Notice2024-22591
Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: 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
October 2, 2024
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentInternational Trade Administration
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 191 (Wednesday, October 2, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 2, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80204-80210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-22591]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-351-863, C-122-872, C-201-864, C-552-844]
Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From Brazil, Canada,
Mexico, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of
Countervailing Duty Investigations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable September 25, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Senoyuit and Sofia Pedrelli at
202-482-6106 and 202-482-4310 (Brazil), Colin Thrasher at 202-482-3004
(Canada), Maria Teresa Aymerich at 202-482-0499 (Mexico), and Mary
Kolberg at 202-482-1785 (the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam)),
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 September 5, 2024, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce)
received countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of
certain corrosion-resistant steel products (CORE) from Brazil, Canada,
Mexico, and Vietnam filed in proper form on behalf of Steel Dynamics,
Inc. (SDI), Nucor Corporation (Nucor), United States Steel Corporation
(U.S. Steel), Wheeling-Nippon Steel, Inc. (Wheeling-Nippon), and the
United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied
Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC (the
USW), domestic producers of CORE and a certified union, which
represents workers engaged in the production of CORE in the United
States (collectively, the petitioners).\1\ The CVD petitions were
accompanied by antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of
CORE from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South
Africa, Taiwan, the Republic of T[uuml]rkiye, the United Arab Emirates,
and Vietnam.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Petitioners' Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,'' dated September 5, 2024
(the Petitions). Nucor is not a petitioner with respect to the AD/
CVD petitions on CORE from Mexico. U.S. Steel, Wheeling-Nippon, and
the USW are not petitioners with respect to the AD/CVD petitions on
CORE from Canada.
\2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between September 9 and 19, Commerce requested supplemental
information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions.\3\ Between
September 12 and 20, 2024, the petitioners filed timely responses to
these requests for additional information.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Supplemental Questions,'' dated
September 9, 2024 (General Issues Questionnaire), see also Country-
Specific CVD Supplemental Questionnaires: Brazil Supplemental,
Canada Supplemental, Mexico Supplemental, and Vietnam Supplemental,
dated September 10 and 11, 2024; Commerce's Letter, ``Second
Supplemental Questions,'' dated September 16, 2024 (Second General
Issues Questionnaire); and Memorandum, ``Phone Call,'' dated
September 19, 2024.
\4\ See Petitioners' Letters, ``Response to General Issues
Questionnaire and Amendment to Volume I of Petitions,'' dated
September 12, 2024 (First General Issues Supplement); see also
Petitioners' Country-Specific CVD Supplemental Responses: Brazil CVD
Supplement, Canada CVD Supplement, Mexico CVD Supplement, and
Vietnam CVD Supplement, dated September 13 and 16, 2024;
Petitioners' Letter, ``Petitioners' Response to Second General
Issues Supplemental Questionnaire and Amendment to Volume I of
Petitions,'' dated September 18, 2024 (Second General Issues
Supplement); and Petitioners' Letter, ``Response to Third General
Issues Questionnaire and Amendment to Volume I of Petitions,'' dated
September 20, 2024 (Third General Issues Supplement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended
[[Page 80205]]
(the Act), the petitioners allege that the Government of Brazil (GOB),
the Government of Canada (GOC), the Government of Mexico (GOM), and the
Government of Vietnam (GOV) (collectively, Governments) are providing
countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 and
771(5) of the Act, to producers of CORE from Brazil, Canada, Mexico,
and Vietnam, and that such imports are materially injuring, or
threatening material injury to, the domestic industry producing CORE 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 (D) of the Act.\5\
Commerce also finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the initiation of the requested CVD
investigations.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ SDI, Nucor, U.S. Steel, and Wheeling-Nippon are interested
parties under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, while the USW is an
interested party under section 771(9)(D) of the Act.
\6\ See section on ``Determination of Industry Support for the
Petitions,'' infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Periods of Investigation
Because the Petitions were filed on September 5, 2024, the periods
of investigation for the Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and Vietnam CVD
investigations are January 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise covered by these investigations is CORE from
Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and Vietnam. For a full description of the
scope of these investigations, see the appendix to this notice.
Comments on the Scope of the Investigations
On September 9 and 16, 2024, Commerce requested information and
clarification 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 industry is seeking
relief.\8\ On September 12 and 18, 2024, the petitioners provided
clarifications and revised the scope.\9\ The description of merchandise
covered by these investigations, as described in the appendix to this
notice, reflects these clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See General Issues Questionnaire; see also Second General
Issues Questionnaire.
\9\ See First General Issues Supplement at 7-9 and Exhibit Supp.
