Titanium Sponge From Japan and Kazakhstan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 43939-43944 [2017-20028]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2017 / Notices
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. Interested
parties should review the regulations
prior to submitting factual information
in this investigation.
Extensions of Time Limits
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.
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. ET
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 a
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 untimelyfiled requests for the extension of time
limits. Parties should 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 this
investigation.
sradovich on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with NOTICES
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual
information in an AD or CVD
proceeding must certify to the accuracy
and completeness of that information.36
Parties must use the certification
formats provided in 19 CFR
351.303(g).37 The Department intends to
reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with
applicable revised certification
requirements.
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit
applications for disclosure under APO
36 See
section 782(b) of the Act.
also Certification of Factual Information to
Import Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July
17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked
questions regarding the Final Rule are available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_
info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
37 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Sep 19, 2017
Jkt 241001
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: September 13, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations,
performing the non-exclusive functions and
duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this investigation
is all forms and grades of titanium sponge,
except as specified below. Titanium sponge
is unwrought titanium metal that has not
been melted. Expressly excluded from the
scope of this investigation are:
(1) Loose particles of unwrought titanium
metal having a particle size of less than 20
mesh (0.84 mm);
(2) alloyed or unalloyed briquettes of
unwrought titanium metal that contain more
than 0.2% oxygen on a dry weight basis; and
(3) ultra-high purity titanium sponge. In
ultra-high purity titanium sponge, metallic
impurities do not exceed any of these
amounts:
WT %
Aluminum 0.0005
Chromium 0.0001
Cobalt 0.0001
Copper 0.0002
Iron 0.0300
Manganese 0.0010
Nickel 0.0002
Vanadium 0.0002
Zirconium 0.0005
Carbon 0.0150
Hydrogen 0.0100
Nitrogen 0.0020
Oxygen 0.1000
Titanium sponge is currently classified
under subheading 8108.20.0010 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS). The HTSUS subheading is
provided for convenience and customs
purposes; the written description of the
scope of this investigation is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2017–20029 Filed 9–19–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
PO 00000
43939
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–588–877, A–834–809]
Titanium Sponge From Japan and
Kazakhstan: Initiation of Less-ThanFair-Value Investigations
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable September 13, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Aleksandras Nakutis at (202) 482–3147
(Japan) and Jonathan Hill at (202) 482–
3518 (Kazakhstan), AD/CVD Operations,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
The Petitions
On August 24, 2017, the U.S.
Department of Commerce (the
Department) received antidumping duty
(AD) Petitions concerning imports of
titanium sponge from Japan and
Kazakhstan, filed in proper form on
behalf of Titanium Metals Corporation
(the petitioner).1 The AD Petitions were
accompanied by a countervailing duty
(CVD) petition concerning imports of
titanium sponge from Kazakhstan. The
petitioner is a domestic producer of
titanium sponge.2 On August 29, 2017,
September 5, 2017, and September 8,
2017, the Department requested
supplemental information pertaining to
certain areas of the Petitions.3 The
petitioner filed responses to these
requests on August 31, 2017, September
7, 2017, and September 11, 2017,
respectively.4 The petitioner filed
1 See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce re:
‘‘Titanium Sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan:
Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties’’ (August 24, 2017) (the
Petitions).
2 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 1–2.
3 See Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petitions for
the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duties on Imports of Titanium Sponge from Japan
and Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated
August 29, 2017 (General Issues Supplemental
Questionnaire); see also Petition for the Imposition
of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Titanium
Sponge from Japan: Supplemental Questionnaire;
and Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping
Duties on Imports of Titanium Sponge from
Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questionnaire. All of
these documents are dated August 29, 2017. See
also Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duties on Imports of Titanium Sponge from Japan
and Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated
September 8, 2017 (Second General Issues
Supplemental Questionnaire).
4 See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Continued
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\20SEN1.SGM
20SEN1
43940
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2017 / Notices
revised scope language on September
11, 2017.5
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), the petitioner alleges that imports
of titanium sponge from Japan and
Kazakhstan are being, or are likely to be,
sold in the United States at less than fair
value within the meaning of section 731
of the Act, and that such imports are
materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, the domestic industry
producing titanium sponge in the
United States. Also, consistent with
section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the
Petitions are accompanied by
information reasonably available to the
petitioner supporting its allegations.
The Department finds that the
petitioner filed these Petitions on behalf
of the domestic industry because the
petitioner is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act.
The Department also finds that the
petitioner demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the
initiation of the AD investigations that
the petitioner is requesting.6
Period of Investigation
Because the Petitions were filed on
August 24, 2017, the period of
investigation (POI) for these
investigations is July 1, 2016, through
June 30, 2017.
Scope of the Investigations
sradovich on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with NOTICES
The product covered by these
investigations is titanium sponge from
Japan and Kazakhstan. For a full
description of the scope of these
investigations, see the ‘‘Scope of the
Investigations,’’ in the Appendix to this
notice.
