Notice2023-11005
Brass Rod From India, Israel, and the Republic of Korea: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
May 24, 2023
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentInternational Trade Administration
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 100 (Wednesday, May 24, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 24, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33566-33570]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11005]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-533-916, C-508-815, C-580-917]
Brass Rod From India, Israel, and the Republic of Korea:
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable May 17, 2023.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dusten Hom (India), Zachary Shaykin
(Israel), and Jacob Saude (the Republic of Korea (Korea)), AD/CVD
Operations, Offices I, IV, and VII, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
5075, (202) 482-2638, or (202) 482-0981, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On April 27, 2023, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce)
received countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of
brass rod from India, Israel, and Korea filed in proper form on behalf
of the American Brass Rod Fair Trade Coalition and its constituent
members, Mueller Brass Co. and Wieland Chase LLC, U.S., producers of
brass rod (collectively, the petitioners).\1\ The CVD petitions were
accompanied by antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of
brass rod from Brazil, India, Israel, Mexico, South Africa, and
Korea.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Petitioners' Letter, ``Brass Rod from Brazil, India,
Israel, Mexico, South Africa, and South Korea: Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions,'' dated April 27, 2023 (Petitions).
\2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 2 and 10, 2023, Commerce requested supplemental information
pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions.\3\ On May 8 and 11,
2023, the petitioners filed timely responses to these requests for
additional information.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Petition for the Imposition of
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Brass Rod from Israel:
Supplemental Questions,'' dated May 2, 2023; ``Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Brass Rod from
Brazil, India, Israel, Mexico, the Republic of Korea, and South
Africa and Countervailing Duties on Imports from India, Israel, and
the Republic of Korea: Supplemental Questions,'' dated May 2, 2023
(General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire); ``Petition for the
Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Countervailing
Duties on Imports of Brass Rod from India: Supplemental Questions,
dated May 2, 2023; and ``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping
Duties on Imports of Brass Rod from Brazil, India, Israel, the
Republic of Korea, Mexico, and South Africa and Countervailing
Duties on Imports from India, Israel, and the Republic of Korea:
Supplemental Questions,'' dated May 10, 2023.
\4\ See Petitioners' Letters, ``Brass Rod from Brazil, India,
Israel, Mexico, South Africa, and South Korea: Amendment of
Petitions and Response to Commerce's Supplemental Questions,'' dated
May 8, 2023 (General Issues Supplement); and ``Brass Rod from
Brazil, India, Israel, Mexico, South Africa, and South Korea: Second
Amendment of Petitions and Response to Commerce's Supplemental
Questions,'' dated May 11, 2023 (Scope Supplement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that the Government of India
(GOI), the Government of Israel (GISR), and the Government of Korea
(GOK) (collectively, Governments) are providing countervailable
subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to
producers of brass rod in India, Israel, and Korea, and that such
imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the
domestic industry producing brass rod in the United States. Consistent
with section 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for those
alleged programs on which we are initiating CVD investigations, the
Petitions were accompanied by information reasonably available to the
petitioners supporting their allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf
of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested parties
as defined in sections 771(9)(C) and (F) of the Act. Commerce also
finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support
with respect to the initiation of the requested CVD investigations.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition''
section, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Periods of Investigation
Because the Petitions were filed on April 27, 2023, the periods of
investigation (POI) for India, Israel, and Korea are January 1, 2022,
through December 31, 2022.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise covered by these investigations is brass rod from
India, Israel, and Korea. For a full description of the scope of these
investigations, see the appendix to this notice.
Comments on the Scope of the Investigations
On May 2 and 10, 2023, Commerce requested information from the
petitioners regarding the proposed scope to ensure that the scope
language in the Petitions is an accurate reflection of the products for
which the domestic
[[Page 33567]]
industry is seeking relief.\7\ On May 8 and 11, 2023, the petitioners
revised the scope language.\8\ The description of merchandise covered
by these investigations, as described in the appendix to this notice,
reflects these clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire at 3-4; see
also Second General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire at 1.