I-55; see also Second General Issues Supplement at 2-3 and Exhibit
2nd Supp I-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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).\10\ 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, all such
factual information should be limited to public information.\11\ To
facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that
scope comments be submitted by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on October
15, 2024, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this
notice.\12\ Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual
information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on October 25, 2024, which
is 10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble).
\11\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual
information'').
\12\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce requests that any factual information that parties
consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted
during that time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that
additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the
investigations may be relevant, the party must contact Commerce and
request permission to submit the additional information. All scope
comments must 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.\13\ An electronically filed document must be received
successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 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.\14\
Commerce held consultations with the GOB on September 23, 2024,\15\ the
GOC on September 19, 2024,\16\ the GOM on September 20, 2024,\17\ and
the GOV on September 19, 2024.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Invitation for Consultation to
Discuss the Countervailing Duty Petition,'' dated September 5, 2024,
and September 6, 2024.
\15\ See Memorandum, ``Consultations with the Government of
Brazil,'' dated September 23, 2024.
\16\ See Memorandum, ``Consultations with Officials from the
Government of Canada,'' dated September 19, 2024 (GOC Consultations
Memorandum). In addition, on September 24, 2024, Commerce met via
video conference with officials from the GOC (at their request) to
further discuss the issues raised during the September 19, 2024,
consultations. See Memorandum, ``Petition for the Imposition of
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Corrosion-Resistant
Steel Products from Canada: Videoconference with Embassy of
Canada,'' dated September 24, 2024.
\17\ See Memorandum, ``Consultations with Officials from the
Government of Mexico,'' dated September 23, 2024.
\18\ See Memorandum, ``Consultations with the Government of
Vietnam,'' dated September 19, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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,
[[Page 80206]]
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,\19\ 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.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\20\ 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 Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United
States, 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.\21\ Based on our analysis of the information
submitted on the record, we have determined that CORE, as defined in
the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have
analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support,
see Checklists, ``Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklists: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Brazil,
Canada, Mexico, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam,'' dated
concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Country-
Specific CVD Initiation Checklists), at Attachment II, Analysis of
Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Petitions Covering Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from
Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa,
Taiwan, the Republic of T[uuml]rkiye, the United Arab Emirates, and
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Attachment II). These checklists
are on file electronically via ACCESS.
\22\ See Attachment II of the Country-Specific CVD Initiation
Checklists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
the 2023 total shipments of the domestic like product for the U.S.
producers and workers that support the Petitions and compared this to
the estimated total 2023 shipments of the domestic like product for the
entire domestic industry.\23\ The petitioners estimated total shipments
of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry based on
shipment data from the American Iron and Steel Institute and made
certain adjustments to these data to approximate total shipments of the
domestic like product in 2023.\24\ Because total industry production
data for the domestic like product for 2023 are not reasonably
available to the petitioners, and the petitioners have established that
shipments are a reasonable proxy for production data,\25\ we have
relied on the data provided by the petitioners for purposes of
measuring industry support.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Id.
\24\ Id.
\25\ Id.
\26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 18, 2024, we received timely filed comments on
industry support from Stelco, Inc. (Stelco), a Canadian producer/
exporter of CORE.\27\ On September 18, 2024, we also received timely
filed comments on industry support from ArcelorMittal Dofasco G.P.
(Dofasco), a Canadian producer and exporter of CORE.\28\ Also on
September 18, 2024, we received timely filed comments on industry
support from Ternium USA and Ternium Mexico S.A. de C.V. (collectively,
Ternium), a U.S. producer and importer of CORE and a Mexican producer/
exporter of CORE, respectively.\29\ In its September 18, 2024,
submission, Ternium stated that it opposed the Mexico CVD Petition.\30\
On September 18, 2024, we also received timely filed comments on
industry support from the GOC and the Government of Ontario
(collectively).\31\ In addition, in the GOC raised industry support
concerns during the September 19, 2024, consultations with respect to
the Canada CVD Petition.\32\ On September 20, 2024, the petitioners
responded to the comments from Stelco, GOC, Dofasco, and Ternium in
timely filed rebuttal submissions.\33\ On September 20, 2024, Stelco,
Dofasco, and Ternium submitted additional comments.\34\ On September
24, 2024, Ternium submitted additional comments and provided its 2023
shipments and production.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Stelco's Letter, ``Comments on Industry Support for the
Petitions and Request for Polling,'' dated September 18, 2024.
\28\ See Dofasco's Letter, ``Comments on Industry Support and
Request for Industry Polling,'' dated September 18, 2024.
