[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7094-7097]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02559]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-909]


Barium Chloride From India: Initiation of Countervailing Duty 
Investigation

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

DATES: Applicable February 1, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tyler Weinhold at (202) 482-1221 and 
Harrison Tanchuck at (202) 482-7301, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and 
Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petition

    On January 12, 2022, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) 
received a countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of 
barium chloride from India, filed in proper form on behalf of Chemical 
Products Corporation (the petitioner), a domestic producer of barium 
chloride.\1\ The Petition was accompanied by an antidumping duty (AD) 
petition concerning imports of barium chloride from India.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Petitioner's Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Barium Chloride from 
India,'' dated January 12, 2022 (the Petition).
    \2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 14 and 19, 2022, Commerce requested supplemental 
information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petition.\3\ The 
petitioner filed responses to these requests on January 19 and 24, 
2022.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Barium Chloride 
from India: Supplemental Questions,'' dated January 14, 2022; and 
``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Barium Chloride from India: Supplemental Questions,'' dated January 
19, 2021.
    \4\ See Petitioner's Letters, ``Barium Chloride from India: 
Response to Supplemental Questionnaire on Volume I of the Petition 
(General Issues and Injury Information),'' dated January 19, 2022 
(General Issues Supplement); and ``Barium Chloride from India: 
Response to Supplemental Questions,'' dated January 24, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended

[[Page 7095]]

(the Act), the petitioner alleges that the Government of India (GOI) is 
providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 
and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of barium chloride in India, and 
that imports of such products are materially injuring, or threatening 
material injury to, the barium chloride industry 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 a CVD investigation, 
the Petition was accompanied by information reasonably available to the 
petitioner supporting its allegations.
    Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of 
the domestic industry, because the petitioner is an interested party, 
as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that 
the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support for the 
initiation of the requested CVD investigation.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions'' 
section, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    Because the Petition was filed on January 12, 2022, the period of 
investigation (POI) for this CVD investigation is January 1, 2021, 
through December 31, 2021, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is barium chloride from 
India. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see 
the appendix to this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigation

    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).\6\ 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,\7\ all 
such factual information should be limited to public information. To 
facilitate preparation of its questionnaire, Commerce requests that all 
interested parties submit scope comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) 
on February 22, 2022, which is the next business day after 20 calendar 
days from the signature date of this notice.\8\ Any rebuttal comments, 
which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on 
March 4, 2022, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment 
deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \7\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
    \8\ The deadline for comments falls on February 21, 2022, which 
is a federal holiday. Commerce's practice dictates that where a 
deadline falls on a weekend or federal holiday, the appropriate 
deadline is the next business day (in this instance, February 22, 
2022). See Notice of Clarification: Application of ``Next Business 
Day'' Rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines Pursuant to 
the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005) 
(Notice of Clarification).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce requests that any factual information the parties consider 
relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this 
time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional 
factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may 
be relevant, the party must contact Commerce and request permission to 
submit the additional information. All such comments must be filed on 
the records of each of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using 
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), unless an exception 
applies.\9\ An electronically-filed document must be received 
successfully in its entirety by the time and date on which it is due. 
Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements 
for serving documents containing business proprietary information, 
until further notice.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 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%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
    \10\ See Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD Service Requirements 
Due to COVID-19; Extension of Effective Period, 85 FR 41363 (July 
10, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce 
notified the GOI of the receipt of the Petition and provided an 
opportunity for consultations with respect to the Petition.\11\ 
Commerce held consultations with the GOI on January 27, 2022.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on 
Barium Chloride from India: Invitation for Consultations to Discuss 
the Countervailing Duty Petition,'' dated January 13, 2022.
    \12\ See Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on Barium 
Chloride from India: Consultations with Officials from the 
Government of India,'' dated January 27, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) 
Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if 
there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or 
(ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling 
method to poll the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The 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 must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\13\ 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.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \14\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F. 2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses

[[Page 7096]]

