Certain Collated Steel Staples From the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 31833-31839 [2019-14234]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 128 (Wednesday, July 3, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31833-31839]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14234]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-112, A-580-901, A-583-866]


Certain Collated Steel Staples From the People's Republic of 
China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-
Value Investigations

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

DATES: Applicable June 26, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Martin at (202) 482-4406 
(Republic of Korea (Korea)); Maisha Cryor (202) 482-5831 (Taiwan); 
Sergio Balbontin at (202) 482-6478 (the People's Republic of China 
(China)); 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 June 6, 2019, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) 
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of certain 
collated steel staples (collated staples) from

[[Page 31834]]

China, Korea, and Taiwan.\1\ The AD Petitions were filed in proper form 
by Kyocera Senco Industrial Tools, Inc. (the petitioner). The AD 
Petitions were accompanied by a countervailing duty (CVD) petition 
concerning imports of collated staples from China.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the Petitioner's Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition 
of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Certain Collated Steel 
Staples from Korea, the People's Republic of China, and Taiwan,'' 
dated June 6, 2019 (Petitions).
    \2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 11 and June 17, 2019, Commerce requested supplemental 
information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions.\3\ The 
petitioner filed responses to these requests between June 13 and June 
19, 2019.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Petition for the Imposition of 
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Collated Steel Staples from 
the People's Republic of China: Supplemental Questions;'' 
``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 
Certain Collated Steel Staples from the People's Republic of China, 
the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan and Countervailing Duties on 
Imports of Certain Collated Steel Staples from the People's Republic 
of China: Supplemental Questions (General Issues Supplemental 
Questionnaire);'' ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping 
Duties on Imports of Certain Collated Steel Staples from Korea: 
Supplemental Questions;'' and ``Petition for the Imposition of 
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Collated Steel Staples from 
Taiwan: Supplemental Questions;'' all dated June 11, 2019; see also 
Memoranda, ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 
Imports of Certain Collated Steel Staples from the People's Republic 
of China: Phone Call with the Petitioner;'' ``Petitions for the 
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Certain Collated Steel Staples from Korea, the People's Republic of 
China, and Taiwan: Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner 
(General Issues Second Supplemental Questionnaire);'' ``Petition for 
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Collated 
Steel Staples from Korea: Phone Call with Counsel to the 
Petitioner;'' and ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping 
Duties on Imports of Certain Collated Steel Staples from Taiwan: 
Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner;'' all dated June 17, 
2019.
    \4\ See the Petitioner's Letters, ``Certain Collated Steel 
Staples from Korea, the People's Republic of China, and Taiwan: 
Petition Supplement--General and Injury'' (General Issues 
Supplement); and ``Certain Collated Steel Staples from Taiwan: 
Petition Supplement,'' both dated June 13, 2019; see also the 
Petitioner's Letters, ``Certain Collated Steel Staples from China: 
Petition Supplement,'' and ``Certain Collated Steel Staples from 
Korea: Petition Supplement,'' both dated June 14, 2019; and 
``Certain Collated Steel Staples from Korea, the People's Republic 
of China, and Taiwan: Petition Supplement--General Issues'' (Second 
General Issues Supplement); ``Certain Collated Steel Staples from 
Korea: Petition Supplement;'' ``Certain Collated Steel Staples from 
Taiwan: Petition Supplement;'' and ``Certain Collated Steel Staples 
from China: Petition Supplement,'' all dated June 19, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of collated 
staples from China, Taiwan, and Korea are being, or are likely to be, 
sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV) 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 collated staples in the United States. Consistent with 
section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the AD Petitions are accompanied by 
information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its 
allegations.
    Commerce 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. Commerce also finds that 
the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to 
the initiation of the requested AD investigations.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Volume I of the AD Petitions, at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Periods of Investigation

    Because the AD Petitions were filed on June 6, 2019, pursuant to 19 
CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) for the Taiwan and 
Korea investigations is April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2019. Because 
China is a non-market economy (NME) country, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.204(b)(1), the POI for the China investigation is October 1, 2018 
through March 31, 2019.