\29\ See Ternium's Letters, ``Comments on Petitioners'
Standing,'' dated September 18, 2024 (Ternium Letter I), and ``Entry
of Appearance,'' dated September 13, 2024.
\30\ See Ternium Letter I at 3.
\31\ See GOC and Government of Ontario's Letter, ``Industry
Support Comments,'' dated September 18, 2024.
\32\ See GOC Consultations Memorandum; see also GOC's Letter,
``Government of Canada's Consultations Materials,'' dated September
20, 2024.
\33\ See Petitioners' Letters, ``Response to Comments on
Industry Support and Request for Polling,'' dated September 20, 2024
(Petitioners' Response I), ``Response to Comments on Industry
Support,'' dated September 20, 2024 (Petitioners' Response II), and
``Response to Comments on Petitioners' Standing,'' dated September
20, 2024 (Petitioners' Response III).
\34\ See Stelco's Letter, ``Rebuttal Comments on Industry
Support for the Petitions and Request for Polling,'' dated September
20, 2024; see also Dofasco's Letter, ``Rebuttal Comments to
Petitioners' Response to the Second General Issues Questionnaire and
Amendment to Volume I of Petitions,'' dated September 20, 2024.
\35\ See Ternium's Letter, ``Ternium's Third Comments on
Petitioners' Standing,'' dated September 24, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the First General
Issues Supplement, Second General Issues Supplement, the Third General
Issues Supplement, Petitioners' Response I, Petitioners' Response II,
Petitioners' Response III, and other information readily available to
Commerce indicates that the petitioners have established industry
support for the Petitions.\36\ With respect to the Brazil, Mexico, and
Vietnam CVD Petitions, we determine that the domestic producers and
workers that support the Brazil, Mexico, and Vietnam CVD Petitions
account 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 to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).\37\
Second, the domestic producers and workers have met the statutory
criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act
because the domestic producers and workers who support the Brazil,
Mexico, and Vietnam CVD Petitions account for at least 25 percent of
the total production of the
[[Page 80207]]
domestic like product.\38\ Finally, the domestic producers and workers
have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section
702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers and workers
who support the Brazil, Mexico, and Vietnam CVD 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.\39\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that
the Brazil, Mexico, and Vietnam CVD Petitions were filed on behalf of
the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the
Act.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ For further discussion, see Attachment II of the Country-
Specific CVD Initiation Checklists.
\37\ Id.; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
\38\ See Attachment II of the Country-Specific CVD Initiation
Checklists.
\39\ Id.
\40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the Canada CVD Petition, based on information
provided in the Petition and supplemental responses thereto, we
determine that 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
Canada CVD Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product.\41\ Because the Canada CVD
Petition and supplemental submissions did not establish support from
domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce was
required to take further action in order to evaluate industry
support.\42\ In this case, Commerce was able to rely on other
information, in accordance with section 702(c)(4)(D)(i) of the Act, to
determine industry support.\43\ Based on information provided in the
Petitions, supplemental responses, and other information readily
available to Commerce, 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
Canada CVD Petition 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 Canada CVD Petition.\44\
Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Canada CVD Petition was filed
on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section
702(b)(1) of the Act.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ See Attachment II of the Canada CVD Initiation Checklist.
\42\ Id.; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
\43\ See Attachment II of the Canada CVD Initiation Checklist.
\44\ Id.
\45\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury Test
Because Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and Vietnam 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 Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and/or Vietnam 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 from Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and Vietnam
individually exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under
section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ For further information regarding negligibility and the
injury allegation, 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 Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from
Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa,
Taiwan, the Republic of T[uuml]rkiye, the United Arab Emirates, and
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Attachment III).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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; and
low and declining capacity utilization; and declines in U.S. commercial
shipment values, net sales values, operating income, and net
income.\47\ We 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.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ Id.
\48\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 CORE from Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and Vietnam
benefit from countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOB, GOC, GOM,
and the GOV, 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.
Brazil
Based on our review of the Petitions, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on all 16 of the
programs alleged by the petitioners. For a full discussion of the basis
for our decision to initiate on each program, see the Brazil CVD
Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for
this investigation is available on ACCESS.
Canada
Based on our review of the Petitions, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 27 of the 28
programs alleged by the petitioners. For a full discussion of the basis
for our decision to initiate on each program, see the Canada CVD
Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for
this investigation is available on ACCESS.
Mexico
Based on our review of the Petitions, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 15 of the 16
programs alleged by the petitioners. For a full discussion of the basis
for our decision to initiate on each program, see the Mexico CVD
Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for
this investigation is available on ACCESS.
