CVD Activity for the Period   
December 8 - 19, 2014 
  
Investigations - New Initiations 
December 9, 2014 
Melamine From the People's Republic of China and Trinidad and Tobago: Initiation of Countervailing Duty 
Investigations http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-12-09/html/2014-28832.htm  
 
New Orders 
Nil 
 
Investigations - Preliminar y and Final De termination 
December 15, 2014 
Calcium Hypochlorite From the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination 
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-12-15/html/2014-29368.htm  
 
Reviews – Preliminary and Final Results 
Nil 
 
Federal Register Notices: 
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 2014)] 
[Notices] [Pages 73030-73034] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office 
[www.gpo.gov ] 
[FR Doc No: 2014-28832] 
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 
 International Trade Administration  [C-570-021, C-274-807] 
 
 Melamine From the People's Republic of China and Trinidad and  Tobago: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations  
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,  
Department of Commerce.  DATES: Effective Date: December 9, 2014.  
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Medley at (202) 482-4987 or Eve  
Wang at (202) 482-6231 (People's Republic of China); Brendan Quinn at  (202) 482-5848 or Raquel Silva at (202) 482-6475 (Republic of Trinidad  and Tobago), Office III, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance,  International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th  
Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. 
 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The Petitions 
     On November 12, 2014, the Department of Commerce (``Department'')  
received countervailing duty (``CVD'') petitions concerning imports of  melamine from the People's Republic of China (``PRC'') and Trinidad and  Tobago (``Trinidad and Tobago'') filed in proper form on behalf of  
Cornerstone Chemical Company (``Petitioner''). The CVD petitions were  accompanied by two antidumping duty (``AD'') petitions.\1\ Petitioner  
is a domestic producer of melamine.\2\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
    \1\ See Petitioner's submission entitled ``Petitions For The  Imposition Of Antidumping And Countervailing Duties Against Melamine  
From China And Trinidad And Tobago,'' dated November 12, 2014  (``Petitions'').     \2\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
    On November 14, and November 19, 2014, the Department requested  information and clarification for certain areas of the Petitions.\3\  
Petitioner filed responses to these requests on  
[[Page 73031]]  
November 18, November 20, and November 24, 2014.\4\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
    \3\ See Letter from the Department to Petitioner entitled  ``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of  
Melamine from Trinidad and Tobago: Supplement Question,'' dated  November 14, 2014; Letter from the Department to Petitioner entitled  ``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing  
Duties on Imports of Melamine from the People's Republic of China  and Trinidad and Tobago: Supplemental Questions,'' dated November  
14, 2014 (``General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire''); Letter  from the Department to Petitioner entitled ``Petitions for the  Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of  
Melamine from the People's Republic of China and Trinidad and  Tobago: Supplemental Questions,'' dated November 19, 2014 (``Second  
General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire'').     \4\ See Letter from Petitioner entitled ``Melamine From Trinidad  and Tobago/Petitioner's Response To The Department's Questions  
Regarding The Petition,'' dated November 18, 2014; Letter from  Petitioner entitled ``Melamine from China and Trinidad and Tobago/ 
Petitioner's Response to the Department's Questions Regarding the  Petition,'' dated November 18, 2014 (``General Issues Supplement'');  Letter from Petitioner entitled ``Melamine From China And Trinidad  
and Tobago/Petitioner's Response To The Department's Second General  
Questionnaire,'' dated November 20, 2014 (``Second General Issues  
Supplement''); Letter from Petitioner entitled ``Supplement to  
Petitions For The Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing  Duties Melamine from China and Trinidad and Tobago'' dated November  
24, 2014 (``Third General Issues Supplement''). 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as  amended (``the Act''), Petitioner alleges that the Government of the  
PRC (``GOC'') and the Government of Trinidad and Tobago (``GOTT'') are  
providing countervailable subsidies (within the meaning of sections 701  
and 771(5) of the Act) to imports of melamine from the PRC and the  
Trinidad and Tobago, respectively, and that such imports are materially  injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United  
States. Also, consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the Act, the  
Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably available to  
Petitioner supporting its allegations. 
    The Department finds that Petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf  of the domestic industry because Petitioner is an interested party as  defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also finds that  
Petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the  initiation of the CVD investigations that Petitioner is requesting.\5\ 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------      \5\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the  
Petitions'' section below. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 Period of Investigations 
     The period of the investigation for both the PRC and Trinidad and  
Tobago is January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013.\6\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     \6\ 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 Scope of the Investigations 
     The product covered by these investigations is melamine from the  PRC and Trinidad and Tobago. For a full description of the scope of  
these investigations, see the ``Scope of the Investigations'' in  Appendix I of this notice. 
 Comments on Scope of the Investigations  
    During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions  to, and received responses from, Petitioner pertaining to the proposed  
scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions would be an  accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is  seeking relief.\7\ 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
    \7\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire and Second  General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also General Issues  Supplement, Second General Issues Supplement, and Third General  
Issues Supplement. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,\8\ we  are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues  
regarding product coverage (scope). The period for scope comments is  
intended to provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider  
all comments and to consult with parties prior to the issuance of the  
preliminary determination. If scope comments include factual  information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), all such factual information  
should be limited to public information. All such comments must be  
filed by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (``EST'') on December 22,  
2014, 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. EST on January 2, 2015, which is 10 calendar days  
after the initial comments deadline.\9\ 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
    \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final rule,  62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).     \9\ According to the Department practice, when a date falls on a  
weekend or a federal holiday, submissions become due the next  business day; see Notice of Clarification: Application of ``Next  
Business Day'' Rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines  Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10,  2005). 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
    The Department requests that any factual information the parties  consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted  
during this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that  additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the  
investigations may be relevant, the party may contact the Department  and request permission to submit the additional information. All such  
comments must be filed on the records of the PRC and Trinidad and  Tobago AD and CVD investigations.  
Filing Requirements  
    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically  using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty  Centralized Electronic Service System (``ACCESS'').\10\ An  
electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its  entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents excepted from the  
electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in  paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room  1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue  
NW, Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt  by the applicable deadlines. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------      \10\ On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and Compliance changed  
the name of Enforcement and Compliance's AD and CVD Centralized  Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS'') to AD and CVD Centralized  
Electronic Service System (``ACCESS''). The Web site location was  changed from http://iaaccess.trade.gov  to http://access.trade.gov .  
The Final Rule changing the reference to the Regulations can be  
found at 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014). 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
Consultations  
    Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, the Department  
notified representatives of the GOC and the GOTT of the receipt of the  
Petitions. Also, in accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the  
Act, the Department provided representatives of the GOC and the GOTT  the opportunity for consultations with respect to the Petitions.\11\  
Consultations were held with the GOC on November 25, 2014.\12\ All  
memoranda are on file electronically via ACCESS.\13\ 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     \11\ See Letters of invitation from the Department to the GOC  
and the GOT, both dated November 17, 2014. 
    \12\ See Memorandum to the File, ``Consultations with Officials  
from the Government of the People's Republic of China Regarding the  
Countervailing Duty Petition Concerning Melamine,'' dated November  26, 2014.     \13\ See supra fn.10 for information pertaining to ACCESS. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
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, the Department  shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to  
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by  subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a  
statistically valid sampling method to poll the ``industry.''  [[Page 73032]] 
     Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the  
producers as a whole of a domestic like product, or those producers  whose collective output of a domestic like product constitutes a major  proportion of the total domestic production of the product. Thus, to  
determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the  statute directs the Department to look to producers and workers who  
produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission  (``ITC''), which is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic  industry'' has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a  
domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the  Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition  
regarding the domestic like product,\14\ they do so for different  purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In  addition, the Department's determination is subject to limitations of  
time and information. Although this may result in different definitions  
of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of  
either agency contrary to law.\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  
Petitions).     With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioner does not offer  a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of  
the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted  on the record, we determined that melamine constitutes a single  
domestic like product and we analyzed industry support in terms of that  domestic like product.\16\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
    \16\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in  
this case, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation  Checklist: Melamine from the People's Republic of China (``PRC CVD  
Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry  Support for the Petitions Covering Melamine from the People's  
Republic of China and Trinidad and Tobago (``Attachment II''); and  Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Melamine  
from Trinidad and Tobago (``Trinidad and Tobago CVD Initiation  Checklist''), at Attachment II. These checklists are dated  concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS.  
Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the  Central Records Unit, Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce  
building. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
    In determining whether Petitioner has 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 Appendix I of  this notice. To establish industry support, Petitioner provided its own  
production of the domestic like product in 2013.\17\ Petitioner states  that it is the only producer of melamine in the United States;  
therefore, the Petitions are supported by 100 percent of the U.S.  industry.\18\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     \17\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2 and Exhibit I-18. 
    \18\ Id., at 2. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
    Based on the data provided in the Petitions, supplemental  
submissions, and other information readily available to the Department,  
we determine that Petitioner has established industry support.\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, the Department is not required  
to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g.,  
polling).\20\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) 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.\21\ Finally, the domestic producers (or  
workers) 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.\22\  
Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petitions were filed on  
behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1)  of the Act. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     \19\ See PRC CVD Checklist and Trinidad and Tobago CVD  
Checklist, at Attachment II.     \20\ See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also PRC CVD  Checklist and Trinidad and Tobago CVD Checklist, at Attachment II. 
    \21\ See PRC CVD Checklist and Trinidad and Tobago CVD  
Checklist, at Attachment II. 
    \22\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     The Department finds that Petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf  
of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined  in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has demonstrated sufficient  
industry support with respect to the CVD investigations that it is  requesting the Department initiate.\23\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     \23\ Id. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------  Injury Test 
     Because the PRC and Trinidad and Tobago 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 the  
PRC and Trinidad and Tobago materially injure, or threaten material  injury to, a U.S. industry. 
 Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation  
    Petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are  benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports,  
individually and cumulatively, are causing, or threaten to cause,  material injury to the U.S. industry producing the domestic like  product. 
    With regard to the PRC, Petitioner alleges that subject imports  
exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section  
771(24)(A) of the Act.\24\ In CVD petitions, section 771(24)(A)-(B) of  
the Act provides that imports of subject merchandise from developing  countries must exceed the negligibility threshold of four percent.  
Because Trinidad and Tobago has been designated as a developing  
country,\25\ imports from Trinidad and Tobago must exceed the  
negligibility threshold of four percent. With regard to Trinidad and  
Tobago, the allegedly subsidized imports exceed the negligibility  threshold provided under section 771(24)(B) of the Act.\26\ 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
    \24\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 11-12 and Exhibit I-11. 
    \25\ See section 771(36)(A) of the Act; see also Developing and  Least-Developed Country Designations under the Countervailing Duty  
Law, 63 FR 29945-29948 (June 2, 1998). 
    \26\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 11-12 and Exhibit I-11. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     Petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is  illustrated by reduced market share, underselling and price depression  
or suppression, lost sales and revenues, and adversely impacted  production, shipments, capacity utilization, financial performance, and  
capital expenditures.\27\ We assessed the allegations and supporting  evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, and  causation, and we 
 
