PRC, Korea, and Taiwan, dated June 3, 2015 (the Petitions). 2 See the Petitions for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy, India, the PRC, Korea, and Taiwan, dated June 3, 2015. 3 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2, and Exhibit I–1. 4 See Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Re: Petitions for the Imposition of E:\FR\FM\30JNN1.SGM 30JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 125 (Tuesday, June 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37223-37228]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16067]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-027, C-533-864, C-475-833, C-580-879, C-583-857]


Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's 
Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: 
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations

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

DATES: Effective Date: June 30, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myrna Lobo at (202) 482-2371 (the 
People's Republic of China, and the Republic of Korea); Matt Renkey or 
Jerry Huang at (202) 482-2312 and (202) 482-4047, respectively (India); 
Robert Palmer at (202) 482-9068 (Italy); Kristen Johnson at (202) 482-
4793 (Taiwan), 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 June 3, 2015, the Department of Commerce (Department) received 
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of certain 
corrosion-resistant steel products (corrosion-resistant steel) from the 
People's Republic of China (PRC), India, Italy, the Republic of Korea 
(Korea), and Taiwan, filed in proper form on behalf of United States 
Steel Corporation, Nucor Corporation, Steel Dynamics, Inc., 
ArcelorMittal USA, LLC, AK Steel Corporation, and California Steel 
Industries, (collectively, Petitioners). The CVD petitions were 
accompanied by antidumping duty (AD) petitions also concerning imports 
of corrosion-resistant steel from all of the above countries.\1\ 
Petitioners are domestic producers of corrosion-resistant steel.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties on Imports: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel 
Products from the People's Republic of China, India Italy, the 
Republic of Korea, and Taiwan,'' dated June 3, 2015 (Petitions).
    \2\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at I-2 and Exhibit I-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 9 and 10, 2015, the Department requested information and 
clarification for certain areas of the Petitions.\3\ Petitioners filed 
responses to

[[Page 37224]]

these requests on June 12, 2015.\4\ In addition, Petitioners filed a 
new subsidy allegation with respect to Korea as an Amendment to Volume 
V of the petition.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled 
``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People's 
Republic of China (PRC): Supplemental Questions,'' dated June 9, 
2015 (PRC Questionnaire); Letter from the Department to Petitioners 
entitled ``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on 
Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India: 
Supplemental Questions,'' dated June 9, 2015 (India Questionnaire); 
Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ``Petition for 
the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain 
Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy: Supplemental 
Questions,'' dated June 9, 2015 (Italy Questionnaire); Letter from 
the Department to Petitioners entitled ``Petition for the Imposition 
of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant 
Steel Products from the Republic of Korea: Supplemental Questions,'' 
dated June 9, 2015 (Korea Questionnaire); Letter from the Department 
to Petitioners entitled ``Petition for the Imposition of 
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant 
Steel Products from Taiwan: Supplemental Questions,'' dated June 10, 
2015 (Taiwan Questionnaire); Letter from the Department to 
Petitioners entitled ``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant 
Steel Products from the People's Republic of China, India, Italy, 
the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Supplemental Questions,'' dated 
June 9, 2015 (General Issues Questionnaire).
    \4\ See Letter from Petitioners entitled ``Certain Corrosion-
Resistant Steel Products from the People's Republic of China, the 
Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to the 
Department's June 9, 2015 Questionnaire Regarding Volume I of the 
Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duties,'' dated June 12, 2015 (General Issues Supplement); Letter 
from Petitioners entitled ``Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel 
Products from the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, 
India, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to the Department's June 9, 2015 
Questionnaire Regarding Volume III of the Petitions for the 
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,'' dated June 
12, 2015 (PRC Supplement); Letter from Petitioners entitled 
``Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People's 
Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: 
Response to the Department's June 9, 2015 Questionnaire Regarding 
Volume VII of the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties,'' dated June 12, 2015 (India Supplement); 
Letter from Petitioners entitled ``Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel 
Products from the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, 
India, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to the Department's June 9, 2015 
Questionnaire Regarding Volume IX of the Petitions for the 
Imposition of Countervailing Duties,'' dated June 12, 2015 (Italy 
Supplement); Letter from Petitioners entitled ``Certain Corrosion-
Resistant Steel Products from the People's Republic of China, the 
Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to the 
Department's June 9, 2015 Questionnaire Regarding Volume V of the 
Petitions for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties,'' dated June 
12, 2015 (Korea Supplement); Letter from Petitioners entitled 
``Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People's 
Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: 
Response to the Department's June 10, 2015 Questionnaire Regarding 
Volume XI of the Petitions for the Imposition of Countervailing 
Duties,'' dated June 12, 2015 (Taiwan Supplement).
    \5\ See Letter from Petitioners entitled ``Certain Corrosion-
Resistant Steel Products from the People's Republic of China, the 
Republic of Korea, India, Italy, and Taiwan: New Subsidy Allegation 
Amendment to Volume V of the Petitions for the Imposition of 
Countervailing Duties,'' dated June 12, 2015 (Korea NSA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), Petitioners allege that the Governments of the PRC 
(GOC), India (GOIn), Italy (GOIt), and Korea (GOK) and the Taiwan 
Authorities (TA) are providing countervailable subsidies (within the 
meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act) to imports of corrosion-
resistant steel from the PRC, India, Italy, Korea and Taiwan, 
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 Petitioners 
supporting their allegations.
    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf 
of the domestic industry because Petitioners are interested parties as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also finds that 
Petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to 
the initiation of the CVD investigations that Petitioners are 
requesting.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petitions'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigations

    The period of investigations is January 1, 2014, through December 
31, 2014.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is corrosion-resistant 
steel from the PRC, India, Italy, Korea and Taiwan. 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, 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.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See General Issues Questionnaire; see also General Issues 
Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,\9\ 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 determinations. 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 Time (ET) on July 13, 2015, 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. ET on July 23, 2015, which is 10 calendar days after the initial 
comments deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 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 PRC, India, Italy, Korea, 
and Taiwan CVD investigations, as well as the concurrent PRC, India, 
Italy Korea, and Taiwan AD 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 (ACCESS). 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 18022, 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.

Consultations

    Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, the Department 
notified representatives of the GOC, GOIn, GOIt, GOK, and TA 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 GOC, GOIn, GOIt, GOK, and TA the opportunity for consultations with 
respect to the Petitions.\10\ Consultations were held with the TA on 
June 17, 2015,

[[Page 37225]]

with the GOIt on June 19, 2015, and with the GOK and the GOC on June 
22, 2015. All memoranda regarding these consultations are on file 
electronically via ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Letters of Invitation from the Department to the GOC 
(dated June 9, 2015), GOIn (dated June 5, 2015), GOIt (dated June 5, 
2015), GOK (dated June 9, 2015), and the TA (dated June 4, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. 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,\11\ 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.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \12\ 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 
Petitions).
    With regard to the domestic like product, 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 corrosion-resistant steel 
constitutes a single domestic like product and we have analyzed 
industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel 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 Corrosion-Resistant 
Steel Products from the People's Republic of China, India, Italy, 
the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan (Attachment II); Countervailing 
Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Corrosion-Resistant 
Steel Products from India (India CVD Initiation Checklist), at 
Attachment II; Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy 
(Italy CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; Countervailing 
Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Corrosion-Resistant 
Steel Products from the Republic of Korea (Korea CVD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II; and Countervailing Duty Investigation 
Initiation Checklist: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products 
from Taiwan (Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist). These checklists are 
dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via 
ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in 
the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of 
Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether 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. Petitioners provided their shipments of the domestic like 
product in 2014, and estimated total shipments of the domestic like 
product for the entire domestic industry using data from the American 
Iron and Steel Institute and the ITC.\14\ To establish industry 
support, Petitioners compared their own shipments to estimated total 
shipments of the domestic like product for the entire domestic 
industry.\15\ Because data regarding total production of the domestic 
like product are not reasonably available to Petitioners and 
Petitioners have established that shipments are a reasonable proxy for 
production, we have relied on the shipment data provided by Petitioners 
for purposes of measuring industry support.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2-3 and Exhibits I-3 to 
I-5; see also General Issues Supplement, at 12-14 and Exhibits Supp. 
I-3, Supp. I-40 to Supp. I-42, and Supp. I-45.
    \15\ Id.
    \16\ For further discussion, see PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, 
India CVD Initiation Checklist, Italy CVD Initiation Checklist, 
Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist, 
at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 12, 2015, we received a submission from Thomas Steel Strip 
Corporation (Thomas) and Apollo Metals, Ltd. (Apollo), domestic 
producers of corrosion-resistant steel. In the submission, Thomas and 
Apollo state that they support the Petitions for the imposition of 
antidumping and countervailing duties on corrosion-resistant steel from 
the PRC, Korea, Italy and Taiwan. Thomas and Apollo do not express a 
view with respect to the Petitions for the imposition of antidumping 
and countervailing duties on corrosion-resistant steel from India. In 
addition, Thomas and Apollo provide their 2014 production of the 
domestic like product.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Letter to the Department from Thomas Steel Strip 
Corporation and Apollo Metals, Ltd., entitled ``Corrosion-Resistant 
Steel Products from the People's Republic of China, the Republic of 
Korea, Italy, and Taiwan: Statement of Support for the Petitions and 
Comments Concerning Nickel-Plated Steel Products,'' dated June 12, 
2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have relied on the data provided by Petitioners, Thomas, and 
Apollo for purposes of measuring industry support.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, India CVD Initiation 
Checklist, Italy CVD Initiation Checklist, Korea CVD Initiation 
Checklist, and Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, General Issues 
supplement, the submission from Thomas and Apollo, and other 
information readily available to the Department indicates that 
Petitioners have established industry support for all of the 
Petitions.\19\ First, the Petitions established support from domestic 
producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product and, as such, the Department is 
not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry 
support (e.g., polling).\20\ Second, the domestic

