[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 2, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80204-80210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[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 https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook 
can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook_on_Electronic_Filing_Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 https://www.trade.gov/administrative-protective-orders.

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 https://www.trade.gov/ec-adcvd-case-announcements. 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 https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 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