Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Notices 68213 

1See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duties: Welded API Line Pipe 

from South Korea and Turkey, dated October 16, 

2014 (the Petitions). 

2See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2–3. 

3See Letter from the Department to the 

petitioners entitled ‘‘Re: Petitions for the Imposition 

of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on 

Imports of Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of 

Korea and the Republic of Turkey: Supplemental 

Questions,’’ dated October 21, 2014 (General Issues 

Supplemental Questionnaire), Letter from the 

Department to the petitioners entitled ‘‘Re: Petition 

for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 

Imports of Welded Line Pipe from the Republic of 

Korea: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated October 21, 

2014, and Letter from the Department to the 

petitioners entitled ‘‘Re: Petition for the Imposition 

of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Welded Line 

Pipe from the Republic of Turkey: Supplemental 

Questions,’’ dated October 21, 2014. 

4See ‘‘Welded API Line Pipe from Korea and 

Turkey: Response to Supplemental Questions,’’ 

dated October 24, 2014 (General Issues 

Supplement), ‘‘Welded API Line Pipe from Korea: 

Response to Supplemental Questions, dated 

October 24, 2014, ‘‘Welded API Line Pipe from 

Turkey: Response to Supplemental Questions,’’ 

dated October 24, 2014 (Turkey AD Supplement), 

and ‘‘Welded API Line Pipe from Korea and Turkey: 

Submission of CSI Letter of Support with 2013 

Production and Revised Scope Language,’’ dated 

October 29, 2014 (Second General Issues 

Supplement). 

5See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for 

the Petitions’’ section below. 

6See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; 

see also General Issues Supplement. 

7See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; 

Final rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). 

was approved on an emergency basis 

through September 30, 2014. NTIS 

anticipates publishing a notice of 

proposed rulemaking in the near future 

and as part of that proposed rulemaking 

will seek clearance of a revised 

information collection. However, the 

revised information collection will not 

be used until a final rule is published. 

NTIS must continue to use the existing 

DMF Certification Form until the final 

rule is published. 

Affected Public: Users who wish to 

obtain access to the Death Master File 

from NTIS. 

Frequency: Annually. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Annually 

(resubmit the certification form at time 

of Limited Access DMF subscription 

renewal. 

This information collection request 

may be viewed at reginfo.gov. Follow 

the instructions to view Department of 

Commerce collections currently under 

review by OMB. 

Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to OIRA_Submission@

omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395–5806. 

Dated: November 10, 2014. 

Glenna Mickelson, 

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26997 Filed 11–13–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–876, A–489–822] 

Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of 

Korea and the Republic of Turkey: 

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value 

Investigations 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: November 14, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Goldberger at (202) 482–4136 (the 

Republic of Korea (Korea)), or Alice 

Maldonado at (202) 482–4682 (the 

Republic of Turkey (Turkey)), AD/CVD 

Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions 

On October 16, 2014, the Department 

of Commerce (the Department) received 

antidumping duty (AD) petitions 

concerning imports of welded line pipe 

from Korea and Turkey filed in proper 

form on behalf of American Cast Iron 

Pipe Company, Energex (a division of 

JMC Steel Group), Maverick Tube 

Corporation, Northwest Pipe Company, 

Stupp Corporation (a division of Stupp 

Bros., Inc.), Tex-Tube Company, TMK 

IPSCO, and Welspun Tubular LLC USA 

(collectively, the petitioners). The AD 

petitions were accompanied by two 

countervailing duty (CVD) petitions.1

The petitioners are domestic producers 

of welded line pipe.2

On October 21, 2014, the Department 

requested additional information and 

clarification of certain portions of the 

Petitions.3 The petitioners filed 

responses to these requests on October 

24, 2014, and October 29, 2014.4 On 

October 27 and October 31, 2014, we 

received submissions from United 

States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel), a 

domestic producer of welded line pipe, 

in support of the Petitions. 

In accordance with section 732(b) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act), the petitioners allege that welded 

line pipe from Korea and Turkey is 

being, or is likely to be, sold in the 

United States at less than fair value 

within the meaning of section 731 of the 

Act and that such imports are materially 

injuring, or threatening material injury 

to, an industry in the United States. 

Also, consistent with section 732(b)(1) 

of the Act, the Petitions are 

accompanied by information reasonably 

available to the petitioners supporting 

their allegations. 

The Department finds that the 

petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf 

of the domestic industry because the 

petitioners are interested parties as 

defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. 

