[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 2, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80196-80204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-22592]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-602-812, A-351-862, A-122-871, A-201-863, A-421-818, A-791-829, A-
583-878, A-489-855, A-520-811, A-552-843]


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: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

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


DATES: Applicable September 25, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maisha Cryor at (202) 482-5831 
(Australia and Canada), Nathan Araya at (202) 482-3401 (Brazil), 
William Horn at (202) 482-4868 (Mexico), Kabir Archuletta at (202) 482-
2593 (the Netherlands), Jacob Saude at (202) 482-0981 (South Africa), 
Fred Baker and Monique Cummings at (202) 482-2924 and (202) 482-3996, 
respectively (Taiwan), Brittany Bauer at (202) 482-3860 (the Republic 
of T[uuml]rkiye (T[uuml]rkiye)), Toni Page at (202) 482-1398 (the 
United Arab Emirates (UAE)), and Jacob Waddell at (202) 482-1369 (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 antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of certain 
corrosion-resistant steel products (CORE) from Australia, Brazil, 
Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, T[uuml]rkiye, 
the UAE, 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,

[[Page 80197]]

the petitioners).\1\ The AD Petitions were accompanied by 
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of CORE from 
Brazil, Canada, Mexico, 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, 2024, Commerce requested supplemental 
information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions in 
supplemental questionnaires.\3\ The petitioners responded to Commerce's 
supplemental questionnaires between September 12 and 20, 2024.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Supplemental Questions,'' dated 
September 9, 2024 (General Issues Questionnaire); see also Country-
Specific AD Supplemental Questionnaires: Australia Supplemental, 
Brazil Supplemental, Canada Supplemental, Mexico Supplemental, the 
Netherlands Supplemental, South Africa Supplemental, Taiwan 
Supplemental, T[uuml]rkiye Supplemental, UAE Supplemental, and 
Vietnam Supplemental, dated September 9, 2024; Commerce's Letter, 
``Second Supplemental Questions,'' dated September 16, 2024 (Second 
General Issues Questionnaire); Second Country-Specific AD 
Supplemental Questionnaires: the Netherlands Second Supplemental and 
Vietnam Second Supplemental, dated September 17, 2024; 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 
Country-Specific AD Supplemental Responses: Australia AD Supplement, 
Brazil AD Supplement, Canada AD Supplement, Mexico AD Supplement, 
the Netherlands AD Supplement, South Africa AD Supplement, Taiwan AD 
Supplement, T[uuml]rkiye AD Supplement, UAE AD Supplement, and 
Vietnam AD Supplement, dated September 12, 2024; Petitioners' 
Letter, ``Petitioner's Response to Second General Issues 
Supplemental Questionnaire and Amendment to Volume I of Petitions,'' 
dated September 18, 2024 (Second General Issues Supplement); 
Country-Specific AD Supplemental Responses: Second Netherlands AD 
Supplement and Second Vietnam AD Supplement, dated September 18, 
2024; 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 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of CORE from 
Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa, 
Taiwan, T[uuml]rkiye, the UAE, and Vietnam are being, or are likely to 
be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV) within the 
meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that imports of such products 
are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the CORE 
industry in the United States. Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the 
Act, 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 for the initiation of the requested LTFV 
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, pursuant to 
19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) for Australia, 
Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, 
T[uuml]rkiye, and the UAE LTFV investigations is July 1, 2023, through 
June 30, 2024. Because Vietnam is a non-market economy (NME) country, 
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the POI for the Vietnam LTFV 
investigation is January 1, 2024, through June 30, 2024.

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is CORE from Australia, 
Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, 
T[uuml]rkiye, the UAE, 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.\7\ On September 12 and 18, 2024, the petitioners provided 
clarifications and revised the scope.\8\ The description of merchandise 
covered by these investigations, as described in the appendix to this 
notice, reflects these clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See General Issues Questionnaire; see also Second General 
Issues Questionnaire.
    \8\ 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).\9\ Commerce will consider all scope 
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,\10\ all such factual information should be limited to 
public information. 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.\11\ Any rebuttal comments, which may 
include factual information, and should also be limited to public 
information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on October 25, 2024, which 
is 10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble); see also 19 CFR 
351.312.
    \10\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
    \11\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce requests that any factual information that parties 
consider relevant to the scope of these investigations be submitted 
during that 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 
LTFV 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.\12\ An electronically filed document must be received 
successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Product Characteristics