Vietnam
Based on our review of the Petitions, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on all 26 of the
programs alleged by the petitioners. For a full discussion of the basis
for our decision to initiate on each program, see the Vietnam CVD
Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for
this investigation is available on ACCESS.
Respondent Selection
Brazil, Canada, and Mexico
In the Petitions, the petitioners identified eight companies in
Brazil, five companies in Canada, and six companies in Mexico as
producers and/
[[Page 80208]]
or exporters of CORE.\49\ Commerce intends to follow its standard
practice in CVD investigations and calculate company-specific subsidy
rates in these investigations. Following standard practice in CVD
investigations, in the event Commerce determines that the number of
exporters or producers is large such that Commerce cannot individually
examine each company based on its resources, Commerce intends to select
mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
entry data for U.S. imports under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheading(s) listed in the
``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 28 and Exhibits I-10
through I-12); see also First General Issues Supplement at 7 and
Exhibit Supp. I-18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 23, 2024, Commerce released CBP data on imports of
CORE from Brazil, Canada, and Mexico under administrative protective
order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO
and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment on CBP data
and/or respondent selection must do so within three business days of
the publication date of the notice of initiation of these
investigations.\50\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See Country-Specific Memoranda, ``Release of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection Entry Data,'' dated September 23, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such
applications may be found on Commerce's website at <a href="https://www.trade.gov/administrative-protective-orders">https://www.trade.gov/administrative-protective-orders</a>.
Vietnam
In the Petitions, the petitioners identified 17 companies in
Vietnam as producers and/or exporters of CORE.\51\ 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 known producers/exporters
is large, and it cannot individually examine each company based upon
Commerce's resources, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents
based on quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires issued to the
potential respondents. Commerce normally selects mandatory respondents
in CVD investigations using U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
entry data for U.S. imports under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings listed in the ``Scope
of the Investigations'' in the appendix. However, for the Vietnam CVD
investigation, due to Commerce's determinations that certain imports of
CORE from Vietnam are circumventing the CVD orders on CORE from the
People's Republic of China \52\ and the Republic of Korea,\53\ we
cannot rely on CBP data in selecting respondents. Accordingly, for
Vietnam, Commerce will send Q&V questionnaires to each producer and/or
exporter for which there is complete address information on the record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 28 and Exhibit I-18).
\52\ See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the
People's Republic of China: Affirmative Final Determination of
Circumvention of the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 83
FR 23895 (May 23, 2018).
\53\ See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the
Republic of Korea: Affirmative Final Determinations of Anti-
Circumvention Inquiries on the Antidumping Duty and Countervailing
Duty Orders, 84 FR 70948 (December 26, 2019); see also Certain
Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the Republic of Korea:
Correction to Affirmative Final Determinations of Anti-Circumvention
Inquiries on the Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Orders, 85
FR 882 (January 8, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce will also post the Q&V questionnaire along with filing
instructions on Commerce's website at <a href="https://www.trade.gov/ec-adcvd-case-announcements">https://www.trade.gov/ec-adcvd-case-announcements</a>. Exporters/producers of CORE from Vietnam that do
not receive Q&V questionnaires may still submit a response to the Q&V
questionnaire and can obtain a copy of the Q&V questionnaire from
Commerce's website. Responses to the Q&V questionnaire must be
submitted by the relevant producers/exporters no later than 5:00 p.m.
on October 9, 2024, which is two weeks from the signature date of this
notice. An electronically filed document must be received successfully,
in its entirety, by ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the deadline
noted above.
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 GOB, GOC, GOM, and GOV 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
Commerce will notify the ITC of its initiation, as required by
section 702(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determination 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 CORE from Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and/or
Vietnam are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a
U.S. industry.\54\ A negative ITC determination for any country will
result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that
country.\55\ Otherwise, these CVD investigations will proceed according
to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
\55\ 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 of production 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 \56\ 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.\57\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
\57\ 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
[[Page 80209]]
limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by
Commerce.\58\ 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, 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, standalone submission; under limited circumstances we 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.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ See 19 CFR 351.302.
\59\ See 19 CFR 351.301; 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.\60\
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR
351.303(g).\61\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\61\ 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). Note that Commerce has amended certain of its requirements
pertaining to the service of documents in 19 CFR 351.303(f).\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ See Administrative Protective Order, Service, and Other
Procedures in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 88 FR
67069 (September 29, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and
777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: September 25, 2024.