Duties on Titanium Sponge from Japan and
Kazakhstan: TIMET Response to Supplemental
General Questions;’’ (August 31, 2017) (General
Issues Supplement); see also ‘‘Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Titanium
Sponge from Japan: TIMET Response to
Supplemental Questionnaire;’’ (Japan AD
Supplement) and ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties on Titanium Sponge from
Kazakhstan: TIMET Response to Supplemental
Questionnaire.’’ (Kazakhstan AD Supplement). Each
of these documents is dated August 31, 2017; see
also Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duties on Titanium Sponge from Japan and
Kazakhstan: TIMET Response to September 6,
2017,’’ dated September 7, 2017 (Second
Supplement); see also Letter from the petitioner,
‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties on Titanium Sponge from
Japan and Kazakhstan: TIMET Rsponse to
September 8, 2017 Supplemental Questions, dated
Septeber (Second General Issues Supplement).
5 See Second General Issues Supplement.
6 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions’’ section, below.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Sep 19, 2017
Jkt 241001
Comments on Scope of the
Investigations
During our review of the Petitions, the
Department issued questions to, and
received responses from, the petitioner
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.7
As discussed in the preamble to the
Department’s regulations, we are setting
aside a period for interested parties to
raise issues regarding product coverage
(scope).8 The Department will consider
all comments received from interested
parties and, if necessary, will consult
with interested parties prior to the
issuance of the preliminary
determinations. If scope comments
include factual information,9 all such
factual information should be limited to
public information. To facilitate
preparation of its questionnaires, the
Department requests all interested
parties to submit such comments by
5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on
Tuesday, October 3, 2017, 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 Friday,
October 13, 2017, which is 10 calendar
days from the initial comments
deadline.10
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 each of the concurrent AD
and CVD titanium sponge
investigations.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department
must be filed electronically using
Enforcement and Compliance’s
Antidumping Duty and Countervailing
Duty Centralized Electronic Service
System (ACCESS).11 An electronically
7 See Second General Issues Questionnaire; see
also Second General Issues Supplement, at
Attachment D.
8 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties,
Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
9 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual
information’’).
10 See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
11 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures;
Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
filed document must be received
successfully in its entirety by the time
and date it is due. Documents exempted
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, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230, and
stamped with the date and time of
receipt by the applicable deadlines.
Comments on Product Characteristics
for AD Questionnaires
The Department will provide
interested parties an opportunity to
comment on the appropriate physical
characteristics of titanium sponge to be
reported in response to the
Department’s AD questionnaires. This
information will be used to identify the
key physical characteristics of the
merchandise under consideration in
order to report the relevant costs of
production accurately as well as to
develop appropriate productcomparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide any
information or comments that they
believe are relevant to the development
of an accurate list of physical
characteristics. Specifically, they may
provide comments as to which
characteristics are appropriate to use as:
(1) General product characteristics and
(2) product-comparison criteria. We
note that it is not always appropriate to
use all product characteristics as
product-comparison criteria. We base
product-comparison criteria on
meaningful commercial differences
among products. In other words,
although there may be some physical
product characteristics utilized by
manufacturers to describe titanium
sponge, it may be that only a select few
product characteristics are
commercially meaningful physical
characteristics. In addition, interested
parties may comment on the order in
which the physical characteristics
should be used in matching products.
Generally, the Department attempts to
list the most important physical
characteristics first and the least
important characteristics last.
In order to consider the suggestions of
interested parties in developing and
issuing the AD questionnaires, all
39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System
Name, 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014) 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.
E:\FR\FM\20SEN1.SGM
20SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2017 / Notices
product characteristics comments must
be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on October 3,
2017. Any rebuttal comments must be
filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on October 13,
2017. All comments and submissions to
the Department must be filed
electronically using ACCESS, as
explained above, on the records of the
Japan and Kazakhstan less-than-fairvalue investigations.
sradovich on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with NOTICES
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires
that a petition be filed on behalf of the
domestic industry. Section 732(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 732(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,12 they do so
for different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In
addition, the Department’s
determination is subject to limitations of
time and information. Although this
may result in different definitions of the
like product, such differences do not
12 See
section 771(10) of the Act.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Sep 19, 2017
Jkt 241001
render the decision of either agency
contrary to law.13
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the
domestic like product as ‘‘a product
which is like, or in the absence of like,
most similar in characteristics and uses
with, the article subject to an
investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the
reference point from which the
domestic like product analysis begins is
‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’
(i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to
be investigated, which normally will be
the scope as defined in a petition).
With regard to the domestic like
product, the petitioner does 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
titanium sponge, as defined in the
scope, constitutes a single domestic like
product, and we have analyzed industry
support in terms of that domestic like
product.14
In determining whether the petitioner
has standing under section 732(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 the Appendix to this
notice. The petitioner provided its own
2016 production of the domestic like
product, and compared this to the
estimated total production of the
domestic like product for the entire
domestic industry.15 We relied on data
the petitioner provided for purposes of
measuring industry support.16
Our review of the data provided in the
Petitions and other information readily
available to the Department indicates
13 See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp.
2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd.
v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988),
aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
14 For a discussion of the domestic like product
analysis as applied to these cases and information
regarding industry support, see Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Titanium Sponge
from Japan (Japan AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II, ‘‘Analysis of Industry Support for
the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Titanium Sponge from Japan and
Kazakhstan;’’ see also Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Titanium Sponge
from Kazakhstan (Kazakhstan AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II, ‘‘Analysis of Industry
Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Petitions Covering Titanium Sponge from
Japan and Kazakhstan.’’ 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.