The Department also finds that the 

petitioners demonstrated sufficient 

industry support with respect to the 

initiation of the AD investigations that 

the petitioners are requesting.5

Period of Investigation 

Because the Petitions were filed on 

October 16, 2014, pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.204(b)(1) the period of investigation 

for both Korea and Turkey is October 1, 

2013, through September 30, 2014. 

Scope of the Investigations 

The product covered by these 

investigations is welded line pipe from 

Korea and Turkey. For a full description 

of the scope of these investigations, see 

the ‘‘Scope of the Investigations’’ in 

Appendix I of this notice. 

Comments on Scope of the 

Investigations 

During our review of the Petitions, the 

Department issued questions to, and 

received responses from, the petitioners 

pertaining to the proposed scope to 

ensure that the scope language in the 

Petitions would be an accurate 

reflection of the products for which the 

domestic industry is seeking relief.6

As discussed in the preamble to the 

Department’s regulations,7 we are 

setting aside a period for interested 

parties to raise issues regarding product 

coverage (scope). The period for scope 

comments is intended to provide the 

Department with ample opportunity to 

consider all comments and to consult 

with parties prior to the issuance of the 

preliminary determinations. If scope 

comments include factual information 

(see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), all such 

factual information should be limited to 

public information. All such comments 

must be filed by 5:00 p.m. Eastern 

Standard Time (EST) on November 25, 

2014, which is 20 calendar days from 

the signature date of this notice. Any 

rebuttal comments, which may include 

factual information, must be filed by 

5:00 p.m. EST on December 5, 2014, 

which is 10 calendar days after the 

initial comments deadline. 

The Department requests that any 

factual information the parties consider 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

68214 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Notices 

8See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; 

Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 

39263 (July 6, 2011) for details of the Department’s 

electronic filing requirements, which went into 

effect on August 5, 2011. Information on help using 

IA ACCESS can be found at https://

iaaccess.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can 

be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/ 

Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling

%20Procedures.pdf. 

9See section 771(10) of the Act. 

10See 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)). 

11For a discussion of the domestic like product 

analysis in this case, see Antidumping Duty 

Investigation Initiation Checklist: Welded Line Pipe 

from the Republic of Korea (Korea AD Initiation 

Checklist) at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry 

Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duty Petitions Covering Welded Line Pipe from the 

Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey 

(Attachment II); and Antidumping Duty 

Investigation Initiation Checklist: Welded Line Pipe 

from the Republic of Turkey (Turkey AD Initiation 

Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are 

dated concurrently with this notice and are on file 

electronically via IA ACCESS. Access to documents 

filed via IA ACCESS is also available in the Central 

Records Unit, Room 7046 of the main Department 

of Commerce building. 

relevant to the scope of the 

investigations be submitted during this 

time period. However, if a party 

subsequently finds that additional 

factual information pertaining to the 

scope of the investigations may be 

relevant, the party may contact the 

Department and request permission to 

submit the additional information. All 

such comments must be filed on the 

records of the Korea and Turkey AD and 

CVD investigations. 

Filing Requirements 

All submissions to the Department 

must be filed electronically using 

Enforcement and Compliance’s 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Centralized Electronic Service System 

(IA ACCESS).8 An electronically-filed 

document must be received successfully 

in its entirety by the time and date it is 

due. Documents excepted from the 

electronic submission requirements 

must be filed manually (i.e., in paper 

form) with Enforcement and 

Compliance’s APO/Dockets Unit, Room 

1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 

14th Street and Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20230, and 

stamped with the date and time of 

receipt by the applicable deadlines. 

Comments on Product Characteristics 

for AD Questionnaires 

The Department requests comments 

from interested parties regarding the 

appropriate physical characteristics of 

welded line pipe to be reported in 

response to the Department’s AD 

questionnaires. This information will be 

used to identify the key physical 

characteristics of the subject 

merchandise in order to report the 

relevant factors and costs of production 

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) productcomparison criteria. We note that it is 

not always appropriate to use all 

product characteristics as productcomparison criteria. We base productcomparison criteria on meaningful 

commercial differences among products. 

In other words, although there may be 

some physical product characteristics 

utilized by manufacturers to describe 

welded line pipe, 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, the 

Department 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 

comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. 

EST on November 25, 2014, which is 20 

calendar days from the signature date of 

this notice. Any rebuttal comments 

must be filed by 5:00 p.m. EST on 

December 2, 2014. All comments and 

submissions to the Department must be 

filed electronically using IA ACCESS, as 

explained above, on the records of the 

Korea and Turkey less-than-fair-value 

investigations. 