[[Page 37226]]

producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry 
support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act for all of the 
Petitions because the domestic producers (or workers) who support each 
of the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product.\21\ Finally, the domestic 
producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry 
support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act for all of the 
Petitions because the domestic producers (or workers) who support each 
of 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.\22\ 
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, India CVD Initiation 
Checklist, Italy CVD Initiation Checklist, Korea CVD Initiation 
Checklist, and Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \20\ See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also PRC CVD 
Initiation Checklist, India CVD Initiation Checklist, Italy CVD 
Initiation Checklist, Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, and Taiwan CVD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \21\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, India CVD Initiation 
Checklist, Italy CVD Initiation Checklist, Korea CVD Initiation 
Checklist, and Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that 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.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Injury Test

    Because the PRC, India, Italy, Korea, and Taiwan 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 the PRC, India, Italy, Korea, and/or Taiwan materially 
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    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. Petitioners allege that subject 
imports exceed the negligibility threshold of three percent provided 
for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\24\ In CVD petitions, section 
771(24)(B) of the Act provides that imports of subject merchandise from 
least developed countries must exceed the negligibility threshold of 
four percent. Petitioners also demonstrate that subject imports from 
India, which has been designated as a least developed country under 
section 771(36)(B) of the Act, exceed the negligibility threshold 
provided for under section 771(24)(B) of the Act.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 24 (footnote 87) and 
Exhibit I-27.
    \25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price suppression 
or depression; lost sales and revenues; oversupply and inventory 
overhang in the U.S. market; and adverse impact on domestic industry 
performance.\26\ 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.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 17-19, 24-43 and Exhibits 
I-5, I-12 and I-18 through I-27; see also General Issues Supplement, 
at 1 and Exhibits Supp. I-18, Supp. I-25, Supp. I-26, and Supp. I-
28.
    \27\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, India CVD Initiation 
Checklist, Italy CVD Initiation Checklist, Korea CVD Initiation 
Checklist, and Taiwan CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the 
People's Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and 
Taiwan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Petitioners 
supporting the allegations.
    Petitioners allege that producers/exporters of corrosion-resistant 
steel in the PRC, India, Italy, Korea, and Taiwan benefited from 
countervailable subsidies bestowed by the governments/authorities of 
these countries, respectively. The Department 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 corrosion-resistant steel 
from the PRC, India, Italy, Korea, and Taiwan receive countervailable 
subsidies from the governments/authorities of these countries, 
respectively.

The PRC

    Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 47 of the 48 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the PRC CVD Initiation 
Checklist.

India

    Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 52 of the 53 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the India CVD 
Initiation Checklist.

Italy

    Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 12 of the 14 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the Italy CVD 
Initiation Checklist.

Korea

    Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 39 of the 41 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the Korea CVD 
Initiation Checklist.

Taiwan

    Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 20 of the 22 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the Taiwan CVD 
Initiation Checklist.
    A public version of the initiation checklist for each investigation 
is available on ACCESS.
    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

    Petitioners named 146 companies as producers/exporters of 
corrosion-resistant steel from the PRC, 26 from India, 7 from Italy, 11 
from Korea, and 35 from Taiwan.\28\ Following standard

[[Page 37227]]