15 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 6–7 and
Exhibit GEN–20.
16 Id. For further discussion, see Japan AD
Initiation Checklist and Kazakhstan AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43941
that the petitioner has established
industry support for the Petitions.17
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).18 Second, the domestic
producers (or workers) have met the
statutory criteria for industry support
under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act
because the domestic producers (or
workers) who support the Petitions
account for at least 25 percent of the
total production of the domestic like
product.19 Finally, the domestic
producers (or workers) have met the
statutory criteria for industry support
under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act
because the domestic producers (or
workers) who support the Petitions
account for more than 50 percent of the
production of the domestic like product
produced by that portion of the industry
expressing support for, or opposition to,
the Petitions.20 Accordingly, the
Department determines that the
Petitions were filed on behalf of the
domestic industry within the meaning
of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
The Department finds that the
petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of
the domestic industry because it is an
interested party as defined in section
771(9)(C) of the Act, and that the
petitioner has demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the AD
investigations that it is requesting the
Department to initiate.21
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that the U.S.
industry producing the domestic like
product is being materially injured, or is
threatened with material injury, by
reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at less than normal
value (NV). In addition, the petitioner
alleges that subject imports exceed the
negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.22
The petitioner contends that the
industry’s injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share;
17 See Japan AD Initiation Checklist and
Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment
II.
18 See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also
Japan AD Initiation Checklist and Kazakhstan AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
19 See Japan AD Initiation Checklist and
Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment
II.
20 Id.
21 Id.
22 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 24–25 and
Exhibits GEN–5 and GEN–6.
E:\FR\FM\20SEN1.SGM
20SEN1
43942
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2017 / Notices
displacement of U.S. production by
subject imports; underselling and price
suppression or depression; decline in
production, capacity utilization, hours
worked, and earnings before interest
and taxes, lost sales and revenues; and
decline in pricing for downstream
titanium products.23 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.24
Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value
The following is a description of the
allegations of sales at less than fair value
upon which the Department based its
decision to initiate AD investigations of
imports of titanium sponge from Japan
and Kazakhstan. The sources of data for
the deductions and adjustments relating
to U.S. price and NV are discussed in
greater detail in the country-specific
initiation checklists.
Export Price
For Japan, the petitioner based U.S.
export prices (EPs) on price quotes for
sales of titanium sponge produced in,
and exported from, Japan and offered for
sale in the United States, and on average
unit values (AUVs) obtained from
official import statistics.25 For
Kazakhstan, the petitioner based U.S. EP
on an AUV obtained from official
import statistics.26 Where applicable,
the petitioner made deductions from
U.S. price for movement expenses.27
sradovich on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with NOTICES
Normal Value
The petitioner was unable to obtain
any prices of sales (or offers for sale) of
titanium sponge in Kazakhstan.28
Additionally, although the petitioner
was able to obtain a range of titanium
sponge prices in Japan during the 2017
23 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 1–3, 14–15,
18–47 and Exhibits GEN–1, GEN–2, GEN–5, GEN–
6, GEN–10, GEN–12—GEN–15, GEN–19—GEN–26,
GEN–30, GEN–31, and GEN–33.
24 See Japan AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and
Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Titanium Sponge from Japan and
Kazakhstan (Attachment III); and Kazakhstan AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III.
25 See Japan AD Initiation Checklist.
26 See Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist.
27 See Japan AD Initiation Checklist; and
Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist.
28 The petitioner cited a newspaper article which
quotes the President of Ust-Kamenogorsk Titanium
Magnesium Plant JSC (UKTMP) (the sole producer
of titanium sponge in Kazakhstan according to the
petitioner) as saying ‘‘100% of UKTMP products are
exported. . .’’ See Kazakhstan AD Supplement, at
2–3 and Exhibit B.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Sep 19, 2017
Jkt 241001
fiscal year from the publication Nihon
Keizai Shimbun, the petitioner provided
evidence indicating that these prices
may be based on affiliated-party sales
and thus may not be arm’s length
prices.29 As a result, the petitioner
contends that these home market prices
are not usable for determining normal
value.30 Furthermore, for both Japan
and Kazakhstan, the petitioner stated
that it was unable to find usable thirdcountry titanium sponge prices.31
Therefore, for both Japan and
Kazakhstan, the petitioner based NV on
constructed value (CV). For further
discussion of the cost of production
(COP) and NV based on CV, see the
section ‘‘Normal Value Based on
Constructed Value’’ below.32
Normal Value Based on Constructed
Value
Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act,
CV consists of the cost of manufacturing
(COM), selling, general, and
administrative (SG&A) expenses,
financial expenses, and profit. The
petitioner determined the COM of
titanium sponge by adding together the
costs of raw materials, labor,
maintenance, electricity, other supplies,
and factory overhead, as applicable,
incurred by the petitioner, adjusted,
where possible, for known differences
from costs in Japan and Kazakhstan
during a contemporaneous period to the
POI. Specifically, the petitioner adjusted
for known differences in costs by using
publicly available labor and energy rates
for Japan and Kazakhstan. The
petitioner based prices for raw
materials, maintenance, other supplies
and factory overhead on the petitioner’s
own costs as such costs in Japan and
Kazakhstan were not reasonably
available to the petitioner. The
petitioner calculated SG&A expenses,
financial expense, and profit based on
the experience of Japanese and Kazakh
producers of identical merchandise.33
29 See Volume II-a of the Petitions, at 6–8; see also
Japan AD Supplement at 3–4.; see also Japan
Second Supplement, at 1.