    Commerce is providing interested parties an opportunity to comment 
on the appropriate physical characteristics of CORE to be reported in 
response to Commerce's AD questionnaires. This

[[Page 80198]]

information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics 
of the subject merchandise in order to report the relevant factors of 
production (FOP) or cost of production (COP) accurately, as well as to 
develop appropriate product comparison criteria.
    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that 
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of 
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to 
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) general product 
characteristics; and (2) product comparison criteria. We note that it 
is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product 
comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on meaningful 
commercial differences among products. In other words, although there 
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers 
to describe CORE, it may be that only a select few product 
characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical 
characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the 
order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching 
products. Generally, Commerce attempts to list the most important 
physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics 
last.
    In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in 
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product 
characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on October 15, 
2024, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this 
notice.\13\ Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on 
October 25, 2024, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment 
deadline. All comments and submissions to Commerce must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the record of each 
of the LTFV investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) 
poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if 
there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or 
(ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling 
method to poll the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), 
which is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' 
has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like 
product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the 
ITC apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like 
product,\14\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a 
separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce's determination 
is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may 
result in different definitions of the like product, such differences 
do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \15\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 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.\16\ 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.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as 
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support, 
see Checklists, ``Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklists: 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,'' dated concurrently with, and 
hereby adopted by, this notice (Country-Specific AD 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.
    \17\ See Attachment II of the Country-Specific AD Initiation 
Checklists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the appendix to 
this notice. To establish industry support, the 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.\18\ 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.\19\ 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,\20\ we have 
relied on the data provided by the petitioners for purposes of 
measuring industry support.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Id.
    \19\ Id.
    \20\ Id.
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 18, 2024, we received timely filed comments on 
industry support from several parties: Stelco, Inc. (Stelco), a 
Canadian producer/exporter of CORE; \22\ ArcelorMittal Dofasco G.P. 
(Dofasco), a Canadian producer and exporter of CORE; \23\ Ternium USA 
and Ternium Mexico S.A. de C.V. (collectively, Ternium), a U.S. 
producer

[[Page 80199]]

and importer of CORE and a Mexican producer/exporter of CORE, 
respectively; \24\ and Government of Canada (GOC) and the Government of 
Ontario (collectively).\25\ In its September 18, 2024, submission, 
Ternium stated that it opposed the Mexico AD Petition.\26\ In addition, 
in consultations held by Commerce officials with representatives of the 
GOC on September 19, 2024, regarding the Canada CVD Petition, the GOC 
raised industry support concerns relating to both the CVD and AD 
Petitions.\27\ On September 20, 2024, the petitioners responded to the 
comments from Stelco, GOC, Dofasco, and Ternium in timely filed 
rebuttal submissions.\28\ Also on September 20, 2024, Stelco, Dofasco, 
and Ternium submitted additional comments.\29\ On September 24, 2024, 
Ternium submitted additional comments and provided its 2023 shipments 
and production.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Stelco's Letter, ``Comments on Industry Support for the 
Petitions and Request for Polling,'' dated September 18, 2024.
    \23\ See Dofasco's Letter, ``Comments on Industry Support and 
Request for Industry Polling,'' dated September 18, 2024.
    \24\ See Ternium's Letters, ``Comments on Petitioners' 
Standing,'' dated September 18, 2024 (Ternium Letter I), and ``Entry 
of Appearance,'' dated September 13, 2024.
    \25\ See GOC and Government of Ontario's Letter, ``Industry 
Support Comments,'' dated September 18, 2024.
    \26\ See Ternium Letter I at 3.
    \27\ See Memorandum, ``Consultations with Officials from the 
Government of Canada.,'' dated September 19, 2024; see also GOC's 
Letter, ``Government of Canada's Consultations Materials,'' dated 
September 20, 2024.
    \28\ 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).
    \29\ 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; and 
Ternium's Letter, ``Ternium's Second Comments on Petitioners' 
Standing,'' dated September 20, 2024.
    \30\ 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.\31\ With respect to the Australia, Brazil, 
Mexico, Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, T[uuml]rkiye, UAE, and 
Vietnam AD Petitions, we determine that the domestic producers and 
workers that support these AD 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).\32\ Second, the domestic producers 
and workers have met the statutory criteria for industry support under 
section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers and 
workers who support the Australia, Brazil, Mexico, Netherlands, South 
Africa, Taiwan, T[uuml]rkiye, UAE, and Vietnam AD Petitions account for 
at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like 
product.\33\ Finally, the domestic producers and workers have met the 
statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) 
of the Act because the domestic producers and workers who support the 
Australia, Brazil, Mexico, Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, 
T[uuml]rkiye, UAE, and Vietnam AD 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.\34\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Australia, 
Brazil, Mexico, Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, T[uuml]rkiye, UAE, 
and Vietnam AD Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry 
within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ For further discussion, see Attachment II of the Country-
Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
    \32\ Id.; see also section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
    \33\ See Attachment II of the Country-Specific AD Initiation 
Checklists.
    \34\ Id.
    \35\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the Canada AD 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 732(c)(4)(A)(i) 
of the Act, because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the 
Canada AD Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product.\36\ Because the Canada AD 
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.\37\ In this case, Commerce was able to rely on other 
information, in accordance with section 732(c)(4)(D)(i) of the Act, to 
determine industry support.\38\ 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 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) 
of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the 
Canada AD 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 AD Petition.\39\ 
Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Canada AD Petition was filed 
on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 
732(b)(1) of the Act.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Attachment II of the Canada AD Initiation Checklist.
    \37\ Id.; see also section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
    \38\ See Attachment II of the Canada AD Initiation Checklist.
    \39\ Id.
    \40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the 
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened 
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject 
merchandise sold at LTFV. In addition, with respect to Brazil, Canada, 
Mexico, Taiwan, and Vietnam, the petitioners allege that subject 
imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 
771(24)(A) of the Act.\41\ With respect to Australia, the Netherlands, 
South Africa, T[uuml]rkiye, and the UAE, while the allegedly dumped 
imports from each of these countries do not individually exceed the 
statutory requirements for negligibility, the petitioners provided data 
demonstrating that the aggregate import share from these five countries 
is 9.01 percent, which exceeds the seven percent threshold established 
by the exception in section 771(24)(A)(ii) of the Act.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ For further information regarding negligibility and the 
injury allegation, see Country-Specific AD 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).
    \42\ See Attachment III of the Country-Specific AD Initiation 
Checklists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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