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations consists of collated 
staples from China, Korea, and Taiwan. For a full description of the 
scope of these investigations, see the Appendix to this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigations

    During our review of the Petitions, Commerce issued questions to, 
and received responses from, the petitioner pertaining to the proposed 
scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions is an accurate 
reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking 
relief.\6\ As a result of these exchanges, the scope of the Petitions 
was modified to clarify the description of the merchandise covered by 
the Petitions. The description of the merchandise covered by these 
initiations, as described in the Appendix to this notice, reflects 
these clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See General Issues Supplement, at 4-7 and exhibit 3; see 
also Second General Issues Supplement, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are 
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding 
product coverage (scope).\7\ Commerce 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,\8\ all 
such factual information should be limited to public information. To 
facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that 
all interested parties submit scope comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time 
(ET) on July 16, 2019, which is 20 calendar days from the signature 
date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual 
information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on July 26, 2019, which is 
10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble).
    \8\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce requests that any factual information parties consider 
relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this 
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 Commerce and request permission to 
submit the additional information. All such submissions must be filed 
on the records of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically via 
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\10\ 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

[[Page 31835]]

with the date and time of receipt by the applicable deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 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 Commerce's electronic filing 
requirements, effective 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

    Commerce is providing interested parties an opportunity to comment 
on the appropriate physical characteristics of collated staples to be 
reported in response to Commerce's AD questionnaires. This information 
will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the 
subject merchandise in order to report the relevant factors of 
production (FOPs) accurately, as well as to develop appropriate 
product-comparison criteria.
    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that 
they feel 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 collated staples, it may be that only a select few product 
characteristics take into account 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, Commerce 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 product 
characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on July 16, 
2019, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this 
notice.\11\ Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on July 
26, 2019.\12\ All comments and submissions to Commerce must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the record of each 
of the AD investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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, Commerce 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 Act directs 
Commerce 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 Commerce and the ITC must apply the 
same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,\13\ they 
do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct 
authority. In addition, Commerce'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.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \14\ See, e.g., USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 
8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 
F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the Petitions.\15\ Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that collated staples, as 
defined in the scope, constitute a single domestic like product, and we 
have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like 
product.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 9-13 and Exhibit IN-4; 
see also General Issues Supplement, at 4 and Exhibit 1.
    \16\ 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: Certain 
Collated Steel Staples from the People's Republic of China (China AD 
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry 
Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Certain Collated Steel Staples from the People's Republic 
of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan (Attachment II); 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain 
Collated Steel Staples from the Republic of Korea (Korea AD 
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty 
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Collated Steel Staples 
from Taiwan (Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. 
These checklists are dated concurrently with this notice and are on 
file electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS 
is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the 
main 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. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its 
own 2018 production of the domestic like product and compared this to 
the estimated total production of the domestic like product for the 
entire domestic industry.\17\ We relied on data provided by the 
petitioner for purposes of measuring industry support.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Volume I of the AD Petitions, at 3 and Exhibit GEN-1; 
see also General Issues Supplement, at 7 and Exhibit 5; and Second 
General Issues Supplement, at Exhibit 1.
    \18\ See Volume I of the AD Petitions, at 3 and Exhibit GEN-1; 
see also China AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Korea AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Taiwan AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the General 
Issues Supplement, the Second General Issues Supplement, and other 
information readily available to Commerce indicates that the petitioner 
has established industry support for the Petitions.\19\ First, the 
Petitions established support from domestic producers (or workers) 
accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the 
domestic like product and, as such, Commerce is not required to take 
further action in order

[[Page 31836]]