30 See Japan Second Supplement, at 1.
31 See Japan Second Supplement, at 1–2.
32 In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade
Preferences Extension Act of 2015, amending
section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for all of the
investigations, the Department will request
information necessary to calculate the CV and COP
to determine whether there are reasonable grounds
to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like
product have been made at prices that represent
less than the COP of the product. The Department
no longer requires a COP allegation to conduct this
analysis.
33 See Japan AD Initiation Checklist and
Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the
petitioner, there is reason to believe that
imports of titanium sponge from Japan
and Kazakhstan are being, or are likely
to be, sold in the United States at less
than fair value. Based on comparisons of
EP to NV in accordance with sections
772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated
dumping margins for titanium sponge
from Japan and Kazakhstan are as
follows: Japan—69.69% to 95.20%
percent; 34 and Kazakhstan—42.22%.35
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value
Investigations
Based upon our examination of the
AD Petitions, we find that the Petitions
meet the requirements of section 732 of
the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD
investigations to determine whether
imports of titanium sponge from Japan
and Kazakhstan are being, or are likely
to be, sold in the United States at less
than fair value. In accordance with
section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed,
we will make our preliminary
determinations in these investigations
no later than 140 days after the date of
this initiation. For a full discussion of
the basis for our decision to initiate or
not initiate on each program, see the
Japan AD Initiation Checklist and
Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist.
Public versions of the initiation
checklists for these investigations are
available on ACCESS.
Under the Trade Preferences
Extension Act of 2015, numerous
amendments to the AD and CVD law
were made.36 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.37 The
amendments to sections 771(15), 773,
776, and 782 of the Act are applicable
to all determinations made on or after
34 See Japan AD Initiation Checklist. The
petitioner also calculated margins based on a
comparison between EP and the home market
prices. However, because the petitioner contends
that the home market prices are not usable for
purposes of determining normal value, we have
relied on the estimated dumping margins based on
the comparison between EP and CV for purposes of
the initiation.
35 See Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist.
36 See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015,
Public Law 114–27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
37 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).
E:\FR\FM\20SEN1.SGM
20SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2017 / Notices
August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to
these AD investigations.38
Respondent Selection
Although the Department normally
relies on the number of producers/
exporters identified in the petition and/
or import data from U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) to determine
whether to select a limited number of
producers/exporters for individual
examination in AD investigations, the
petitioner identified only two
companies as producers/exporters of
titanium sponge from Japan: Osaka
Titanium Technologies Co., Ltd. and
Toho Titanium Company., Ltd.; and one
company as a producer/exporter of
titanium sponge form Kazakhstan:
UKTMP. We currently know of no
additional producers/exporters of the
merchandise under consideration from
Japan or Kazakhstan and the petitioner
provided information from an
independent source as support for its
claim that there are only two producers/
exporters or titanium sponge in Japan
and only one producer/exporter or
titanium sponge in Kazakhstan.39
Accordingly, the Department intends to
examine the producers/exporters
identified in the Petitions for these
investigations. Parties wishing to
comment on respondent selection must
do so within five days of the publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.
Any such comments must be submitted
no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the due
date, and must be filed electronically
via ACCESS.
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section
732(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version
of the Petitions have been provided to
the governments of Japan and
Kazakhstan via ACCESS. To the extent
practicable, we will attempt to provide
a copy of the public version of the
Petitions to each exporter named in the
Petitions, as provided under 19 CFR
351.203(c)(2).
sradovich on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with NOTICES
ITC Notification
We will notify the ITC of our
initiation, as required by section 732(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
38 Id. at 46794–95. The 2015 amendments may be
found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114thcongress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
39 See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit GEN–
14.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Sep 19, 2017
Jkt 241001
of titanium sponge from Japan and/or
Kazakhstan are materially injuring, or
threatening material injury to, a U.S.
industry. A negative ITC determination
for any country will result in the
investigation being terminated with
respect to that country. 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). 19 CFR 351.301(b)
requires any party, when submitting
factual information, to specify under
which subsection of 19 CFR
351.102(b)(21) the information is being
submitted 40 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.41 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. Interested
parties should review the regulations
prior to submitting factual information
in these investigations.
Extensions of Time Limits
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.