[[Page 80200]]

income.\43\ 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.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ Id.
    \44\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Sales at LTFV

    The following is a description of the allegations of sales at LTFV 
upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate LTFV investigations 
of imports of CORE from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the 
Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, T[uuml]rkiye, the UAE, and Vietnam. 
The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. 
price and normal value (NV) are discussed in greater detail in the 
Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.

U.S. Price

    For Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South 
Africa, T[uuml]rkiye, the UAE, and Vietnam, the petitioners based 
export price (EP) on the POI average unit values (AUVs) derived from 
official U.S. import statistics for imports of CORE produced in and 
exported from each country.\45\ For Taiwan, the petitioners based EP on 
a transaction-specific AUV (i.e., month- and port-specific AUV) derived 
from official import statistics and tied to ship manifest data.\46\ For 
each country, the petitioners made certain adjustments to U.S. price to 
calculate a net ex-factory U.S. price, where applicable.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
    \46\ See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
    \47\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value <SUP>48</SUP>

    For Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, Taiwan, 
T[uuml]rkiye, and the UAE, the petitioners based NV on home market 
pricing information they obtained for CORE produced in and sold, or 
offered for sale, in the respective countries during the applicable 
time period.\49\ For Canada, the Netherlands, and the UAE, the 
petitioners provided information indicating that the prices for CORE 
sold or offered for sale in the respective countries were below the 
COP. Therefore, for Canada, the Netherlands, and the UAE, the 
petitioners based NV on constructed value (CV).\50\ For South Africa, 
the petitioners stated that they were unable to obtain home market or 
third country pricing information for CORE to use as a basis for 
NV.\51\ Therefore, for South Africa, the petitioners calculated NV 
based on CV.\52\ For further discussion of CV for Canada, the 
Netherlands, South Africa, and the UAE, see the section ``Normal Value 
Based on Constructed Value,'' below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ In accordance with section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for the 
Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa, 
Taiwan, T[uuml]rkiye, and the UAE investigations, Commerce will 
request information necessary to calculate the constructed value 
(CV) and COP to determine whether there are reasonable grounds to 
believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product have been 
made at prices that represent less than the COP of the product.
    \49\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
    \50\ Id.
    \51\ See South Africa AD Initiation Checklist.
    \52\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce considers Vietnam to be an NME country.\53\ In accordance 
with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any determination that a foreign 
country is an NME country shall remain in effect until revoked by 
Commerce. Therefore, we continue to treat Vietnam as an NME country for 
purposes of the initiation of the Vietnam LTFV investigation. 
Accordingly, we base NV on FOPs valued in a surrogate market economy 
country in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ See, e.g., Raw Honey from the Socialist Republic of 
Vietnam: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances 
Review, 89 FR 64411 (August 7, 2024), and accompanying NME Analysis 
Memorandum at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners claim that Morocco is an appropriate surrogate 
country for Vietnam because it is a market economy that is at a level 
of economic development comparable to that of Vietnam and is a 
significant producer of comparable merchandise.\54\ The petitioners 
provided publicly available information from Morocco to value all 
FOPs.\55\ Based on the information provided by the petitioners, we 
believe it is appropriate to use Morocco as a surrogate country for 
Vietnam to value all FOPs for initiation purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ See Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
    \55\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Factors of Production

    Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by 
Vietnamese producers/exporters was not reasonably available, the 
petitioners used product-specific consumption rates from a U.S. 
producer of CORE as a surrogate to value Vietnamese manufacturers' 
FOPs.\56\ Additionally, the petitioners calculated factory overhead, 
selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and profit based 
on the experience of a Moroccan producer of comparable merchandise.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ Id.
    \57\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value

    As noted above for Canada, the Netherlands, and the UAE, the 
petitioners provided information indicating that the prices for CORE 
sold or offered for sale in the respective countries were below the 
COP. Also as noted above, for South Africa, the petitioners stated that 
they were unable to obtain home market or third-country prices for CORE 
to use as a basis for NV. Therefore, for Canada, the Netherlands, South 
Africa, and the UAE, the petitioners calculated NV based on CV.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, the petitioners calculated 
CV as the sum of the cost of manufacturing, SG&A expenses, financial 
expenses, and profit.\59\ For Canada, the Netherlands, South Africa, 
and the UAE, in calculating the cost of manufacturing, the petitioners 
relied on the production experience and input consumption rates of a 
U.S. producer of CORE, valued using publicly available information 
applicable to the respective countries, where applicable.\60\ In 
calculating SG&A expenses, financial expenses, and profit ratios, the 
petitioners relied on the fiscal year 2023 financial statements of 
producers of comparable merchandise domiciled in each country, 
respectively.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ Id.
    \60\ Id.
    \61\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of CORE from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, 
the Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, T[uuml]rkiye, the UAE, and 
Vietnam are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at 
LTFV. Based on comparisons of EP to NV in accordance with sections 772 
and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for CORE for each of 
the countries covered by this initiation are as follows: (1) 
Australia--45.86 to 51.79 percent; (2) Brazil--52.03 to 107.67 percent; 
(3) Canada--19.73 to 52.08 percent; (4)

[[Page 80201]]

Mexico--27.46 to 41.94 percent; (5) the Netherlands--12.70 to 20.51 
percent; (6) South Africa--53.81 to 53.86 percent ; (7) Taiwan--67.81 
percent; (8) T[uuml]rkiye--18.30 to 34.59 percent; (9) the UAE--77.09 
to 78.53 percent; and (10) Vietnam--195.23 percent.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of LTFV Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the Petitions and supplemental 
responses, we find that they meet the requirements of section 732 of 
the Act. Therefore, we are initiating LTFV investigations to determine 
whether imports of CORE from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the 
Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, T[uuml]rkiye, the UAE, and Vietnam 
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at LTFV. In 
accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary 
determinations no later than 140 days after the date of these 
initiations.

Respondent Selection

Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa, and 
T[uuml]rkiye

    In the Petitions, the petitioners identified six companies in 
Australia, eight companies in Brazil, five companies in Canada, six 
companies in Mexico, seven companies in the Netherlands, three 
companies in South Africa, and 27 companies in T[uuml]rkiye as 
producers/exporters of CORE.\63\ Following standard practice in LTFV 
investigations involving market economy countries, in the event 
Commerce determines that the number of companies is large, and it 
cannot individually examine each company based upon Commerce's 
resources, where appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory 
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for 
imports under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States (HTSUS) subheading(s) listed in the ``Scope of the 
Investigations,'' in the appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 27 and Exhibits I-9 through 
I-14 and I-16); see also First General Issues Supplement at 7 and 
Exhibits Supp. I-14 and Supp. I-16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 23 and 25, 2024, Commerce released CBP data on imports 
of CORE from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South 
Africa, and T[uuml]rkiye 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.\64\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ See Country-Specific Memoranda, ``Release of U.S. Customs 
and Border Protection Entry Data,'' dated September 23 and 25, 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.