to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).\20\ 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.\21\ 
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.\22\ Accordingly, Commerce 
determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic 
industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See China AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; see 
also Korea AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Taiwan AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \20\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also China AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Korea AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II; and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II.
    \21\ See China AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; see 
also Korea AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Taiwan AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \22\ 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 LTFV. In addition, the petitioner alleges that 
subject imports from China exceed the negligibility threshold provided 
for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Volume I of the AD Petitions, at 23 and Exhibits GEN-4 
and IN-15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to Korea and Taiwan, while the allegedly dumped 
imports from Korea and Taiwan do not exceed the statutory requirements 
for negligibility,\24\ the petitioner alleges and provides supporting 
evidence that: (1) There is a reasonable indication that data obtained 
in the ITC's investigation will establish that imports exceed the 
negligibility threshold,\25\ and (2) there is the potential that 
imports from Korea and Taiwan will imminently exceed the negligibility 
threshold and, therefore, are not negligible for purposes of a threat 
determination.\26\ The petitioner's arguments regarding the limitations 
of publicly available import data and the collection of scope-specific 
import data in the ITC's investigations are consistent with the SAA. 
Furthermore, the petitioner's arguments regarding the potential for 
imports from Korea and Taiwan to imminently exceed the negligibility 
threshold are consistent with the statutory criteria for 
``negligibility in threat analysis'' under section 771(24)(A)(iv) of 
the Act, which provides that imports shall not be treated as negligible 
if there is a potential that subject imports from a country will 
imminently exceed the statutory requirements for negligibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id.
    \25\ See Statement of Administrative Action (SAA), H.R. Doc. No. 
103-316, Vol. 1, (1994) (SAA), at 857; see also Volume I of the AD 
Petitions, at 23-24.
    \26\ See SAA at 856; see also Volume I of the AD Petitions, at 
23-26 and Exhibits GEN-4, IN-15 and IN-18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports; 
reduced market share; lost sales and revenue; underselling and price 
depression or suppression; and low capacity utilization rates and 
declining shipments, production, and profitability.\27\ We have 
assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material 
injury, threat of material injury, causation, cumulation, as well as 
negligibility, and we have determined that these allegations are 
properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory 
requirements for initiation.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Volume I of the AD Petitions, at 9, 16-35 and Exhibits 
GEN-4, IN-1 through IN-7, IN-9 through IN-18, and IN-19; see also 
General Issues Supplement, at 4, 8-11 and Exhibit 1.
    \28\ See China AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Certain Collated Steel Staples from the People's Republic 
of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan (Attachment III); see 
also Korea AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; and Taiwan AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Sales at LTFV

    The following is a description of the allegations of sales at LTFV 
upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate AD investigations of 
imports of collated staples from China, Korea, and Taiwan. The sources 
of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and 
normal value (NV) are discussed in greater detail in the AD Initiation 
Checklist for each country.

Export Price (EP)

    For China and Korea, the petitioner based the U.S. price on quoted 
offer prices for sales of collated staples produced in and exported 
from China and Korea and sold, or offered for sale, to customers in the 
United States through a U.S. distributor.\29\ Where applicable, the 
petitioner made deductions from U.S. price for distributor markup, 
movement and other expenses, consistent with the terms of sale.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See China AD Initiation Checklist; see also Korean AD 
Initiation Checklist.
    \30\ See China AD Initiation Checklist; see also Korea AD 
Initiation Checklist
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Constructed Export Price (CEP)

    For Taiwan, because the petitioner had reason to believe the sale 
reflected a transaction from a Taiwanese producer/exporter to an 
unrelated customer in the United States after importation, the 
petitioner based CEP on a sale of collated staples produced in, and 
exported from, Taiwan and sold to an unaffiliated U.S. distributor for 
sale in the United States.\31\ The petitioner made deductions from U.S. 
price for movement and other expenses, consistent with the terms of 
sale.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
    \32\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    For Korea, the petitioner based NV on home market prices obtained 
through market research for collated staples produced in and sold, or 
offered for sale, in Korea within the POI.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Taiwan, the petitioner was unable to obtain information 
relating to the prices charged for collated staples produced and sold 
in the home market or in third countries; accordingly, the petitioner 
based NV on constructed value (CV).\34\ For further discussion of CV, 
see the section ``Normal Value Based on Constructed Value.'' \35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
    \35\ In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade Preferences 
Extension Act of 2015, amending section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for 
this investigation, Commerce will request information necessary to 
calculate the CV and cost of production (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. Commerce no longer requires a COP 
allegation to conduct this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to China, Commerce considers China to be an NME 
country.\36\ In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the 
presumption of NME status remains in effect until revoked by Commerce. 
Therefore, we continue to treat China as an NME for purposes of the 
initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, NV in China is 
appropriately based on FOPs

[[Page 31837]]

valued in a surrogate market economy country, in accordance with 
section 773(c) of the Act.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See, e.g., Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain 
Aluminum Foil from the People's Republic of China: Affirmative 
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less-Than-Fair Value and 
Postponement of Final Determination, 82 FR 50858, 50861 (November 2, 
2017), and accompanying decision memorandum, China's Status as a 
Non-Market Economy; unchanged in Certain Aluminum Foil from the 
People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value, 83 FR 9282 (March 5, 2018).
    \37\ See China AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner claims that Mexico is an appropriate surrogate 
country for China, because it is a market economy country that is at a 
level of economic development comparable to that of China, it is a 
significant producer of comparable merchandise, and public information 
from Mexico is available to value all material input factors.\38\ Based 
on the information provided by the petitioner, we determine that it is 
appropriate to use Mexico as a surrogate country for initiation 
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Volume II of the AD Petitions at 2-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit comments 
regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly 
available information to value FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled 
date of the preliminary determination.