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. ET
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 a
letter or memorandum setting forth the
deadline (including a specified time) by
which extension requests must be filed
40 See
41 See
PO 00000
19 CFR 351.301(b).
19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43943
to be considered timely. An extension
request must be made in a separate,
stand-alone submission; under limited
circumstances we will grant untimelyfiled requests for the extension of time
limits. Parties should 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.42
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.43 The
Department intends to reject factual
submissions if the submitting party does
not comply with 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 732(c)(2) and 777(i)
of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
42 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.
43 See
E:\FR\FM\20SEN1.SGM
20SEN1
43944
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2017 / Notices
Dated: September 13, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations,
performing the non-exclusive functions and
duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these
investigations is all forms and grades of
titanium sponge, except as specified below.
Titanium sponge is unwrought titanium
metal that has not been melted. Expressly
excluded from the scope of these
investigations are:
(1) Loose particles of unwrought titanium
metal having a particle size of less than 20
mesh (0.84 mm);
(2) alloyed or unalloyed briquettes of
unwrought titanium metal that contain more
than 0.2% oxygen on a dry weight basis; and
(3) ultra-high purity titanium sponge. In
ultra-high purity titanium sponge, metallic
impurities do not exceed any of these
amounts:
WT %
Aluminum 0.0005
Chromium 0.0001
Cobalt 0.0001
Copper 0.0002
Iron 0.0300
Manganese 0.0010
Nickel 0.0002
Vanadium 0.0002
Zirconium 0.0005
Carbon 0.0150
Hydrogen 0.0100
Nitrogen 0.0020
Oxygen 0.1000
Titanium sponge is currently classified
under subheading 8108.20.0010 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS). The HTSUS subheading is
provided for convenience and customs
purposes; the written description of the
scope of these investigations is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2017–20028 Filed 9–19–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XF658
Fisheries of the South Atlantic; South
Atlantic Fishery Management Council;
Public Meetings
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Announcement of rescheduled
meetings of the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council’s Citizen Science
Advisory Panel Projects/Topics
Management; Volunteers;
sradovich on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Sep 19, 2017
Jkt 241001
Communication/Outreach/Education
Action Teams.
The South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (Council) will
hold meetings of its Citizen Science
Advisory Panel Projects/Topics
Management; Volunteers;
Communication/Outreach/Education
Action Teams via webinar. The
meetings via webinar were originally
scheduled for Tuesday, September 19,
2017 at 1 p.m. (Projects/Topics
Management); Thursday, September 21,
2017 at 1 p.m. (Volunteers); Friday,
September 22, 2017 at 10 a.m.
(Communication/Outreach/Education)
but have been rescheduled as a result of
wide-spread impacts due to Hurricane
Irma [See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION].
DATES: The Volunteers Team meeting
has been rescheduled for Monday,
October 2, 2017 at 1 p.m.; Projects/
Topics Management Team on Tuesday,
October 3, 2017 at 2 p.m.; and
Communication/Outreach/Education
Team on Wednesday, October 4 at 1
p.m. Each meeting is scheduled to last
approximately 90 minutes. Additional
Action Team webinar and plenary
webinar dates and times will publish in
a subsequent issue in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held
via webinar and are open to members of
the public. Webinar registration is
required and registration links will be
posted to the Citizen Science program
page of the Council’s Web site at
www.safmc.net.
Council address: South Atlantic
Fishery Management Council, 4055
Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N.
Charleston, SC 29405.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amber Von Harten, Citizen Science
Program Manager, SAFMC; phone: (843)
302–8433 or toll free (866) SAFMC–10;
fax: (843) 769–4520; email:
amber.vonharten@safmc.net.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Due to the
impacts of Hurricane Irma and ongoing
recovery efforts in the South Atlantic
region, the meetings of the Council’s
Citizen Science Advisory Panel
Projects/Topics Management;
Volunteers; Communication/Outreach/
Education Action Team originally
scheduled for Tuesday, September 19,
2017 at 1 p.m. (Projects/Topics
Management); Thursday, September 21,
2017 at 1 p.m. (Volunteers); Friday,
September 22, 2017 at 10 a.m.
(Communication/Outreach/Education)
have been rescheduled. The originally
scheduled meetings were published in
the Federal Register on September 1,
2017 (82 FR 41613).
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The Volunteers Team meeting has
been rescheduled for Monday, October
2, 2017 at 1 p.m.; Projects/Topics
Management Team on Tuesday, October
3, 2017 at 2 p.m.; and Communication/
Outreach/Education Team on
Wednesday, October 4 at 1 p.m.
The South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (Council) created
a Citizen Science Advisory Panel Pool
in June 2017. The Council appointed
members of the Citizen Science
Advisory Panel Pool to five Action
Teams in the areas of Volunteers, Data
Management, Projects/Topics
Management, Finance, and
Communication/Outreach/Education to
develop program policies and
operations for the Council’s Citizen
Science Program.
The Communication/Outreach/
Education; Projects/Topics
Management; Volunteers Action Teams
will meet to continue work on
developing recommendations on
program policies and operations to be
reviewed by the Council’s Citizen
Science Committee. Public comment
will be accepted at the beginning of the
meeting.