Ryan Majerus,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, performing the
non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigations
The products covered by these investigations are certain flat-
rolled steel products, either clad, plated, or coated with
corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-,
aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated
or painted, varnished, laminated, or coated with plastics or other
non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating. The
products covered include coils that have a width of 12.7 mm or
greater, regardless of form of coil (e.g., in successively
superimposed layers, spirally oscillating, etc.). The products
covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight
lengths) of a thickness less than 4.75 mm and a width that is 12.7
mm or greater and that measures at least 10 times the thickness. The
products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in
straight lengths) of a thickness of 4.75 mm or more and a width
exceeding 150 mm and measuring at least twice the thickness. The
products described above may be rectangular, square, circular, or
other shape and include products of either rectangular or non-
rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved
subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been
``worked after rolling'' (e.g., products which have been beveled or
rounded at the edges).
For purposes of the width and thickness requirements referenced
above:
(1) Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product is
within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual
measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions
set forth above, and
(2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific product
(e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-rectangular cross-
section, the width of certain products with non-rectangular shape,
etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or thickness applies.
Steel products included in the scope of these investigations are
products in which: (1) iron predominates, by weight, over each of
the other contained elements; and (2) the carbon content is 2
percent or less, by weight.
Subject merchandise also includes corrosion-resistant steel that
has been further processed in a third country, including but not
limited to annealing, tempering, painting, varnishing, trimming,
cutting, punching and/or slitting or any other processing that would
not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the
investigations if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-
scope corrosion resistant steel.
All products that meet the written physical description are
within the scope of these investigations unless specifically
excluded. The following products are outside of and/or specifically
excluded from the scope of these investigations:
<bullet> Flat-rolled steel products either plated or coated with
tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (``terne
plate'') or both chromium and chromium oxides (``tin free steel''),
whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other
non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating;
<bullet> Clad products in straight lengths of 4.7625 mm or more
in composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and
measures at least twice the thickness;
<bullet> Certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are
three-layered corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat-rolled products
less than 4.75 mm in composite thickness that consist of a carbon
steel flat-rolled product clad on both sides with stainless steel in
a 20%-60%-20% ratio; and
Also excluded from the scope of the antidumping duty
investigation on corrosion resistant steel from Taiwan are any
products covered by the existing antidumping duty order on
corrosion-resistant steel from Taiwan. See Certain Corrosion-
Resistant Steel Products from India, Italy, the People's Republic of
China, the Republic of Korea and Taiwan: Amended Final Affirmative
Antidumping Determination for India and Taiwan, and Antidumping Duty
Orders, 81FR 48390 (July 25, 2016); Corrosion-Resistant Steel
Products from Taiwan: Notice of Third Amended Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value Pursuant to Court Decision and Partial
Exclusion from Antidumping Duty Order, 88 FR 58245 (August 25,
2023).
Also excluded from the scope of the antidumping duty
investigation on corrosion-resistant steel from the United Arab
Emirates and the antidumping duty and countervailing duty
investigations on corrosion-resistant steel from the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam are any products covered by the existing
antidumping and countervailing duty orders on corrosion-resistant
steel from the People's Republic of China and the Republic of Korea
and the antidumping duty order on corrosion-resistant steel from
Taiwan. See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India,
Italy, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea and
Taiwan: Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping Determination for
India and Taiwan, and Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 48390 (July 25,
2016); see also Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from
India, Italy, Republic of Korea and the People's Republic of China:
Countervailing Duty Order, 81 FR 48387 (July 25, 2016). This
exclusion does not apply to imports of corrosion-resistant steel
that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption in
the United States for which the relevant importer and
[[Page 80210]]
exporter certifications have been completed and maintained and all
other applicable certification requirements have been met such that
the entry is entered into the United States as not subject to the
antidumping and countervailing duty orders on corrosion-resistant
steel from the People's Republic of China, the antidumping and
countervailing duty orders on corrosion-resistant steel from the
Republic of Korea, or the antidumping duty order on corrosion-
resistant steel from Taiwan.
The products subject to the investigations are currently
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) under item numbers: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060,
7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0040, 7210.49.0045,
7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000,
7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000,
7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090,
7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000,
7212.50.0000, 7212.60.0000, 7225.91.0000, 7225.92.0000,
7226.99.0110, and 7226.99.0130.
The products subject to the investigations may also enter under
the following HTSUS item numbers: 7210.90.1000, 7215.90.1000,
7215.90.3000, 7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500, 7217.30.1530,
7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060,
7217.90.5090, 7225.99.0090, 7226.99.0180, 7228.60.6000,
7228.60.8000, and 7229.90.1000.
The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and
customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the
investigations is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2024-22591 Filed 10-1-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on October 2, 2024.
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.