Factors of Production

    Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by the 
Chinese producers/exporters is not available, the petitioner relied on 
its own production experience as an estimate of Chinese manufacturers' 
FOPs.\39\ The petitioner valued the estimated FOPs using surrogate 
values from Mexico and used the average POI exchange rate to convert 
the data to U.S. dollars.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See China AD Initiation Checklist.
    \40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value

    The petitioner was unable to obtain information relating to the 
prices charged for collated staples produced in Taiwan, or third 
country prices; accordingly, the petitioner based NV on CV.\41\ 
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, packing expenses, and profit. For Taiwan, 
the petitioner calculated the COM by first identifying and calculating 
the amount (i.e., consumption rate) of each production input based on 
staples production at its own manufacturing facilities.\42\ The 
petitioner based the input FOPs on the quantity of inputs needed to 
produce one net short ton of the same merchandise. The input FOPs were 
valued using publicly available data on costs specific to Taiwan, 
during the proposed POI.\43\ Specifically, the prices for raw 
materials, scrap offsets, and packing inputs were valued using publicly 
available import data for Taiwan.\44\ Labor and energy (i.e., 
electricity, natural gas) costs were valued using publicly available 
sources for Taiwan.\45\ The petitioner calculated factory overhead, 
SG&A expenses, financial expenses, and profit for Taiwan based on the 
ratios found in the experience of a Taiwanese producer of identical or 
comparable merchandise.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
    \42\ Id.
    \43\ Id.
    \44\ Id.
    \45\ Id.
    \46\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the AD Petitions, there is reason to 
believe that imports of collated staples from China, Korea and Taiwan 
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at LTFV. 
Based on comparisons of EP, or CEP, to NV in accordance with sections 
772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for collated 
staples for each of the countries covered by this initiation are as 
follows: (1) China--119.37 and 122.55 percent; \47\ (2) Taiwan--47.60 
percent; \48\ and (3) Korea--10.23 to 14.25 percent.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See China AD Initiation Checklist.
    \48\ See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
    \49\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of LTFV Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the AD Petitions and supplements to 
the AD Petitions, we find that the AD Petitions meet the requirements 
of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD 
investigations to determine whether imports of collated staples from 
China, Korea and Taiwan are being, or are likely to be, sold in the 
United States at LTFV. 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 no later than 140 days after the date of 
this initiation.

Respondent Selection

    The petitioner named 29 companies in Taiwan \50\ and 15 companies 
in Korea \51\ as producers/exporters of collated staples. Following 
standard practice in AD investigations involving market economy 
countries, in the event Commerce determines that the number of 
companies is large and it cannot individually examine each company 
based upon Commerce's resources, where appropriate, Commerce intends to 
select respondents in Taiwan and Korea based on U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports under the appropriate Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) number listed in the 
Appendix.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See Volume I of the AD Petitions, at Exhibit GEN-2.
    \51\ Id.
    \52\ See, e.g., Polyester Textured Yarn from India and the 
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value 
Investigations, 83 FR 58223, 58227 (November 19, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner named 99 producers/exporters of collated staples in 
China.\53\ In accordance with our standard practice for respondent 
selection in AD cases involving NME countries, we intend to issue 
quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires to producers/exporters of 
merchandise subject to the investigation. For this investigation, 
Commerce will request Q&V information from known exporters and 
producers identified in the Petition with complete contact information. 
In addition, Commerce will post the Q&V questionnaire along with filing 
instructions on the Enforcement and Compliance website at https://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp. In accordance with our standard 
practice for respondent selection in AD cases involving NME countries, 
we intend to base respondent selection on the responses to the Q&V 
questionnaire that we receive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ See Volume I of the AD Petitions, at Exhibit Gen-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Producers/exporters of collated staples from China that do not 
receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the 
Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy of the Q&V questionnaire from 
Enforcement & Compliance's website. The Q&V response must be submitted 
by the relevant Chinese exporters/producers no later than 5:00 p.m. ET 
on July 11, 2019. All Q&V responses must be filed electronically via 
ACCESS.