[[Page 73033]] 
 determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate  
evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.\28\ In  accordance with section 771(7)(G)(ii)(III) of the Act, which provides  
an exception to the mandatory cumulation provision for imports from any  country designated as a beneficiary country under the Caribbean Basin  
Economic Recovery Act (``CBERA''), we considered Petitioner`s  allegation of injury with respect to Trinidad and Tobago, a designated  beneficiary under CBERA, independent of the allegation for the PRC and  
found that the information provided satisfies the requirements for  initiation.\29\ 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------      \27\ Id., at 12-16 and Exhibits I-13 through I-20; see also  
Third General Issues Supplement, at 2-5 and Exhibits 1-4.     \28\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist and Trinidad and Tobago  
CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations  and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping  and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Melamine from the  
People's Republic of China and Trinidad and Tobago (``Attachment  III''). 
    \29\ See id. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations  
    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a  CVD investigation whenever an interested party files a CVD petition on  behalf of an industry that: (1) Alleges the elements necessary for an  
imposition of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act; and (2) is  
accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner  
supporting the allegations. 
    In the Petitions, Petitioner alleges that producers/exporters of  melamine in the PRC and Trinidad and Tobago benefited from  
countervailable subsidies bestowed by the governments of these  
countries, respectively. The Department examined the Petitions and  
finds that they comply with the requirements of section 702(b)(1) of  
the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Act, we  are initiating CVD investigations to determine whether manufacturers,  
producers, or exporters of melamine from the PRC and Trinidad and  
Tobago receive countervailable subsidies from the governments of these  
countries, respectively. 
 The PRC 
 
    Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is  
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 21 of the  
alleged programs.\30\ For a full discussion of the basis for our  decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the PRC CVD  Initiation Checklist. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
    \30\ Additionally, Petitioner alleged various grants received  individually by four producers/exporters of melamine. The Department  intends to investigate these grants to the extent that these  
specific companies are selected as mandatory respondents in this  
proceeding. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
Trinidad and Tobago  
    Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is  sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 10 of the 10  
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision  to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the Trinidad and  Tobago CVD Initiation Checklist. 
    A public version of the initiation checklist for each investigation  is available on ACCESS and at http://trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp . 
    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 this initiation. 
 Respondent Selection 
     Petitioner named 54 companies as producers/exporters of melamine  from the PRC and one company as a producer/exporter of melamine from  
Trinidad and Tobago.\31\ Following standard practice in CVD  investigations, the Department will, where appropriate, select  
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') data  for U.S. imports of melamine during the period of investigation under  the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States  
(``HTSUS'') number: 2933.61.0000. For the PRC, we intend to release CBP  data under Administrative Protective Order (``APO'') to all parties  
with access to information protected by APO shortly after the  announcement of these case initiations. For Trinidad and Tobago,  Petitioner named only one company as a producer/exporter of melamine  
i.e., Methanol Holdings (Trinidad) Ltd., and provided information from  
an independent third party source as support.\32\ Furthermore, we  
currently know of no additional producers/exporters of subject  
merchandise from Trinidad and Tobago. Accordingly, the Department  intends to examine all known producers/exporters in this investigation  
(i.e., the company cited above). The Department invites comments  
regarding CBP data and respondent selection within five calendar days  
of publication of this Federal Register notice. Comments must be filed  
electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be  received successfully in its entirety by the Department's electronic  
records system, ACCESS, by 5 p.m. EST by the date noted above. We  
intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20  
days of publication of this Federal Register notice. 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 the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo . 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
    \31\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I-5.     \32\ See id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 Distribution of Copies of the Petitions 
     In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR  351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been  
provided to the GOC and GOTT via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we  
will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petitions  
to each known exporter (as named in the Petitions), consistent with 19  CFR 351.203(c)(2). 
 ITC Notification 
     We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section  
702(d) of the Act.  Preliminary Determinations by the ITC 
     The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date  
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable  indication that imports of melamine from the PRC and/or Trinidad and  Tobago are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a  
U.S. industry.\33\ A negative ITC determination for either country will  result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that  
country; \34\ otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to  statutory and regulatory time limits. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     \33\ See section 703(a) of the Act. 
    \34\ Id. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
Submission of Factual Information  
    On April 10, 2013, the Department published Definition of Factual  Information and Time Limits for Submission of Factual Information:  Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 2013), which modified two  
regulations related to AD and CVD proceedings: the definition of  
factual information (19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits for  
the submission of factual information (19 CFR 351.301). The final rule  
identifies five categories of factual information in 19 CFR  351.102(b)(21), which are summarized as follows: (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  
[[Page 73034]] 
 
CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by the  
Department; and (v) evidence other than factual information described  in (i)-(iv). The final rule requires any party, when submitting factual  
information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)  
the information is being submitted and, if the information is submitted  
to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the  
record, to provide an explanation identifying the information already  on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or  correct. The final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301 so that, rather  
than providing general time limits, there are specific time limits  based on the type of factual information being submitted. These  
modifications are effective for all proceeding segments initiated on or  after May 10, 2013, and thus are applicable to these investigations.  Interested parties should review the final rule, available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt , prior to  
submitting factual information in these investigations. 
 Revised Extension of Time Limits Regulation 
     On September 20, 2013, the Department modified its regulation  
concerning the extension of time limits for submissions in AD and CVD  proceedings.\35\ The modification clarifies that parties may request an  
extension of time limits before a time limit established under Part 351  expires, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an  extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the  
time limit established under Part 351 expires. For submissions which  are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will  
be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. on the due date.  Examples include, but are not limited to: (1) Case and rebuttal briefs,  filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309; (2) factual information to value  
factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c), or to measure the adequacy of  remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2), filed pursuant to 19 CFR  
351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, clarification and correction information  filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(iv); (3) comments concerning the  selection of a surrogate country and surrogate values and rebuttal; (4)  
comments concerning CBP data; and (5) quantity and value  questionnaires. Under certain circumstances, the Department 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, the Department will inform parties in  
the letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a  specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be  
considered timely. This modification also requires that an extension  request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission, and  clarifies the circumstances under which the Department will grant  
untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. These  
modifications are effective for all segments initiated on or after  
October 21, 2013, and thus are applicable to these investigations.  
Interested parties should review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule,  available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm , 
prior to submitting factual information in these  
investigations. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     \35\ See Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790  
(September 20, 2013). 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
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 are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are  
in effect for company/government officials, as well as their  representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of petitions  filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD  
proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the  formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final  
Rule.\37\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the  submitting party does not comply with the applicable revised  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  http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_0717201
3.pdf. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
Notification to Interested Parties  
    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under  APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the  Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:  
Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January  22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations  
should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures  (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR  351.103(d)). 
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and  777(i) of the Act. 
     Dated: December 2, 2014. Paul Piquado, 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.  
Appendix I--Scope of the Investigations      The merchandise subject to these investigations is melamine  
(Chemical Abstracts Service (``CAS'') registry number 108-78-01,  
molecular formula C3H6N6).\1\  
Melamine is a crystalline powder or granule typically (but not  
exclusively) used to manufacture melamine formaldehyde resins. All  melamine is covered by the scope of these investigations  
irrespective of purity, particle size, or physical form. Melamine  
that has been blended with other products is included within this  
scope when such blends include constituent parts that have been  
intermingled, but that have not been chemically reacted with each  other to produce a different product. For such blends, only the  
melamine component of the mixture is covered by the scope of these  
investigations. Melamine that is otherwise subject to these  
investigations is not excluded when commingled with melamine from  
sources not subject to these investigations. Only the subject  component of such commingled products is covered by the scope of  
these investigations. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
    \1\ Melamine is also known as 2,4,6-triamino-s-triazine; l,3,5- Triazine-2,4,6-triamine; Cyanurotriamide; Cyanurotriamine;  Cyanuramide; and by various brand names. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------  
    The subject merchandise is provided for in subheading  2933.61.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States  (``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS subheading and CAS registry number  
are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written  
description of the scope is dispositive. 
 [FR Doc. 2014-28832 Filed 12-8-14; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P  [Federal Register Volume 79, Number 240 (Monday, December 15, 2014)] 
[Notices] [Pages 74064-74065] 
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov ] 
[FR Doc No: 2014-29368] 
  
 [[Page 74064]] 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------  
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE  
International Trade Administration  [C-570-009] 
  
Calcium Hypochlorite From the People's Republic of China: Final  Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination  
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,  Department of Commerce. 
 ACTION: Notice.  
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``Department'') determines that  
countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters  of calcium hypochlorite from the People's Republic of China (``PRC'').  
For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the ``Suspension of  
Liquidation'' section of this notice. 
 
DATES: Effective Date: December 15, 2014.  
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katie Marksberry, AD/CVD Operations,  
Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade  
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and  
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone 202.482.7906.  
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
 
Background 
     The petitioner to this investigation is Arch Chemicals Inc.  (``Petitioner''). This investigation covers 24 government programs. The  
Department selected three mandatory respondents; Hubei Dinglong  Chemical Co., Ltd. (``Hubei Dinglong''), W&W Marketing Corporation  
(``W&W Marketing''), and Tianjin Jinbin International Trade Co., Ltd.  (``Tianjin Jinbin''). All three mandatory respondents refused to  participate in this investigation. 
 