Items to be addressed during these
meetings:
1. Discuss work on tasks in the Terms
of Reference
2. Other Business
Special Accommodations
These meetings are physically
accessible to people with disabilities.
Requests for auxiliary aids should be
directed to the council office (see
ADDRESSES) 3 days prior to the meeting.
Note: The times and sequence specified in
this agenda are subject to change.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: September 15, 2017.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–20039 Filed 9–19–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XF696
Marine Mammals; File Nos. 21217 and
21397
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; receipt of applications.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\20SEN1.SGM
20SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 20, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43939-43944]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20028]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-588-877, A-834-809]
Titanium Sponge From Japan and Kazakhstan: Initiation of Less-
Than-Fair-Value Investigations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable September 13, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aleksandras Nakutis at (202) 482-3147
(Japan) and Jonathan Hill at (202) 482-3518 (Kazakhstan), AD/CVD
Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On August 24, 2017, the U.S. Department of Commerce (the
Department) received antidumping duty (AD) Petitions concerning imports
of titanium sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan, filed in proper form on
behalf of Titanium Metals Corporation (the petitioner).\1\ The AD
Petitions were accompanied by a countervailing duty (CVD) petition
concerning imports of titanium sponge from Kazakhstan. The petitioner
is a domestic producer of titanium sponge.\2\ On August 29, 2017,
September 5, 2017, and September 8, 2017, the Department requested
supplemental information pertaining to certain areas of the
Petitions.\3\ The petitioner filed responses to these requests on
August 31, 2017, September 7, 2017, and September 11, 2017,
respectively.\4\ The petitioner filed
[[Page 43940]]
revised scope language on September 11, 2017.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce re: ``Titanium
Sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan: Petition for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties'' (August 24, 2017) (the
Petitions).
\2\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 1-2.
\3\ See Letter from the Department, ``Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of
Titanium Sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questions,''
dated August 29, 2017 (General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire);
see also Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on
Imports of Titanium Sponge from Japan: Supplemental Questionnaire;
and Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Titanium Sponge from Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questionnaire. All of
these documents are dated August 29, 2017. See also Letter from the
Department, ``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Titanium Sponge from Japan and
Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questions,'' dated September 8, 2017
(Second General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire).
\4\ See Letter from the petitioner, ``Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Titanium
Sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan: TIMET Response to Supplemental
General Questions;'' (August 31, 2017) (General Issues Supplement);
see also ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on
Titanium Sponge from Japan: TIMET Response to Supplemental
Questionnaire;'' (Japan AD Supplement) and ``Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Titanium Sponge from Kazakhstan:
TIMET Response to Supplemental Questionnaire.'' (Kazakhstan AD
Supplement). Each of these documents is dated August 31, 2017; see
also Letter from the petitioner, ``Petition for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Titanium Sponge from Japan
and Kazakhstan: TIMET Response to September 6, 2017,'' dated
September 7, 2017 (Second Supplement); see also Letter from the
petitioner, ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties on Titanium Sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan:
TIMET Rsponse to September 8, 2017 Supplemental Questions, dated
Septeber (Second General Issues Supplement).
\5\ See Second General Issues Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of titanium
sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan are being, or are likely to be, sold
in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of
section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring,
or threatening material injury to, the domestic industry producing
titanium sponge in the United States. Also, consistent with section
732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by information
reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its allegations.
The Department finds that the petitioner filed these Petitions on
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested
party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also
finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with
respect to the initiation of the AD investigations that the petitioner
is requesting.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the
Petitions'' section, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
Because the Petitions were filed on August 24, 2017, the period of
investigation (POI) for these investigations is July 1, 2016, through
June 30, 2017.
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these investigations is titanium sponge from
Japan and Kazakhstan. For a full description of the scope of these
investigations, see the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the
Appendix to this notice.
Comments on Scope of the Investigations
During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions
to, and received responses from, the petitioner 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.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Second General Issues Questionnaire; see also Second
General Issues Supplement, at Attachment D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations, we
are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues
regarding product coverage (scope).\8\ The Department will consider all
comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will
consult with interested parties prior to the issuance of the
preliminary determinations. If scope comments include factual
information,\9\ all such factual information should be limited to
public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires,
the Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments
by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Tuesday, October 3, 2017, 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 Friday, October 13, 2017, which is 10 calendar days from the
initial comments deadline.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
\9\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual
information'').
\10\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 each of the concurrent AD and
CVD titanium sponge investigations.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing
Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\11\ An
electronically filed document must be received successfully in its
entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents exempted 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, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by
the applicable deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046
(November 20, 2014) 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires
The Department will provide interested parties an opportunity to
comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of titanium sponge
to be reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaires. This
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics
of the merchandise under consideration in order to report the relevant
costs of production accurately as well as to develop appropriate
product-comparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide any information or comments that
they believe are relevant to the development of an accurate list of
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product
characteristics and (2) product-comparison criteria. We note that it is
not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-
comparison criteria. We base product-comparison criteria on meaningful
commercial differences among products. In other words, although there
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers
to describe titanium sponge, it may be that only a select few product
characteristics are commercially meaningful physical characteristics.