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 corrosion-resistant steel during the periods 
of investigation under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTSUS) numbers: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 
7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 7210.61.0000, 
7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, 
7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 
7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, and 
7212.60.0000. We intend to release CBP data under Administrative 
Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information 
protected by APO within five-business days of publication of this 
Federal Register notice. The Department invites comments regarding 
respondent selection within seven days of publication of this Federal 
Register notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibits I-7 to I-11. For 
Taiwan, see also Volume XI at Exhibit XI-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An 
electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its 
entirety by ACCESS, by 5 p.m. ET by the date noted above. We intend to 
make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of 
publication of this notice. Interested parties must submit applications 
for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(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 GOC, GOIn, GOIt, GOK and TA via ACCESS. To the extent 
practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of 
the Petitions to each known exporter (as named in the Petitions), 
consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    We will notify 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 corrosion-resistant steel from the PRC, 
India, Italy, Korea, and Taiwan are materially injuring, or threatening 
material injury to, a U.S. industry.\29\ A negative ITC determination 
for any country will result in the investigation being terminated with 
respect to that country; \30\ otherwise, these investigations will 
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See section 703(a) of the Act.
    \30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (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 regulation 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. Time limits for the 
submission of factual information are addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, 
which provides specific time limits based on the type of factual 
information being submitted. Parties should review the regulations 
prior to submitting factual information in these investigations.

Extension of Time Limits Regulation

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as 
otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request 
will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the 
time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301 expires. For submissions 
that 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. Under certain circumstances, we 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, we 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. An extension request 
must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited 
circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension 
of time limits. Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 
57790 (September 20, 2013), 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.\31\ 
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.\32\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable revised 
certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \32\ 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 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: June 23, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Attachment I

Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are certain flat-
rolled steel products, either

[[Page 37228]]

clad, plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as 
zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, 
whether or not corrugated or painted, varnished, laminated, or 
coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to 
the metallic coating. The products covered include coils that have a 
width of 12.7 mm or greater, regardless of form of coil (e.g., in 
successively superimposed layers, spirally oscillating, etc.). The 
products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in 
straight lengths) of a thickness less than 4.75 mm and a width that 
is 12.7 mm or greater and that measures at least 10 times the 
thickness. The products covered also include products not in coils 
(e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness of 4.75 mm or more and a 
width exceeding 150 mm and measuring at least twice the thickness. 
The products described above may be rectangular, square, circular, 
or other shape and include products of either rectangular or non-
rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved 
subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been 
``worked after rolling'' (e.g., products which have been beveled or 
rounded at the edges). For purposes of the width and thickness 
requirements referenced above:
    (1) Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product is 
within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual 
measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions 
set forth above, and
    (2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific product 
(e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-rectangular cross-
section, the width of certain products with non-rectangular shape, 
etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or thickness applies.
    Steel products included in the scope of this investigation are 
products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of 
the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or 
less, by weight; and (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds 
the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

 2.50 percent of manganese, or
 3.30 percent of silicon, or
 1.50 percent of copper, or
 1.50 percent of aluminum, or
 1.25 percent of chromium, or
 0.30 percent of cobalt, or
 0.40 percent of lead, or
 2.00 percent of nickel, or
 0.30 percent of tungsten (also called wolfram), or
 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or
 0.10 percent of niobium (also called columbium), or
 0.30 percent of vanadium, or
 0.30 percent of zirconium

    Unless specifically excluded, products are included in this 
scope regardless of levels of boron and titanium.
    For example, specifically included in this scope are vacuum 
degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to as interstitial-
free (IF)) steels and high strength low alloy (HSLA) steels. IF 
steels are recognized as low carbon steels with micro-alloying 
levels of elements such as titanium and/or niobium added to 
stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized 
as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, 
copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum.
    Furthermore, this scope also includes Advanced High Strength 
Steels (AHSS) and Ultra High Strength Steels (UHSS), both of which 
are considered high tensile strength and high elongation steels.
    All products that meet the written physical description, and in 
which the chemistry quantities do not exceed any one of the noted 
element levels listed above, are within the scope of this 
investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products 
are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of this 
investigation:

 Flat-rolled steel products either plated or coated with 
tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (``terne 
plate''), or both chromium and chromium oxides (``tin free steel''), 
whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other 
non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating;
 Clad products in straight lengths of 4.7625 mm or more in 
composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures 
at least twice the thickness; and
 Certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are 
three-layered corrosion-resistant flat-rolled steel products less 
than 4.75 mm in composite thickness that consist of a flat-rolled 
steel product clad on both sides with stainless steel in a 20%-60%-
20% ratio.

    The products subject to the investigation are currently 
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) under item numbers: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 
7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 
7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 
7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 
7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 
7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, and 7212.60.0000.
    The products subject to the investigation may also enter under 
the following HTSUS item numbers: 7210.90.1000, 7215.90.1000, 
7215.90.3000, 7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 
7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 
7217.90.5090, 7225.91.0000, 7225.92.0000, 7225.99.0090, 
7226.99.0110, 7226.99.0130, 7226.99.0180, 7228.60.6000, 
7228.60.8000, and 7229.90.1000.
    The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the 
investigation is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2015-16067 Filed 6-29-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P