Taiwan

    In the Petitions, the petitioners identified 13 companies in Taiwan 
as producers and/or exporters of CORE.\65\ In the event that Commerce 
determines that the number of companies is large, and it cannot 
individually examine each company based upon Commerce's resources, 
where appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents 
based on quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires issued to potential 
respondents. Following standard practice in LTFV investigations 
involving market economy countries, Commerce would normally select 
respondents based on CBP entry data for imports under the appropriate 
HTSUS subheading(s) listed in the ``Scope of the Investigations'' in 
the Appendix. However, for the Taiwan LTFV investigation, due to the 
existing AD order on imports of CORE from Taiwan,\66\ we cannot rely on 
CBP data in selecting respondents. Accordingly, for Taiwan, Commerce 
will send Q&V questionnaires to each producer and/or exporter for which 
there is complete address information on the record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 27 and Exhibit I-15); see 
also First General Issues Supplement at 7 and Exhibit Supp. I-15.
    \66\ 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 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce will post the Q&V questionnaire along with filing 
instructions on Commerce's website at https://www.trade.gov/ec-adcvd-case-announcements. Producers/exporters of CORE from Taiwan 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 Taiwanese producers/exporters no later than 
5:00 p.m. ET on October 9, 2024, which is two weeks from the signature 
date of this notice. All Q&V questionnaire responses must be filed 
electronically via ACCESS. 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.

UAE

    In the Petitions, the petitioners named five companies in the UAE 
as producers and/or exporters of CORE.\67\ In the event that Commerce 
determines that the number of companies is large, and it cannot 
individually examine each company based upon Commerce's resources, 
where appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents 
based on Q&V questionnaires issued to potential respondents. Following 
standard practice in LTFV investigations involving market economy 
countries, Commerce would normally select respondents based on CBP 
entry data for imports under the appropriate HTSUS subheading(s) listed 
in the ``Scope of the Investigations'' in the Appendix. However, for 
the UAE LTFV investigation, due to Commerce's determination that 
certain imports of CORE from the UAE are circumventing the AD order on 
CORE from the People's Republic of China,\68\ we cannot rely on CBP 
data in selecting respondents. Accordingly, for the UAE, Commerce will 
send Q&V questionnaires to each producer and/or exporter for which 
there is complete address information on the record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 27 and Exhibit I-17).
    \68\ See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the 
People's Republic of China: Affirmative Final Determination of 
Circumvention Involving the United Arab Emirates, 85 FR 41957 (July 
13, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce will post the Q&V questionnaire along with filing 
instructions on Commerce's website at https://www.trade.gov/ec-adcvd-case-announcements. Producers/exporters of CORE from the UAE 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 UAE producers/exporters no later than 5:00 
p.m. ET on October 9, 2024, which is two weeks from the signature date 
of

[[Page 80202]]

this notice. All Q&V questionnaire responses must be filed 
electronically via ACCESS. 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.

Vietnam

    In the Petitions, the petitioners named 17 companies in Vietnam as 
producers and/or exporters of CORE.\69\ Our standard practice for 
respondent selection in AD investigations involving NME countries is to 
select respondents based on quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires in 
cases where Commerce has determined that the number of companies is 
large, and it cannot individually examine each company based upon its 
resources. Therefore, considering the number of producers and/or 
exporters identified in the Petitions, Commerce will solicit Q&V 
information that can serve as a basis for selecting exporters for 
individual examination in the event that Commerce determines that the 
number is large and decides to limit the number of respondents 
individually examined pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. There 
are 17 Vietnamese producers and/or exporters identified in the 
Petitions. Commerce has determined that this number of producers and/or 
exporters is large, and thus, it will issue Q&V questionnaires to each 
potential respondent for which there is complete address information on 
the record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 27 and Exhibit I-18); see 
also First General Issues Supplement at 7 and Exhibit Supp. I-18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce will post the Q&V questionnaires along with filing 
instructions on Commerce's website at https://www.trade.gov/ec-adcvd-case-announcements. Producers/exporters 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 Vietnamese producers/exporters no later than 
5:00 p.m. ET on October 9, 2024, which is two weeks from the signature 
date of this notice. All Q&V questionnaire responses must be filed 
electronically via ACCESS. 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.
    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). As stated above, instructions 
for filing such applications may be found on Commerce's website at 
https://www.trade.gov/administrative-protective-orders.