In addition, interested parties may comment on the order in which the
physical characteristics should be used in matching products.
Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important physical
characteristics first and the least important characteristics last.
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all
[[Page 43941]]
product characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on
October 3, 2017. Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on
October 13, 2017. All comments and submissions to the Department must
be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the
records of the Japan and Kazakhstan less-than-fair-value
investigations.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(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 732(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,\12\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department's
determination is subject to limitations of time and information.
Although this may result in different definitions of the like product,
such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary
to law.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\13\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F.
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in a
petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does 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 titanium sponge, as
defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and
we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like
product.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support,
see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Titanium
Sponge from Japan (Japan AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II,
``Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Titanium Sponge from Japan
and Kazakhstan;'' see also Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Titanium Sponge from Kazakhstan (Kazakhstan AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II, ``Analysis of Industry Support for the
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Titanium
Sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan.'' 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 the petitioner has standing under section
732(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 the Appendix to
this notice. The petitioner provided its own 2016 production of the
domestic like product, and compared this to the estimated total
production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic
industry.\15\ We relied on data the petitioner provided for purposes of
measuring industry support.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 6-7 and Exhibit GEN-20.
\16\ Id. For further discussion, see Japan AD Initiation
Checklist and Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our review of the data provided in the Petitions and other
information readily available to the Department indicates that the
petitioner has established industry support for the Petitions.\17\
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).\18\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the
statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i)
of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the
Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of
the domestic like product.\19\ Finally, the domestic producers (or
workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under
section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or
workers) who support the Petitions account for more than 50 percent of
the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of
the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the
Petitions.\20\ Accordingly, the Department determines that the
Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the
meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Japan AD Initiation Checklist and Kazakhstan AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\18\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also Japan AD
Initiation Checklist and Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment II.
\19\ See Japan AD Initiation Checklist and Kazakhstan AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on
behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and that the petitioner has
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the AD
investigations that it is requesting the Department to initiate.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the
petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 24-25 and Exhibits GEN-5
and GEN-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share;
[[Page 43942]]
displacement of U.S. production by subject imports; underselling and
price suppression or depression; decline in production, capacity
utilization, hours worked, and earnings before interest and taxes, lost
sales and revenues; and decline in pricing for downstream titanium
products.\23\ 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.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 1-3, 14-15, 18-47 and
Exhibits GEN-1, GEN-2, GEN-5, GEN-6, GEN-10, GEN-12--GEN-15, GEN-
19--GEN-26, GEN-30, GEN-31, and GEN-33.
\24\ See Japan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III,
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Titanium Sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan (Attachment III);
and Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less
than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to
initiate AD investigations of imports of titanium sponge from Japan and
Kazakhstan. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments
relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the
country-specific initiation checklists.
Export Price
For Japan, the petitioner based U.S. export prices (EPs) on price
quotes for sales of titanium sponge produced in, and exported from,
Japan and offered for sale in the United States, and on average unit
values (AUVs) obtained from official import statistics.\25\ For
Kazakhstan, the petitioner based U.S. EP on an AUV obtained from
official import statistics.\26\ Where applicable, the petitioner made
deductions from U.S. price for movement expenses.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Japan AD Initiation Checklist.
\26\ See Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist.
\27\ See Japan AD Initiation Checklist; and Kazakhstan AD
Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value
The petitioner was unable to obtain any prices of sales (or offers
for sale) of titanium sponge in Kazakhstan.\28\ Additionally, although
the petitioner was able to obtain a range of titanium sponge prices in
Japan during the 2017 fiscal year from the publication Nihon Keizai
Shimbun, the petitioner provided evidence indicating that these prices
may be based on affiliated-party sales and thus may not be arm's length
prices.\29\ As a result, the petitioner contends that these home market
prices are not usable for determining normal value.\30\ Furthermore,
for both Japan and Kazakhstan, the petitioner stated that it was unable
to find usable third-country titanium sponge prices.\31\ Therefore, for
both Japan and Kazakhstan, the petitioner based NV on constructed value
(CV). For further discussion of the cost of production (COP) and NV
based on CV, see the section ``Normal Value Based on Constructed
Value'' below.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The petitioner cited a newspaper article which quotes the
President of Ust-Kamenogorsk Titanium Magnesium Plant JSC (UKTMP)
(the sole producer of titanium sponge in Kazakhstan according to the
petitioner) as saying ``100% of UKTMP products are exported. . .''
See Kazakhstan AD Supplement, at 2-3 and Exhibit B.
\29\ See Volume II-a of the Petitions, at 6-8; see also Japan AD
Supplement at 3-4.; see also Japan Second Supplement, at 1.
\30\ See Japan Second Supplement, at 1.
\31\ See Japan Second Supplement, at 1-2.