\8\ See General Issues Supplement; see also Scope Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding
product coverage (i.e., scope).\9\ Commerce will consider all comments
received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with
interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary
determination. If scope comments include factual information, all such
factual information should be limited to public information.\10\ To
facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that
all interested parties submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time
(ET) on June 6, 2023, 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 June 16, 2023, which is
10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296,
27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble).
\10\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual
information'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce requests that any factual information that 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 Commerce and
request permission to submit the additional information. All scope
comments must also be filed simultaneously 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), unless an exception
applies.\11\ An electronically filed document must be received
successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 Commerce's electronic filing
requirements, effective August 5, 2011. Information on using ACCESS
can be found at <a href="https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx">https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx</a> and a handbook
can be found at <a href="https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook_on_Electronic_Filing_Procedures.pdf">https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook_on_Electronic_Filing_Procedures.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consultations
Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce
notified the Governments of the receipt of the Petitions and provided
an opportunity for consultations with respect to the Petitions.\12\
Commerce held consultations with the GOI on May 11, 2023, the GISR on
May 8, 2023, and the GOK on May 10, 2023.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on
Brass Rods from India: Invitation for Consultations to Discuss the
Countervailing Duty Petition,'' dated May 2, 2023; Countervailing
Duty Petition on Brass Rod from Israel: Invitation for Consultations
to Discuss the Countervailing Duty Petition,'' dated April 28, 2023;
and ``Countervailing Duty Petition on Brass Rod from the Republic of
Korea,'' dated April 28, 2023.
\13\ See Memoranda, ``Petition for the Imposition of
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Brass Rod from the Republic of
India: Teleconference Consultations with the Indian Government,''
dated May 11, 2023; ``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing
Duties on Imports of Brass Rod from Israel: Teleconference
Consultations with the Israeli Government,'' dated May 10, 2023; and
``Brass Rod from the Republic of Korea: Consultations with
Government of the Republic of Korea,'' dated May 10, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, 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 statute
directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The U.S. 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 apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like
product,\14\ 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.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\15\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F.
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope
of the investigations.\16\ Based on our analysis of the information
submitted on the record, we have determined that brass rod, as defined
in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have
analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Petition at Volume I (pages 19-20); see also General
Issues Supplement at 5-7.
\17\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support,
see CVD Investigation Initiation Checklists, ``Brass Rod from India,
Israel, and the Republic of Korea,'' dated concurrently with this
notice (Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists), at Attachment
II (Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Brass Rod from Brazil, India,
Israel, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, and South Africa).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section
702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the appendix to
this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioners provided
their own production of brass
[[Page 33568]]
rod in 2022 and compared this to the total 2022 production of brass rod
by the U.S. industry.\18\ We relied on data provided by the petitioners
for purposes of measuring industry support.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 4-5 and Exhibit GEN-1);
see also General Issues Supplement at 5 and Exhibit SUPP1-GEN-3.
\19\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 3-5 and Exhibit GEN-1);
see also General Issues Supplement at 5 and Exhibit SUPP1-GEN-3. For
further discussion, see Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists
at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the General
Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce
indicates that the petitioners have established industry support for
the Petitions.\20\ 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 to evaluate
industry support (e.g., polling).\21\ Second, the domestic producers
(or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under
section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or
workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product.\22\ Finally, the
domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for
industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the
domestic producers (or workers) who support the 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.\23\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that
the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the
meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 3-5 and Exhibit GEN-1);
see also General Issues Supplement at 5 and Exhibit SUPP1-GEN-3. For
further discussion, see the Country-Specific CVD Initiation
Checklists at Attachment II.
\21\ See Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists at
Attachment II; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
\22\ See Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists at
Attachment II.
\23\ Id.
\24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury Test
Because India, Israel, and Korea are ``Subsidies Agreement
Countries'' within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section
701(a)(2) of the Act applies to these investigations. Accordingly, the
ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from
India, Israel, and/or Korea materially injure, or threaten material
injury to, a U.S. industry.