Separate Rates

    In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation, 
exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate application.\54\ 
The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application in 
the China investigation are outlined in detail in the application 
itself, which is available on Commerce's website at https://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separate-rate 
application will be due 30 days after publication of this initiation

[[Page 31838]]

notice.\55\ Exporters and producers who submit a separate-rate 
application and are selected as mandatory respondents will be eligible 
for consideration for separate-rate status only if they respond to all 
parts of Commerce's AD questionnaire as mandatory respondents. Commerce 
requires that companies from China submit a response to both the Q&V 
questionnaire and the separate-rate application by the respective 
deadlines in order to receive consideration for separate-rate status. 
Companies not filing a timely Q&V response will not receive separate-
rate consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and 
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation 
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at 
https://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin 
05.1).
    \55\ Although in past investigations this deadline was 60 days, 
consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(a), which states that ``the Secretary 
may request any person to submit factual information at any time 
during a proceeding,'' this deadline is now 30 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use of Combination Rates

    Commerce will calculate combination rates for certain respondents 
that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME investigation. The 
Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin states:

    {W{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate 
rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will 
now assign in its NME Investigation will be specific to those 
producers that supplied the exporter during the period of 
investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the 
exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise 
to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both 
to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated 
separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms 
receiving the weighted-average of the individually calculated rates. 
This practice is referred to as the application of ``combination 
rates'' because such rates apply to specific combinations of 
exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned 
to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the 
firm in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter 
during the period of investigation.\56\

    \56\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distribution of Copies of the AD Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the AD Petitions have been 
provided to the governments of China, Korea, and Taiwan via ACCESS. To 
the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public 
version of the AD Petitions to each exporter named in the AD 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 Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the AD Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of collated staples from China, Korea, and/or 
Taiwan are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a 
U.S. industry.\57\ A negative ITC determination for any country will 
result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that 
country.\58\ Otherwise, the investigations will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \58\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) 
Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence 
submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available 
information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the 
adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence 
placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual 
information described in (i)-(iv). Section 351.301(b) of Commerce's 
regulations requires any party, when submitting factual information, to 
specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information 
is being submitted \59\ 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.\60\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \60\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Particular Market Situation Allegation

    Section 504 of the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 amended 
the Act by adding the concept of particular market situation (PMS) for 
purposes of CV under section 773(e) of the Act.\61\ Section 773(e) of 
the Act states that ``{I{time} f a particular market situation exists 
such that the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of 
any kind does not accurately reflect the cost of production in the 
ordinary course of trade, the administering authority may use another 
calculation methodology under this subtitle or any other calculation 
methodology.'' When an interested party submits a PMS allegation 
pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce will respond to such a 
submission consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v). If Commerce finds 
that a PMS exists under section 773(e) of the Act, then it will modify 
its dumping calculations appropriately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Neither section 773(e) of the Act nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v) set a 
deadline for the submission of PMS allegations and supporting factual 
information. However, in order to administer section 773(e) of the Act, 
Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting factual 
information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus, should 
an interested party wish to submit a PMS allegation and supporting new 
factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, it must do 
so no later than 20 days after submission of initial section D 
questionnaire responses.

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 of 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

[[Page 31839]]

and completeness of that information.\62\ Parties must use the 
certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g).\63\ Commerce 
intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not 
comply with the applicable certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \63\ See 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, Commerce 
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).

    Dated: June 26, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

Scope of the Investigations

    The merchandise covered by the scope of these investigations is 
certain collated steel staples. Certain collated steel staples 
subject to these investigations are made from steel wire having a 
nominal diameter from 0.0355 inch to 0.0830 inch, inclusive, and 
have a nominal leg length from 0.25 inch to 3.0 inches, inclusive, 
and a nominal crown width from 0.187 inch to 1.125 inch, inclusive.
    Certain collated steel staples may be manufactured from any type 
of steel, and are included in the scope of the investigations 
regardless of whether they are uncoated or coated, and regardless of 
the type or number of coatings, including but not limited to 
coatings to inhibit corrosion.
    Certain collated steel staples may be collated using any 
material or combination of materials, including but not limited to 
adhesive, glue, and adhesive film or adhesive or paper tape.
    Certain collated steel staples are generally made to American 
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) specification ASTM F1667-
18a, but can also be made to other specifications.
    Excluded from the scope of these investigations are any carton-
closing staples covered by the scope of the existing antidumping 
duty order on Carton-Closing Staples from the People's Republic of 
China. See Carton-Closing Staples From the People's Republic of 
China: Antidumping Duty Order, 83 FR 20792 (May 8, 2018).
    Certain collated steel staples subject to these investigations 
are currently classifiable under subheading 8305.20.0000 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).
    While the HTSUS subheading and ASTM specification are provided 
for convenience and for customs purposes, the written description of 
the subject merchandise is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2019-14234 Filed 7-2-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P