\32\ In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade Preferences
Extension Act of 2015, amending section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for
all of the investigations, the Department will request information
necessary to calculate the CV and COP to determine whether there are
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign
like product have been made at prices that represent less than the
COP of the product. The Department no longer requires a COP
allegation to conduct this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value Based on Constructed Value
Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the cost of
manufacturing (COM), selling, general, and administrative (SG&A)
expenses, financial expenses, and profit. The petitioner determined the
COM of titanium sponge by adding together the costs of raw materials,
labor, maintenance, electricity, other supplies, and factory overhead,
as applicable, incurred by the petitioner, adjusted, where possible,
for known differences from costs in Japan and Kazakhstan during a
contemporaneous period to the POI. Specifically, the petitioner
adjusted for known differences in costs by using publicly available
labor and energy rates for Japan and Kazakhstan. The petitioner based
prices for raw materials, maintenance, other supplies and factory
overhead on the petitioner's own costs as such costs in Japan and
Kazakhstan were not reasonably available to the petitioner. The
petitioner calculated SG&A expenses, financial expense, and profit
based on the experience of Japanese and Kazakh producers of identical
merchandise.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See Japan AD Initiation Checklist and Kazakhstan AD
Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to
believe that imports of titanium sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan are
being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair
value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV in accordance with sections 772
and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for titanium sponge
from Japan and Kazakhstan are as follows: Japan--69.69% to 95.20%
percent; \34\ and Kazakhstan--42.22%.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Japan AD Initiation Checklist. The petitioner also
calculated margins based on a comparison between EP and the home
market prices. However, because the petitioner contends that the
home market prices are not usable for purposes of determining normal
value, we have relied on the estimated dumping margins based on the
comparison between EP and CV for purposes of the initiation.
\35\ See Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations
Based upon our examination of the AD Petitions, we find that the
Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore,
we are initiating AD investigations to determine whether imports of
titanium sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan are being, or are likely to
be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. In accordance
with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless
postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations in these
investigations no later than 140 days after the date of this
initiation. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to
initiate or not initiate on each program, see the Japan AD Initiation
Checklist and Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist. Public versions of
the initiation checklists for these investigations are available on
ACCESS.
Under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, numerous
amendments to the AD and CVD law were made.\36\ 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.\37\ The amendments to
sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are applicable to all
determinations made on or after
[[Page 43943]]
August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to these AD investigations.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
\37\ 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).
\38\ Id. at 46794-95. The 2015 amendments may be found at
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Respondent Selection
Although the Department normally relies on the number of producers/
exporters identified in the petition and/or import data from U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether to select a
limited number of producers/exporters for individual examination in AD
investigations, the petitioner identified only two companies as
producers/exporters of titanium sponge from Japan: Osaka Titanium
Technologies Co., Ltd. and Toho Titanium Company., Ltd.; and one
company as a producer/exporter of titanium sponge form Kazakhstan:
UKTMP. We currently know of no additional producers/exporters of the
merchandise under consideration from Japan or Kazakhstan and the
petitioner provided information from an independent source as support
for its claim that there are only two producers/exporters or titanium
sponge in Japan and only one producer/exporter or titanium sponge in
Kazakhstan.\39\ Accordingly, the Department intends to examine the
producers/exporters identified in the Petitions for these
investigations. Parties wishing to comment on respondent selection must
do so within five days of the publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. Any such comments must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m.
ET on the due date, and must be filed electronically via ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit GEN-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been
provided to the governments of Japan and Kazakhstan via ACCESS. To the
extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public
version of the Petitions to each exporter named in the Petitions, as
provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(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 titanium sponge from Japan and/or Kazakhstan
are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S.
industry. A negative ITC determination for any country will result in
the investigation being terminated with respect to that country.
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). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires
any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which
subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted
\40\ 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.\41\ 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. Interested parties should review the
regulations prior to submitting factual information in these
investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
\41\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extensions of Time Limits
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. 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. ET 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 a 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.
Parties should 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.\42\
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.\43\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\43\ 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 732(c)(2)
and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
[[Page 43944]]
Dated: September 13, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these investigations is all forms and
grades of titanium sponge, except as specified below. Titanium
sponge is unwrought titanium metal that has not been melted.
Expressly excluded from the scope of these investigations are:
(1) Loose particles of unwrought titanium metal having a
particle size of less than 20 mesh (0.84 mm);
(2) alloyed or unalloyed briquettes of unwrought titanium metal
that contain more than 0.2% oxygen on a dry weight basis; and
(3) ultra[hyphen]high purity titanium sponge. In
ultra[hyphen]high purity titanium sponge, metallic impurities do not
exceed any of these amounts:
WT %
Aluminum 0.0005
Chromium 0.0001
Cobalt 0.0001
Copper 0.0002
Iron 0.0300
Manganese 0.0010
Nickel 0.0002
Vanadium 0.0002
Zirconium 0.0005
Carbon 0.0150
Hydrogen 0.0100
Nitrogen 0.0020
Oxygen 0.1000
Titanium sponge is currently classified under subheading
8108.20.0010 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS). The HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and
customs purposes; the written description of the scope of these
investigations is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2017-20028 Filed 9-19-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