Period of Investigation 
     The period of investigation for which we are measuring subsidies is  
January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2012.  
Case History  
    The events that have occurred since the Department published the  Preliminary Determination on May 27, 2014,\1\ are discussed in the  Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and  
Compliance, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final  Determination of Calcium Hypochlorite from the People's Republic of  
China'' (``Decision Memorandum''), which is hereby adopted by this  notice.\2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     \1\ See Calcium Hypochlorite From the People's Republic of  
China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination,  and Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty Determination With Final  Antidumping Duty Determination, 79 FR 30082 (May 27, 2014)  
(Preliminary Determination), and the accompanying Preliminary  Decision Memorandum. 
    \2\ On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and Compliance changed the  name of Enforcement and Compliance's AD and CVD Centralized  Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS'') to AD and CVD Centralized  
Electronic Service System (``ACCESS''). The Web site location was  changed from http://iaaccess.trade.gov  to http://access.trade.gov .  
The Final Rule changing the references to the Regulations can be  
found at 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014). Public versions of all  business proprietary documents and all public documents are on file  
electronically via ACCESS. Access to ACCESS is available to  
registered users at http://access.trade.gov  and to all parties in  
the Central Records Unit, Room 7046 of the main Department of  
Commerce building. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
Scope of the Investigation 
 
    The product covered by this investigation is calcium hypochlorite,  regardless of form (e.g., powder, tablet (compressed), crystalline  
(granular), or in liquid solution), whether or not blended with other  
materials, containing at least 10 percent available chlorine measured  
by actual weight. The scope also includes bleaching powder and  
hemibasic calcium hypochlorite. For a complete description of the scope  of the investigation, see Appendix I to this notice. 
 
Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received 
 
    The subsidy programs under investigation and the issues raised in  the case and rebuttal briefs submitted by parties in this investigation  are addressed in the Decision Memorandum, dated concurrently with this  
notice. A list of the issues that parties raised and to which we  responded in the Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as  
Appendix II. The Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on  file electronically via ACCESS. In addition, a complete version of the  Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html . The signed and the electronic  
versions of this memorandum are identical in content. 
 Use of Facts Otherwise Available, Including Adverse Inferences 
     For purposes of this final determination, we relied on facts  
available and applied an adverse inference, in accordance with sections  776(a) and (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''),  
with regard to (1) the existence of a financial contribution, benefit,  and specificity for the alleged subsidy programs and (2) the net  subsidy rate assigned to Hubei Dinglong, W&W Marketing, and Tianjin  
Jinbin. A full discussion of our decision to rely on adverse facts  available is presented in the Decision Memorandum under the section  
``Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences.''  Suspension of Liquidation 
     In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we have  
calculated individual rates for Hubei Dinglong, W&W Marketing, and  Tianjin Jinbin. Section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act states that for  companies not individually investigated, we will determine an ``all- 
others'' rate equal to the weighted average countervailable subsidy  rates established for exporters and producers individually  
investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis countervailable rates,  and any rates determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. Section  705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act states that if the countervailable subsidy  
rates for all exporters and producers individually investigated are  zero or de minimis rates, or are determined entirely under section 776  
of the Act, the Department may use any reasonable method to establish  an all-others rate for exporters and producers not individually  investigated, including averaging the weighted average countervailable  
subsidy rates determined for the exporters and producers individually  
investigated. As described above, all of the mandatory respondents'  
subsidy rates were calculated entirely under section 776 of the Act.  
Therefore, we have resorted to ``any reasonable method'' to derive the  ``all-others'' rate, as described under section 705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the  
Act. We are basing the ``all-others'' rate on the rate determined for  
the mandatory respondents, consistent with section 705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of  
the Act.\3\ This issue is discussed in more detail in Comment 2 of the  
Decision Memorandum. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
    \3\ See, e.g., Certain Potassium Phosphate Salts From the  
People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty  
Determination and Termination of Critical Circumstances Inquiry, 75  FR 30375, 30376 (June 1, 2010). 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
    We determine the total estimated net countervailable subsidy rates  
to be:  ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
                                                          Net subsidy ad                     Producer/exporter                      valorem rate 
                                                             (percent) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hubei Dinglong Chemical Co., Ltd........................           65.85 
W&W Marketing Corporation...............................           65.85 
 