Separate Rates

    In order to obtain separate rate status in an NME investigation, 
exporters and producers must submit a separate rate application. The 
specific requirements for submitting a separate rate application in an 
NME investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself, 
which is available on Commerce's website at https://access.trade.gov/Resources/nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separate rate application will be 
due 30 days after publication of this initiation notice. Exporters and 
producers must file a timely separate rate application if they want to 
be considered for individual examination. Exporters and producers who 
submit a separate rate application and have been selected as mandatory 
respondents will be eligible for consideration for separate rate status 
only if they respond to all parts of Commerce's AD questionnaire as 
mandatory respondents. Commerce requires that companies from Vietnam 
submit a response both to the Q&V questionnaire and to the separate 
rate application by the respective deadlines to receive consideration 
for separate rate status. Companies not filing a timely Q&V 
questionnaire response will not receive separate rate consideration.

Use of Combination Rates

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

{w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates 
only to exporters, all separate rates that {Commerce{time}  will now 
assign in its NME investigation will be specific to those producers 
that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, 
however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the 
producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period 
of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory 
respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as 
well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the {weighted 
average{time}  of the individually calculated rates. This practice 
is referred to as the application of ``combination rates'' because 
such rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or 
more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will 
apply only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question and 
produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of 
investigation.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \70\ See Enforcement and Compliance's Policy Bulletin No. 05.1, 
regarding, ``Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination 
Rates in Antidumping Investigation involving NME Countries,'' (April 
5, 2005) at 6 (emphasis added), available on Commerce's website at 
https://access.trade.gov/Resources/policy/bull05-1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been 
provided to the governments of Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the 
Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, T[uuml]rkiye, the UAE, and Vietnam 
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 our initiation, as required by 
section 732(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 CORE from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, 
the Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, T[uuml]rkiye, the UAE, and/or 
Vietnam are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a 
U.S. industry.\71\ A negative ITC determination for any country will 
result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that 
country.\72\ Otherwise, these LTFV investigations will proceed 
according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \72\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) 
evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence 
submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available 
information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the 
adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence 
placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual 
information described in (i)-(iv). Section 351.301(b) of Commerce's 
regulations requires any party, when submitting factual information, to 
specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information 
is being submitted \73\ 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

[[Page 80203]]

correct.\74\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \73\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \74\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Particular Market Situation Allegation

    Section 773(e) of the Act addresses the concept of particular 
market situation (PMS) for purposes of CV, stating that ``if a 
particular market situation exists such that the cost of materials and 
fabrication or other processing of any kind does not accurately reflect 
the cost of production in the ordinary course of trade, the 
administering authority may use another calculation methodology under 
this subtitle or any other calculation methodology.'' When an 
interested party submits a PMS allegation pursuant to section 773(e) of 
the Act (i.e., a cost-based PMS allegation), the submission must be 
filed in accordance with the requirements of 19 CFR 351.416(b), and 
Commerce will respond to such a submission consistent with 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(2)(v). If Commerce finds that a cost-based PMS exists under 
section 773(e) of the Act, then it will modify its dumping calculations 
appropriately.
    Neither section 773(e) of the Act, nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v), 
sets a deadline for the submission of cost-based PMS allegations and 
supporting factual information. However, in order to administer section 
773(e) of the Act, Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting 
factual information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus, 
should an interested party wish to submit a cost-based PMS allegation 
and supporting new factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of 
the Act, it must do so no later than 20 days after submission of a 
respondent's initial section D questionnaire response.
    We note that a PMS allegation filed pursuant to sections 
773(a)(1)(B)(ii)(III) or 773(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act (i.e., a sales-
based PMS allegation) must be filed within 10 days of submission of a 
respondent's initial section B questionnaire response, in accordance 
with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(i) and 19 CFR 351.404(c)(2).

Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as 
otherwise specified by Commerce. In general, an extension request will 
be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time 
limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by 
Commerce.\75\ 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.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \75\ 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.
    \76\ See 19 CFR 351.302; see also, e.g., Time Limits Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\77\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\78\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \77\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \78\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Additional 
information regarding the Final Rule is available at https://access.trade.gov/Resources/filing/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 letter of 
appearance). Note that Commerce has amended certain of its requirements 
pertaining to the service of documents in 19 CFR 351.303(f).\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \79\ 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 732(c)(2) 
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,

[[Page 80204]]

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 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. 2024-22592 Filed 10-1-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P