Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe From India: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 65700-65703 [2015-27376]

Download as PDF 65700 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 207 / Tuesday, October 27, 2015 / Notices Notification to Interested Parties DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 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 (Jan. 22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in the investigation should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)). This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. International Trade Administration Dated: October 20, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Scope of the Investigation The merchandise covered by this investigation is circular welded austenitic stainless pressure pipe not greater than 14 inches in outside diameter. References to size are in nominal inches and include all products within tolerances allowed by pipe specifications. This merchandise includes, but is not limited to, the American Society for Testing and Materials (‘‘ASTM’’) A–312 or ASTM A–778 specifications, or comparable domestic or foreign specifications. ASTM A–358 products are only included when they are produced to meet ASTM A–312 or ASTM A–778 specifications, or comparable domestic or foreign specifications. Excluded from the scope of the investigation are: (1) Welded stainless mechanical tubing, meeting ASTM A–554 or comparable domestic or foreign specifications; (2) boiler, heat exchanger, superheater, refining furnace, feedwater heater, and condenser tubing, meeting ASTM A–249, ASTM A–688 or comparable domestic or foreign specifications; and (3) specialized tubing, meeting ASTM A–269, ASTM A–270 or comparable domestic or foreign specifications. The subject imports are normally classified in subheadings 7306.40.5005, 7306.40.5040, 7306.40.5062, 7306.40.5064, and 7306.40.5085 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). They may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 7306.40.1010, 7306.40.1015, 7306.40.5042, 7306.40.5044, 7306.40.5080, and 7306.40.5090. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes only; the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2015–27364 Filed 10–26–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Oct 26, 2015 Jkt 238001 [C–533–868] Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe From India: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce DATES: Effective date: October 20, 2015 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurel LaCivita at (202) 482–4243, or Mandy Mallott at (202) 482–6430, 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 Petition On September 30, 2015, the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) received a countervailing duty (‘‘CVD’’) petition concerning imports of welded stainless pressure pipe (‘‘welded stainless pipe’’) from India, filed in proper form on behalf of Bristol Metals, LLC, Felker Brothers Corp, Outokumpu Stainless Pipe, Inc., and Marcegaglia USA (collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’). The CVD petition was accompanied by an antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’) petition concerning imports of welded stainless pipe from India.1 Petitioners are domestic producers of welded stainless pipe.2 On October 2, 2015, the Department requested information and clarification for certain areas of the Petition.3 Petitioners filed responses to these requests on October 6, 2015.4 In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), Petitioners allege that the Government of India (‘‘GOI’’) is providing countervailable subsidies 1 See ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India,’’ dated September 30, 2015 (‘‘Petition’’). 2 See Volume I of the Petition, at 2. 3 See letter from the Department, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated October 2, 2015 (‘‘General Issues Questionnaire’’); letter from the Department, ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India: Supplemental Questions,’’ October 2, 2015 (‘‘CVD Deficiency Questionnaire’’). 4 See letter from Petitioners, ‘‘Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India: Response to Supplemental Questions,’’ dated October 6, 2015, covering volume I (‘‘General Issues Supplement’’) and III (‘‘CVD Supplement’’) of the Petition. PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 (within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act) to imports of welded stainless pipe from India, 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, for those alleged programs in India on which we have initiated a CVD investigation, the Petition is accompanied by information reasonably available to Petitioners supporting their allegations. The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition 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 investigation that Petitioners are requesting.5 Period of Investigation The period of investigation is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.6 Scope of the Investigation The product covered by this investigation is welded stainless pipe from India. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the ‘‘Scope of the Investigation’’ in Appendix I of this notice. Comments on Scope of the Investigation During our review of the Petition, the Department issued questions to, and received responses from, Petitioners pertaining to the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petition would be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.7 As discussed in the preamble to the Department’s regulations,8 we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., scope). The Department will consider all comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with the interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determination. If scope comments include factual information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), all such factual information should be limited to public information. In order to facilitate preparation of its questionnaire, the 5 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petition’’ section below. 6 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2). 7 See General Issues Questionnaire and General Issues Supplement. See also Petitioners’ submission, ‘‘Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India: Revised Scope Definition,’’ dated October 15, 2015. 8 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM 27OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 207 / Tuesday, October 27, 2015 / Notices Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (‘‘ET’’) on Tuesday, November 10, 2015, which is the first business day after 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 Friday, November 20, 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 investigation be submitted during this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigation 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 record of the concurrent AD investigation. 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’’).9 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. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Consultations Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, the Department notified representatives of the GOI of the receipt of the Petition. Also, in accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, the Department provided representatives of the GOI the opportunity for consultations with respect to the CVD petition. As the GOI did not request consultations prior to the initiation of this investigation, the Department and the GOI did not hold consultations. 9 See 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements); Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011), for details of the Department’s electronic filing requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. Information on help using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/ help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https:// access.trade.gov/help/Handbook% 20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Oct 26, 2015 Jkt 238001 Determination of Industry Support for the Petition Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, the Department shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method to poll the ‘‘industry.’’ Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The 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,10 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.11 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 10 See section 771(10) of the Act. USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)). 11 See PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 65701 ‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’ (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the Petition). With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioners do not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that welded stainless pipe constitutes a single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.12 In determining whether Petitioners have standing under section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petition with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ in Appendix I of this notice. To establish industry support, Petitioners provided their shipments of the domestic like product in 2014, and compared their shipments to the estimated total shipments of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.13 Because total industry production data for the domestic like product for 2014 are not reasonably available to Petitioners, and Petitioners have established that shipments are a reasonable proxy for production data,14 we have relied upon the shipment data provided by Petitioners for purposes of measuring industry support.15 Our review of the data provided in the Petition, General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department indicates that Petitioners have established industry support.16 First, the Petition established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total shipments 17 of the 12 For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in this case, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India (‘‘India CVD Initiation Checklist’’), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India (‘‘Attachment II’’). This checklist is 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. 