[[Page 74065]]  
  Tianjin Jinbin International Trade Co., Ltd.............           65.85 
All Others..............................................           65.85 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
     As a result of our Preliminary Determination, and pursuant to  section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border  
Protection (``CBP'') to suspend liquidation of all entries of calcium  hypochlorite from the PRC that were entered or withdrawn from  
warehouse, for consumption on or after May 27, 2014, the date of  publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register.  In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we issued instructions to  
CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for countervailing  duty (``CVD'') purposes for subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn  
from warehouse, on or after September 24, 2014, but to continue the  suspension of liquidation of all entries from May 27, 2014, through  September 23, 2014. 
    If the U.S. International Trade Commission (``ITC'') issues a final  affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order and  
reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act  and will require a cash deposit of estimated CVDs for such entries of  merchandise in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC determines that  
material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this  proceeding will be terminated and all estimated duties deposited or  
securities posted as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be  refunded or canceled.  
ITC Notification 
 
    In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the  
ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the  ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information related to this  
investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and  
business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC  
confirms it will not disclose such information, either publicly or  
under an administrative protective order (``APO''), without the written  consent of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. 
 
Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information 
 
    In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury  determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties  
subject to an APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction of  
proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR  
351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return/destruction of  
APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby  requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO  is a violation that is subject to sanction. 
    This determination is published pursuant to sections 705(d) and  777(i) of the Act. 
     Dated: December 8, 2014. Paul Piquado, 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. 
 
Appendix I--Scope of the Investigation  
    The product covered by this investigation is calcium  hypochlorite, regardless of form (e.g., powder, tablet (compressed),  
crystalline (granular), or in liquid solution), whether or not  blended with other materials, containing at least 10 percent  
available chlorine measured by actual weight. The scope also  includes bleaching powder and hemibasic calcium hypochlorite.     Calcium hypochlorite has the general chemical formulation  
Ca(OCl)2, but may also be sold in a more dilute form as  bleaching powder with the chemical formulation,  
Ca(OCl)2.CaCl2.Ca(OH)2.2H2 O or hemibasic calcium hypochlorite with the chemical formula of  2Ca(OCl)2.Ca(OH)2 or  
Ca(OCl)2.0.5Ca(OH)2. Calcium hypochlorite has  a Chemical Abstract Service (``CAS'') registry number of 7778-54-3,  
and a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA) Pesticide Code  (``PC'') Number of 014701. The subject calcium hypochlorite has an  International Maritime Dangerous Goods (``IMDG'') code of Class 5.1  
UN 1748, 2880, or 2208 or Class 5.1/8 UN 3485, 3486, or 3487.     Calcium hypochlorite is currently classifiable under the  
subheading 2828.10.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the  United States (``HTSUS''). The subheading covers commercial calcium  hypochlorite and other calcium hypochlorite. When tableted or  
blended with other materials, calcium hypochlorite may be entered  under other tariff classifications, such as 3808.94.5000 and  
3808.99.9500, which cover disinfectants and similar products. While  the HTSUS subheadings, the CAS registry number, the U.S. EPA PC  number, and the IMDG codes are provided for convenience and customs  
purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation  
is dispositive. 
 
Appendix II--Issues and Decision Memorandum  
I. Summary 
II. Background 
    A. Case History 
    B. Period of Investigation III. Scope Comments 
IV. Scope of the Investigation 
V. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences 
    A. Selection of the Adverse Facts Available Rate 
    B. Subsidy Rate Chart VI. Analysis of Comments 
    Comment 1: Whether the Department Correctly Denied CPIW/JSCC  
Voluntary/Mandatory Respondent Status 
    Comment 2: Whether the Department Correctly Calculated the CVD  
Rate Applied to CPIW/JSCC [FR Doc. 2014-29368 Filed 12-12-14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P