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, 

the Department shall: (i) poll the 

industry or rely on other information in 

order to determine if there is support for 

the petition, as required by 

subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine 

industry support using a statistically 

valid sampling method to poll the 

‘‘industry.’’ 

Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines 

the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a 

whole of a domestic like product, or 

those producers whose collective output 

of a domestic like product constitutes a 

major proportion of the total domestic 

production of the product. Thus, to 

determine whether a petition has the 

requisite industry support, the statute 

directs the Department to look to 

producers and workers who produce the 

domestic like product. The International 

Trade Commission (ITC), which is 

responsible for determining whether 

‘‘the domestic industry’’ has been 

injured, must also determine what 

constitutes a domestic like product in 

order to define the industry. While both 

the Department and the ITC must apply 

the same statutory definition regarding 

the domestic like product,9 they do so 

for different purposes and pursuant to a 

separate and distinct authority. In 

addition, the Department’s 

determination is subject to limitations of 

time and information. Although this 

may result in different definitions of the 

like product, such differences do not 

render the decision of either agency 

contrary to law.10

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. Based on our analysis of 

the information submitted on the 

record, we have determined that welded 

line pipe, as defined in the scope of the 

investigations, constitutes a single 

domestic like product and we have 

analyzed industry support in terms of 

that domestic like product.11

In determining whether the 

petitioners have standing under section 

732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Notices 68215 

12See General Issues Supplement, at 3–5 and 

Exhibits 3 and 4; see also Second General Issues 

Supplement, at Attachment 1. 

13See Letter from U.S. Steel, dated October 27, 

2014, at 1–2. 

14See Letter from U.S. Steel to the Department 

entitled ‘‘Re: Welded Line Pipe from the Republic 

of Korea and the Republic of Turkey,’’ dated 

October 31, 2014. 

15See Korea AD Initiation Checklist and Turkey 

AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 

16 Id. 

17 Id. 

18 Id. 

19See General Issues Supplement, at 6 and 

Exhibit 7. 

20See Volume I of the Petitions, at 14–18, 21–27, 

and Exhibits I–2, I–6, and I–8 through I–10; see also 

General Issues Supplement, at 6–7 and Exhibits 7 

and 8. 

21See Korea AD Initiation Checklist and Turkey 

AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis 

of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 

Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duty Petitions Covering Welded Line Pipe from the 

Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey. 

22See Korea AD Initiation Checklist. 

23See Turkey AD Initiation Checklist. The 

petitioners noted that September 2014 import data 

was not available through the ITC’s Dataweb at the 

time of the Turkey AD Supplement. See Turkey AD 

Supplement, at 1. 

24See Turkey AD Initiation Checklist. 

25See Korea AD Initiation Checklist and Turkey 

AD Initiation Checklist. 

26 Id. 

27See Korea AD Initiation Checklist. 

28See Turkey AD Supplement, at 3. 

the industry support data contained in 

the Petitions with reference to the 

domestic like product as defined in the 

‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ in 

Appendix I of this notice. To establish 

industry support, the petitioners 

provided their production of the 

domestic like product in 2013, as well 

as the production of a company that 

supports the Petitions, and compared 

this to the total production of the 

domestic like product for the entire 

domestic industry.12

On October 27, 2014, we received a 

submission from U.S. Steel, a domestic 

producer of welded line pipe. In the 

submission, U.S. Steel states that it 

supports the AD and CVD petitions on 

welded line pipe from Korea and 

Turkey.13 In an additional submission 

on October 31, 2014, U.S. Steel 

provided its 2013 production of the 

domestic like product.14

We have relied upon data that the 

petitioners and U.S. Steel provided for 

purposes of measuring industry 

support.15

Based on information provided in the 

Petitions, supplemental submissions, 

and other information readily available 

to the Department, we determine that 

the petitioners 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 Petitions 

account for at least 25 percent of the 

total production of the domestic like 

product.16 Based on information 

provided in the Petitions, supplemental 

submissions, and submissions from U.S. 

Steel, 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 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. Accordingly, the Department 

determines that the Petitions were filed 

on behalf of the domestic industry 

within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) 

of the Act.17

The Department finds that the 

petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf 

of the domestic industry because they 

are interested parties as defined in 

section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they 

have demonstrated sufficient industry 

support with respect to the AD 

investigations that they are requesting 

the Department initiate.18

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 less than fair value. 