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 petitioner does not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the investigation.\15\ Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that barium chloride, as 
defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and 
we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like 
product.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See General Issues Supplement at 2-3 and Exhibit GEN-3.
    \16\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as 
applied to this case and information regarding industry support, see 
Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Barium 
Chloride from India (CVD Initiation Checklist) at Attachment II, 
Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Petitions Covering Barium Chloride from India (Attachment II). 
This checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and on file 
electronically via ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 
702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petition with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in the appendix to 
this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its 
own production of the domestic like product in 2021.\17\ The petitioner 
provided information from the ITC's fifth sunset review of barium 
chloride from the People's Republic of China, published in June 2021, 
in which the ITC found that Chemical Products Corporation was the only 
domestic producer of barium chloride; therefore, the Petition is 
supported by 100 percent of the U.S. industry.\18\ We relied on data 
provided by the petitioner for purposes of measuring industry 
support.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See General Issues Supplement at 4.
    \18\ See Petition at Volume I at I-2 through I-4; see also 
General Issues Supplement at 3-4 and Exhibit GEN-3 (containing 
Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Fifth Review), 
USITC Pub. 5203 (June 2021) at 7).
    \19\ See Petition at Volume I at I-2 through I-4; see also 
General Issues Supplement at 3-4 and Exhibit GEN-3. For further 
discussion, see Attachment II of the CVD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the General Issues 
Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce 
indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the 
Petition. First, the Petition established support from domestic 
producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product, and, as such, Commerce is not 
required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support 
(e.g., polling).\20\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have 
met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 
702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) 
who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product.\21\ Finally, the domestic 
producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry 
support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic 
producers (or workers) who support the 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 Petition.\22\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petition 
was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Attachment II of the CVD Initiation Checklist; see also 
section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
    \21\ See Attachment II of the CVD Initiation Checklist.
    \22\ Id.
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because India is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the 
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act 
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine 
whether imports of the subject merchandise from India materially 
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are 
benefitting 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 petitioner 
alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold 
provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Petition at Volume I at I-10 and Exhibit I-9; see also 
General Issues Supplement at 5 and Exhibit GEN-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by significant volume of subject imports; increasing market 
share of subject imports; underselling and price depression and/or 
suppression; inventory levels; declines in production, shipments, and 
revenues; and lost sales and revenues.\25\ We assessed the allegations 
and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material 
injury, causation, as well as negligibility, and we have determined 
that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and 
meet the statutory requirements for initiation.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Petition at Volume I at I-7 through I-30 and Exhibits 
I-5 and I-8 through I-12; see also General Issues Supplement at 2-3, 
5 and Exhibits GEN-2 and GEN-4.
    \26\ See CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, Analysis of 
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Barium 
Chloride from India (Attachment III).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of CVD Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the Petition and supplemental 
responses, we find that they meet the requirements of section 702 of 
the Act. Therefore, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine 
whether imports of barium chloride from India benefit from 
countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOI. 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.
    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 42 of the 43 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate on each program, see India CVD Initiation Checklist. A 
public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is 
available on ACCESS.

Respondent Selection

    In the Petition, the petitioner named 22 companies in India as 
producers/exporters of barium chloride.\27\ Commerce intends to follow 
its standard practice in CVD investigations and calculate company-
specific subsidy rates in this investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Volume I of the Petition at I-7 and Exhibit I-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the event Commerce determines that the number of Indian 
producers or exporters is large such that Commerce cannot individually 
examine each company based upon its resources, where appropriate, 
Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs 
and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of barium chloride 
from India during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States subheading listed in the ``Scope of the 
Investigation,'' in the appendix.

[[Page 7097]]

    On January 26, 2022, Commerce released CBP data for U.S. imports of 
barium chloride from India under administrative protective order (APO) 
to all parties with access to information protected by APO and 
indicated that interested parties wishing to comment on the CBP data 
and/or respondent selection must do so within three business days of 
the publication date of the notice of initiation of this 
investigation.\28\ Comments on CBP data and respondent selection must 
be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document 
must be received successfully, in its entirety, via ACCESS no later 
than 5:00 p.m. ET on the specified deadline. Commerce will not accept 
rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or respondent selection. We 
intend to select respondents within 20 days of publication of this 
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty and Antidumping Duty 
Petitions on Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from India: 
Release of Customs Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,'' 
dated February 12, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    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 Petition has been 
provided to the GOI via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will 
attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petition to each 
exporter named in the Petition, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    Commerce will notify the ITC of its initiation, as required by 
section 702(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determinations by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of barium chloride from India are materially 
injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.\29\ A 
negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being 
terminated.\30\ Otherwise, this CVD investigation will proceed 
according to the statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See section 703(a) of the Act.
    \30\ 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 \31\ 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.\32\ 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 this investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \32\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as 
otherwise specified by Commerce. In general, an extension request will 
be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time 
limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are due 
from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be 
considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. 
Under certain circumstances, Commerce may elect to specify a different 
time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for 
submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such 
a case, Commerce will inform parties in a letter or memorandum of the 
deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must 
be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in 
a separate, stand-alone submission; Commerce will grant untimely filed 
requests for the extension of time limits only in limited cases where 
we determine, based on 19 CFR 351.302, that extraordinary circumstances 
exist. Parties should review Commerce's regulations concerning factual 
information prior to submitting factual information in this 
investigation.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See 19 CFR 351.301; see also Extension of Time Limits; 
Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), 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.\34\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\35\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \35\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also 
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_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).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and 
777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).

    Dated: February 1, 2022.
Lisa W. Wang,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is barium 
chloride, a chemical compound having the formulas BaCl<INF>2</INF> 
or BaCl<INF>2</INF>-2H<INF>2</INF>O, currently classifiable under 
subheading 2827.39.4500 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
scope of this investigation is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2022-02559 Filed 2-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P