13 See Volume I of the Petition, at 2–3 and Exhibits I–1 and I–2; see also General Issues Supplement, at 3–8 and Exhibits I–9 and I–10. 14 See Volume I of the Petition, at 3 and Exhibit I–1; see also General Issues Supplement, at 3–6 and Exhibits I–8 and I–9. 15 For further discussion, see India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 16 See India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 17 As mentioned above, Petitioners have established that shipments are a reasonable proxy E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM Continued 27OCN1 65702 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 207 / Tuesday, October 27, 2015 / Notices domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).18 Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total shipments of the domestic like product.19 Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for more than 50 percent of the shipments of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petition.20 Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition 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 investigation that they are requesting the Department initiate.21 Injury Test Because India is a ‘‘Subsidies Agreement Country’’ within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from India materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 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. In CVD petitions, section 771(24)(A)-(B) of the Act provides that imports of subject merchandise from developing and least developed for production data. Section 351.203(e)(1) of the Department’s regulations states ‘‘production levels may be established by reference to alternative data that the Secretary determines to be indicative of production levels.’’ 18 See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 19 See India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 20 Id. 21 Id. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Oct 26, 2015 Jkt 238001 countries must exceed the negligibility threshold of four percent. Petitioners demonstrate that subject imports from India, which has been designated as a least developed country,22 exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(B) of the Act.23 Petitioners contend that the industry’s injured condition is illustrated by reduced market share; decline in shipments, production, and capacity utilization; underselling and price suppression or depression; inventory overhang; decreased employment, hours worked, and wages; lost sales and revenues; and negative impact on profitability.24 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.25 Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation 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 welded stainless pipe in India benefit from countervailable subsidies bestowed by the GOI. The Department examined the Petition and finds that it complies with the requirements of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Act, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether manufacturers, producers, or exporters of welded stainless pipe from India receive countervailable subsidies from the GOI. On June 29, 2015, the President of the United States signed into law the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, which made numerous amendments to the AD and CVD law.26 The 2015 law 22 See section 771(36)(B) of the Act. General Issues Supplement, at 9 and Exhibit I–11. 24 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 10–25 and Exhibits I–1, I–5, and I–7; see also General Issues Supplement, at 9 and Exhibit I–11. 25 See India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India. 26 See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Pub. L. 114–27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015). 23 See PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 does not specify dates of application for those amendments. On August 6, 2015, the Department published an interpretative rule, in which it announced the applicability dates for each amendment to the Act, except for amendments contained in section 771(7) of the Act, which relate to determinations of material injury by the ITC.27 The amendments to sections 776 and 782 of the Act are applicable to all determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to this CVD investigation.28 Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 25 of the 50 alleged programs in India. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the India CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this 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 determination no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation. Respondent Selection Petitioners named thirteen companies as producers/exporters of welded stainless pipe in India.29 Following standard practice in CVD investigations, the Department will, where appropriate, select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) data for U.S. imports of welded stainless pipe during the period of investigation. 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 business 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 27 See Dates of Application of Amendments to the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws Made by the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, 80 FR 46793 (August 6, 2015) (Applicability Notice). The 2015 amendments may be found at https:// www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/ 1295/text/pl. 28 Id. at 46794–95. 29 See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibit I–4. E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM 27OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 207 / Tuesday, October 27, 2015 / Notices 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. should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information in this investigation. Distribution of Copies of the Petition In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been provided to the GOI via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petition to each known exporter (as named in the Petition), consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). 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-201309-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in this investigation. ITC Notification We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 702(d) of the Act. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Preliminary Determinations by the ITC The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of welded stainless pipe from India are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.30 A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated; 31 otherwise, this investigation 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 30 See 31 See section 703(a)(2) of the Act. section 703(a)(1) of the Act. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Oct 26, 2015 Jkt 238001 Extension of Time Limits Regulation Certification Requirements Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.32 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.33 The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable revised certification requirements. 32 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. 33 See PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 65703 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 this investigation 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: October 20, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation The merchandise covered by this investigation is circular welded austenitic stainless pressure pipe not greater than 14 inches in outside diameter. References to size are in nominal inches and include all products within tolerances allowed by pipe specifications. This merchandise includes, but is not limited to, the American Society for Testing and Materials (‘‘ASTM’’) A–312 or ASTM A–778 specifications, or comparable domestic or foreign specifications. ASTM A–358 products are only included when they are produced to meet ASTM A–312 or ASTM A–778 specifications, or comparable domestic or foreign specifications. Excluded from the scope of the investigation are: (1) Welded stainless mechanical tubing, meeting ASTM A–554 or comparable domestic or foreign specifications; (2) boiler, heat exchanger, superheater, refining furnace, feedwater heater, and condenser tubing, meeting ASTM A–249, ASTM A–688 or comparable domestic or foreign specifications; and (3) specialized tubing, meeting ASTM A–269, ASTM A–270 or comparable domestic or foreign specifications. The subject imports are normally classified in subheadings 7306.40.5005, 7306.40.5040, 7306.40.5062, 7306.40.5064, and 7306.40.5085 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). They may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 7306.40.1010, 7306.40.1015, 7306.40.5042, 7306.40.5044, 7306.40.5080, and 7306.40.5090. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes only; the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2015–27376 Filed 10–26–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM 27OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 207 (Tuesday, October 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65700-65703]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27376]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-868]


Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe From India: Initiation of 
Countervailing Duty Investigation

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

DATES: Effective date: October 20, 2015

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurel LaCivita at (202) 482-4243, or 
Mandy Mallott at (202) 482-6430, 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 Petition

    On September 30, 2015, the Department of Commerce (``Department'') 
received a countervailing duty (``CVD'') petition concerning imports of 
welded stainless pressure pipe (``welded stainless pipe'') from India, 
filed in proper form on behalf of Bristol Metals, LLC, Felker Brothers 
Corp, Outokumpu Stainless Pipe, Inc., and Marcegaglia USA 
(collectively, ``Petitioners''). The CVD petition was accompanied by an 
antidumping duty (``AD'') petition concerning imports of welded 
stainless pipe from India.\1\ Petitioners are domestic producers of 
welded stainless pipe.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties: Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India,'' 
dated September 30, 2015 (``Petition'').
    \2\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 2, 2015, the Department requested information and 
clarification for certain areas of the Petition.\3\ Petitioners filed 
responses to these requests on October 6, 2015.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See letter from the Department, ``Petitions for the 
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India: Supplemental Questions,'' 
dated October 2, 2015 (``General Issues Questionnaire''); letter 
from the Department, ``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing 
Duties on Imports of Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India: 
Supplemental Questions,'' October 2, 2015 (``CVD Deficiency 
Questionnaire'').
    \4\ See letter from Petitioners, ``Welded Stainless Pressure 
Pipe from India: Response to Supplemental Questions,'' dated October 
6, 2015, covering volume I (``General Issues Supplement'') and III 
(``CVD Supplement'') of the Petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``the Act''), Petitioners allege that the Government of India 
(``GOI'') is providing countervailable subsidies (within the meaning of 
sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act) to imports of welded stainless pipe 
from India, 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, for those alleged 
programs in India on which we have initiated a CVD investigation, the 
Petition is accompanied by information reasonably available to 
Petitioners supporting their allegations.
    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition 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 investigation that Petitioners are 
requesting.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation is January 1, 2014, through December 
31, 2014.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is welded stainless pipe 
from India. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, 
see the ``Scope of the Investigation'' in Appendix I of this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigation

    During our review of the Petition, the Department issued questions 
to, and received responses from, Petitioners pertaining to the proposed 
scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petition would be an 
accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is 
seeking relief.\7\ As discussed in the preamble to the Department's 
regulations,\8\ we are setting aside a period for interested parties to 
raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., scope). The Department 
will consider all comments received from interested parties and, if 
necessary, will consult with the interested parties prior to the 
issuance of the preliminary determination. If scope comments include 
factual information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), all such factual 
information should be limited to public information. In order to 
facilitate preparation of its questionnaire, the

[[Page 65701]]

Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments by 
5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (``ET'') on Tuesday, November 10, 2015, which is 
the first business day after 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 Friday, November 20, 
2015, which is 10 calendar days after the initial comments deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See General Issues Questionnaire and General Issues 
Supplement. See also Petitioners' submission, ``Welded Stainless 
Pressure Pipe from India: Revised Scope Definition,'' dated October 
15, 2015.
    \8\ 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 investigation be submitted during 
this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that 
additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the 
investigation 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 record of the concurrent AD 
investigation.

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'').\9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements); 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing 
Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 
(July 6, 2011), for details of the Department's electronic filing 
requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. Information 
on help using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook% 20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, the Department 
notified representatives of the GOI of the receipt of the Petition. 
Also, in accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, the 
Department provided representatives of the GOI the opportunity for 
consultations with respect to the CVD petition. As the GOI did not 
request consultations prior to the initiation of this investigation, 
the Department and the GOI did not hold consultations.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department 
shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to 
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by 
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a 
statistically valid sampling method to poll the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The 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,\10\ 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.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \11\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
Petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioners do not offer 
a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of 
the investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted 
on the record, we have determined that welded stainless pipe 
constitutes a single domestic like product and we have analyzed 
industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India (``India CVD 
Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry 
Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India (``Attachment 
II''). This checklist is 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 Petition with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in Appendix I of this 
notice. To establish industry support, Petitioners provided their 
shipments of the domestic like product in 2014, and compared their 
shipments to the estimated total shipments of the domestic like product 
for the entire domestic industry.\13\ Because total industry production 
data for the domestic like product for 2014 are not reasonably 
available to Petitioners, and Petitioners have established that 
shipments are a reasonable proxy for production data,\14\ we have 
relied upon the shipment data provided by Petitioners for purposes of 
measuring industry support.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 2-3 and Exhibits I-1 and 
I-2; see also General Issues Supplement, at 3-8 and Exhibits I-9 and 
I-10.
    \14\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 3 and Exhibit I-1; see 
also General Issues Supplement, at 3-6 and Exhibits I-8 and I-9.
    \15\ For further discussion, see India CVD Initiation Checklist, 
at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petition, General Issues 
Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department 
indicates that Petitioners have established industry support.\16\ 
First, the Petition established support from domestic producers (or 
workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total shipments 
\17\ of the

[[Page 65702]]

domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required to 
take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., 
polling).\18\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the 
statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) 
of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the 
Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total shipments of the 
domestic like product.\19\ Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) 
have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 
702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) 
who support the Petition account for more than 50 percent of the 
shipments of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the 
industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petition.\20\ 
Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petition was filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) 
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \17\ As mentioned above, Petitioners have established that 
shipments are a reasonable proxy for production data. Section 
351.203(e)(1) of the Department's regulations states ``production 
levels may be established by reference to alternative data that the 
Secretary determines to be indicative of production levels.''
    \18\ See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also India CVD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \19\ See India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition 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 investigation that they are 
requesting the Department initiate.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Injury Test