In addition, the petitioners allege that 

subject imports exceed the negligibility 

threshold provided for under section 

771(24)(A) of the Act.19

The petitioners contend that the 

industry’s injured condition is 

illustrated by reduced market share, 

underselling and price depression or 

suppression, lost sales and revenues, 

declining shipments, reduced 

production capacity, and a decline in 

financial performance.20 We assessed 

the allegations and supporting evidence 

regarding material injury, threat of 

material injury, and causation, and we 

determined that these allegations are 

properly supported by adequate 

evidence and meet the statutory 

requirements for initiation.21

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair 

Value 

The following is a description of the 

allegations of sales at less than fair value 

upon which the Department based its 

decision to initiate investigations of 

imports of welded line pipe from Korea 

and Turkey. 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 initiation checklists. 

Export Price 

For Korea, the petitioners based U.S. 

price on price quotes from a trading 

company, which sells welded line pipe 

produced by a Korean producer, offered 

for sale to a U.S. customer. The 

petitioners made deductions for 

movement and other expenses 

consistent with the sales and delivery 

terms of the price quotes. They also 

made a deduction for the trading 

company mark-up.22

For Turkey, the petitioners based U.S. 

price on the average unit value for U.S. 

imports of welded line pipe under 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS) number 

7306.19.1050, obtained from the ITC’s 

Dataweb for the period of October 2013 

through August 2014.23 The petitioners 

assert that this HTSUS subheading 

includes welded line pipe most similar 

to that found in the home market price 

quote. The petitioners made no 

adjustments to U.S. price for movement 

costs for shipping the merchandise from 

the port in Turkey to the United States 

because the AUV is based on customs 

values which do not include these 

expenses. Further, the petitioners 

conservatively did not deduct foreign 

inland freight expenses from the U.S. 

price because known producers are in 

close proximity to the port.24

Normal Value 

For Korea and Turkey, the petitioners 

based NV on price quotes provided for 

the foreign like product produced in the 

subject country by producer(s) of 

welded line pipe in that country and 

sold or offered for sale in the subject 

country by producer(s) of welded line 

pipe.25 Consistent with the terms of sale 

and delivery, the petitioners did not 

make deductions for movement or other 

expenses.26

Fair Value Comparisons 

Based on the data provided by the 

petitioners, there is reason to believe 

that imports of welded line pipe from 

Korea and Turkey are being, or are 

likely to be, sold in the United States at 

less than fair value. Based on 

comparisons of export price to NV in 

accordance with section 773(a) of the 

Act, the estimated dumping margins for 

welded line pipe from Korea range from 

48.49 percent to 202.31 percent.27 The 

estimated dumping margin for Turkey is 

9.85 percent.28

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

68216 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Notices 

29See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I–4. 

30See section 733(a) of the Act. 

31 Id. 

32See Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 

57790 (September 20, 2013). 

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value 

Investigations 

Based upon the examination of the 

AD Petitions on welded line pipe from 

Korea and Turkey, we find that the 

Petitions meet the requirements of 

section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are 

initiating AD investigations to 

determine whether imports of welded 

line pipe from Korea and Turkey are 

being, or are likely to be, sold in the 

United States at less than fair value. 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 this 

initiation. 

Respondent Selection 

The petitioners named 13 companies 

as producers/exporters of welded line 

pipe from Korea, and 13 from Turkey.29

Following standard practice in AD 

investigations involving market 

economy countries, the Department 

will, where appropriate, select 

respondents based on U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. 

imports of welded line pipe during the 

period of investigation under HTSUS 

numbers: 7305.11.1030; 7305.11.5000; 

7305.12.1030; 7305.12.5000; 

7305.19.1030; 7305.19.5000; 

7306.19.1010; 7306.19.1050; 

7306.19.5110; and 7306.19.5150. We 

intend to release CBP data under 

Administrative Protective Order (APO) 

to all parties with access to information 

protected by APO shortly after the 

announcement of these case initiations. 

The Department invites comments 

regarding CBP data and respondent 

selection within five calendar days of 

publication of this Federal Register 

notice. Comments must be filed 

electronically using IA ACCESS. An 

electronically-filed document must be 

received successfully in its entirety by 

the Department’s electronic records 

system, IA ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern 

time by the date noted above. We intend 

to make our decision regarding 

respondent selection within 20 days of 

publication of this Federal Register 

notice. Interested parties must submit 

applications for disclosure under APO 

in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). 

