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
<![CDATA[
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 https://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
https://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
https://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 https://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 https://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
https://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