    Because India is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the 
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act 
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine 
whether imports of the subject merchandise from India 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. In CVD petitions, section 
771(24)(A)-(B) of the Act provides that imports of subject merchandise 
from developing and least developed countries must exceed the 
negligibility threshold of four percent. Petitioners demonstrate that 
subject imports from India, which has been designated as a least 
developed country,\22\ exceed the negligibility threshold provided for 
under section 771(24)(B) of the Act.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See section 771(36)(B) of the Act.
    \23\ See General Issues Supplement, at 9 and Exhibit I-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; decline in shipments, production, 
and capacity utilization; underselling and price suppression or 
depression; inventory overhang; decreased employment, hours worked, and 
wages; lost sales and revenues; and negative impact on 
profitability.\24\ 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.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 10-25 and Exhibits I-1, 
I-5, and I-7; see also General Issues Supplement, at 9 and Exhibit 
I-11.
    \25\ See India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe from India.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation

    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 welded stainless 
pipe in India benefit from countervailable subsidies bestowed by the 
GOI. The Department examined the Petition and finds that it complies 
with the requirements of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. Therefore, in 
accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Act, we are initiating a CVD 
investigation to determine whether manufacturers, producers, or 
exporters of welded stainless pipe from India receive countervailable 
subsidies from the GOI.
    On June 29, 2015, the President of the United States signed into 
law the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, which made numerous 
amendments to the AD and CVD law.\26\ The 2015 law does not specify 
dates of application for those amendments. On August 6, 2015, the 
Department published an interpretative rule, in which it announced the 
applicability dates for each amendment to the Act, except for 
amendments contained in section 771(7) of the Act, which relate to 
determinations of material injury by the ITC.\27\ The amendments to 
sections 776 and 782 of the Act are applicable to all determinations 
made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to this CVD 
investigation.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Pub. L. 114-
27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
    \27\ See Dates of Application of Amendments to the Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Laws Made by the Trade Preferences Extension 
Act of 2015, 80 FR 46793 (August 6, 2015) (Applicability Notice). 
The 2015 amendments may be found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
    \28\ Id. at 46794-95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 25 of the 50 
alleged programs in India. For a full discussion of the basis for our 
decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the India CVD 
Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for 
this 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 
determination no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation.

Respondent Selection

    Petitioners named thirteen companies as producers/exporters of 
welded stainless pipe in India.\29\ Following standard practice in CVD 
investigations, the Department will, where appropriate, select 
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') data 
for U.S. imports of welded stainless pipe during the period of 
investigation. 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 business days of publication of this 
Federal Register notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibit I-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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

[[Page 65703]]

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 Petition

    In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been 
provided to the GOI via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will 
attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petition to each 
known exporter (as named in the Petition), 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 Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of welded stainless pipe from India are 
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. 
industry.\30\ A negative ITC determination will result in the 
investigation being terminated; \31\ otherwise, this investigation will 
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
    \31\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 this investigation.

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 this investigation.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\32\ 
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.\33\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable revised 
certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \33\ 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 this investigation 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: October 20, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is circular welded 
austenitic stainless pressure pipe not greater than 14 inches in 
outside diameter. References to size are in nominal inches and 
include all products within tolerances allowed by pipe 
specifications. This merchandise includes, but is not limited to, 
the American Society for Testing and Materials (``ASTM'') A-312 or 
ASTM A-778 specifications, or comparable domestic or foreign 
specifications. ASTM A-358 products are only included when they are 
produced to meet ASTM A-312 or ASTM A-778 specifications, or 
comparable domestic or foreign specifications.
    Excluded from the scope of the investigation are: (1) Welded 
stainless mechanical tubing, meeting ASTM A-554 or comparable 
domestic or foreign specifications; (2) boiler, heat exchanger, 
superheater, refining furnace, feedwater heater, and condenser 
tubing, meeting ASTM A-249, ASTM A-688 or comparable domestic or 
foreign specifications; and (3) specialized tubing, meeting ASTM A-
269, ASTM A-270 or comparable domestic or foreign specifications.
    The subject imports are normally classified in subheadings 
7306.40.5005, 7306.40.5040, 7306.40.5062, 7306.40.5064, and 
7306.40.5085 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(``HTSUS''). They may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 
7306.40.1010, 7306.40.1015, 7306.40.5042, 7306.40.5044, 
7306.40.5080, and 7306.40.5090. The HTSUS subheadings are provided 
for convenience and customs purposes only; the written description 
of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2015-27376 Filed 10-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P