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioners allege that imports of the subject merchandise are
benefiting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry
producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioners
allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided
for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 21-22 and Exhibit GEN-5);
see also General Issues Supplement at 7 and Exhibit SUPP1-GEN-4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by the significant volume of subject imports; reduced
market share; underselling and price depression and/or suppression;
lost sales and revenues; adverse impact on the domestic industry's
operations, production, commercial shipments, capacity utilization, and
employment variables; and adverse impact on the domestic industry's
financial performance.\26\ We assessed the allegations and supporting
evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury,
causation, as well as negligibility, and we have determined that these
allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the
statutory requirements for initiation.\27\ In accordance with section
771(7)(G)(ii)(IV) of the Act, which states that the ITC cannot cumulate
imports ``from any country that is party to an agreement with the
United States establishing a free trade area, which entered into force
and effect before January 1, 1987, unless the {ITC{time} determines
that a domestic industry is materially injured or threatened with
material injury by reason of imports from that country,'' we considered
the petitioners' allegation of injury with respect to Israel, a party
to an agreement with the United States establishing a free trade area
in place and effect before January 1, 1987, independently of the
allegations for Brazil, India, Korea, Mexico, and South Africa and
found that the information provided satisfies the requirements for
initiation.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 1-2, 21-41, and Exhibits
GEN-5 through GEN-25); see also General Issues Supplement at 7-8 and
Exhibits SUPP1-GEN-4 and SUPP1-GEN-5.
\27\ See Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists at
Attachment III (Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Petitions Covering Brass Rod from Brazil, India, Israel, the
Republic of Korea, Mexico, and South Africa).
\28\ See Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists at
Attachment III; see also section 771(7)(G)(ii)(IV) of the Act; and
Statement of Administrative Action Accompanying the Uruguay Rounds
Agreement Act, H.R. Doc. 103-216, Vol. 1 (1994), at 850 (``Imports
from Israel may not be cumulated with imports from other countries
unless the {ITC{time} first determines that the domestic industry
is materially injured by reason of such imports from Israel.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of CVD Investigations
Based upon the examination of the Petitions and supplemental
responses, we find that they meet the requirements of section 702 of
the Act. Therefore, we are initiating CVD investigations to determine
whether imports of brass rod from India, Israel, and Korea benefit from
countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOI, GISR, and GOK,
respectively. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary
determinations no later than 65 days after the date of these
initiations.
India
Based on our review of the Petitions, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 13 of the 14
programs alleged by the petitioners. For a full discussion of the basis
for our decision to initiate an investigation of each program, see the
India CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation
checklist for these investigations is available on ACCESS.
Israel
Based on our review of the Petitions, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on seven of the
eight programs alleged by the petitioners. For a full discussion of the
basis for our decision to initiate an investigation of each program,
see the Israel CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the
initiation checklist for these investigations is available on ACCESS.
Korea
Based on our review of the Petitions, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 36 of the 37
programs alleged by the petitioners. For a full discussion of the basis
for our decision to initiate an investigation an investigation of each
program, see the Korea Initiation Checklist. A public version of the
initiation checklist for these investigations is available on ACCESS.
[[Page 33569]]
Respondent Selection
The petitioners named one company in India, one company in Israel,
and two companies in Korea as producers and/or exporters of brass
rod.\29\ Commerce intends to follow its standard practice in CVD
investigations and calculate company-specific subsidy rates in these
investigations. In the event that 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 mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of brass rod from India and
Korea during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule
of the United States subheadings listed in the ``Scope of the
Investigation'' in the appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 15 through 17 and Exhibit
I-3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between May 15 and 16, 2023, Commerce released CBP data on U.S.
imports of brass rod from India, Israel, and Korea under administrative
protective order (APO) to all parties with access to information
protected by APO and indicated that interested parties wishing to
comment on the CBP data and/or respondent selection must do so within
three business days after the publication date of the notice of
initiation of these investigations.\30\ Comments must be filed
electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be
received successfully in its entirety via ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. ET on the
specified deadline. Commerce will not accept rebuttal comments
regarding the CBP data or respondent selection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Memoranda, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on Brass Rod
from the Republic of Korea: Release of Data from U.S. Customs and
Border Protection,'' dated May 15, 2023; ``Countervailing Duty
Petition on Brass Rods from India: Release of Data from U.S. Customs
and Border Protection,'' dated May 15, 2023; and ``Countervailing
Duty Petition on Brass Rod from Israel: Release of Data from U.S.
Customs and Border Protection,'' dated May 16, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petitions has been
provided to the GOI, GISR, and GOK 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 CVD Petitions, as provided
under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
Commerce will notify the ITC of its initiation, as required by
section 702(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determinations by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable
indication that imports of brass rod from India, Israel, and/or Korea
are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S.
industry.\31\ A negative ITC determination for any country will result
in an investigation being terminated with respect to that country.\32\
Otherwise, these CVD investigations will proceed according to statutory
and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
\32\ 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 \33\ 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.\34\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
\34\ 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 Commerce. 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, Commerce 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, Commerce 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, standalone submission; under limited circumstances,
Commerce will grant untimely filed requests for the extension of time
limits, where we determine, based on 19 CFR 351.302, that extraordinary
circumstances exist. Parties should review Commerce's regulations
concerning the extension of time limits and the Time Limits Final Rule
prior to submitting factual information in these investigations.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See 19 CFR 351.302; see also Extension of Time Limits;
Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013) (Time Limits Final
Rule), available at <a href="https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm">https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\37\ 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
<a href="https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf">https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Parties wishing to participate
in these investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements
of 19 CFR 351.103(d) (e.g., by filing the required letters of
appearance).
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and
777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: May 17, 2023.
Lisa W. Wang,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigations
The products covered by these investigations are brass rod and
bar (brass
[[Page 33570]]
rod), which is defined as leaded, low-lead, and no-lead solid brass
made from alloys such as, but not limited to the following alloys
classified under the Unified Numbering System (UNS) as C27450,
C27451, C27460, C34500, C35000, C35300, C35330, C36000, C36300,
C37000, C37700, C48500, C67300, C67600, and C69300, and their
international equivalents.
The brass rod subject to these investigations has an actual
cross-section or outside diameter greater than 0.25 inches but less
than or equal to 12 inches. Brass rod cross-sections may be round,
hexagonal, square, or octagonal shapes as well as special profiles
(e.g., angles, shapes).
Standard leaded brass rod covered by the scope contains, by
weight, 57.0-65.0 percent copper; 0.5-3.0 percent lead; no more than
1.3 percent iron; and at least 15 percent zinc. No-lead or low-lead
brass rod covered by the scope contains by weight 59.0-76.0 percent
copper; 0-1.5 percent lead; no more than 0.35 percent iron; and at
least 15 percent zinc. Brass rod may also include other chemical
elements (e.g., nickel, phosphorous, silicon, tin, etc.).
Brass rod may be in straight lengths or coils. Brass rod covered
by these investigations may be finished or unfinished, and may or
may not be heated, extruded, pickled, or cold-drawn. Brass rod may
be produced in accordance with ASTM B16, ASTM B124, ASTM B981, ASTM
B371, ASTM B453, ASTM B21, ASTM B138, and ASTM B927, but such
conformity to an ASTM standard is not required for the merchandise
to be included within the scope.
Excluded from the scope of these investigations is brass ingot,
which is a casting of unwrought metal unsuitable for conversion into
brass rod without remelting, that contains, by weight, at least 57.0
percent copper and 15.0 percent zinc.
The merchandise covered by these investigations is currently
classifiable under subheadings 7407.21.9000, 7407.21.7000, and
7407.21.1500 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS). Products subject to the scope may also enter under HTSUS
subheadings 7403.21.0000, 7407.21.3000, and 7407.21.5000. The HTSUS
subheadings and UNS alloy designations are provided for convenience
and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of the
investigations is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2023-11005 Filed 5-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on May 24, 2023.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.