Instructions for filing such applications 

may be found on the Department’s Web 

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

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 Korea and Turkey 

via IA ACCESS. Because of the 

particularly large number of producers/ 

exporters identified in the Petitions, the 

Department considers the service of the 

public version of the Petitions to the 

foreign producers/exporters to be 

satisfied by the provision of the public 

version of the Petitions to the 

governments of Korea and Turkey, 

consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). 

ITC Notification 

We have notified 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 welded line pipe from Korea and/or 

Turkey are materially injuring or 

threatening material injury to a U.S. 

industry.30 A negative ITC 

determination for any country will 

result in the investigation being 

terminated with respect to that 

country; 31 otherwise, these 

investigations will proceed according to 

statutory and regulatory time limits. 

Submission of Factual Information 

On April 10, 2013, the Department 

published Definition of Factual 

Information and Time Limits for 

Submission of Factual Information: 

Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 

2013), which modified two regulations 

related to AD and CVD proceedings: the 

definition of factual information (19 

CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits 

for the submission of factual 

information (19 CFR 351.301). The final 

rule identifies five categories of factual 

information in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21), 

which are summarized as follows: (i) 

Evidence submitted in response to 

questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted 

in support of allegations; (iii) publicly 

available information to value factors 

under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure 

the adequacy of remuneration under 19 

CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed 

on the record by the Department; and (v) 

evidence other than factual information 

described in (i)–(iv). The final rule 

requires any party, when submitting 

factual information, to specify under 

which subsection of 19 CFR 

351.102(b)(21) the information is being 

submitted and, if the information is 

submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct 

factual information already on the 

record, to provide an explanation 

identifying the information already on 

the record that the factual information 

seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. The 

final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301 

so that, rather than providing general 

time limits, there are specific time limits 

based on the type of factual information 

being submitted. These modifications 

are effective for all proceeding segments 

initiated on or after May 10, 2013, and 

thus are applicable to these 

investigations. Interested parties should 

review the final rule, available at http:// 

enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/

1304frn/2013-08227.txt prior to 

submitting factual information in these 

investigations. 

Revised Extension of Time Limits 

Regulation 

On September 20, 2013, the 

Department modified its regulation 

concerning the extension of time limits 

for submissions in AD and CVD 

proceedings.32 The modification 

clarifies that parties may request an 

extension of time limits before a time 

limit established under 19 CFR 351 

expires, or as otherwise specified by the 

Secretary. In general, an extension 

request will be considered untimely if it 

is filed after the time limit established 

under Part 351 expires. For submissions 

which are due from multiple parties 

simultaneously, an extension request 

will be considered untimely if it is filed 

after 10:00 a.m. on the due date. 

Examples include but are not limited to: 

(1) Case and rebuttal briefs, filed 

pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309; (2) factual 

information to value factors under 19 

CFR 351.408(c), or to measure the 

adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 

351.511(a)(2) filed pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, clarification 

and correction information filed 

pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(iv); (3) 

comments concerning the selection of a 

surrogate country and surrogate values 

and rebuttal; (4) comments concerning 

CBP data; and (5) quantity and value 

questionnaires. Under certain 

circumstances, the Department may 

elect to specify a different time limit by 

which extension requests will be 

considered untimely for submissions 

which are due from multiple parties 

simultaneously. In such a case, the 

Department will inform parties in the 

letter or memorandum setting forth the 

deadline (including a specified time) by 

which extension requests must be filed 

to be considered timely. This 

modification also requires that an 

extension request must be made in a 

separate, stand-alone submission, and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Notices 68217 

33See section 782(b) of the Act. 

34See 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. 

clarifies the circumstances under which 

the Department will grant untimelyfiled requests for the extension of time 

limits. These modifications are effective 

for all segments initiated on or after 

October 21, 2013. Interested parties 

should review Extension of Time Limits; 

Final Rule, available at http://

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/

html/2013-22853.htm, prior to 

submitting factual information in these 

investigations. 

Certification Requirements 

Any party submitting factual 

information in an AD or CVD 

proceeding must certify to the accuracy 

and completeness of that information.33

Parties are hereby reminded that revised 

certification requirements are in effect 

for company/government officials, as 

well as their representatives. 

Investigations initiated on the basis of 

petitions filed on or after August 16, 

2013, and other segments of any AD or 

CVD proceedings initiated on or after 

August 16, 2013, should use the formats 

for the revised certifications provided at 

the end of the Final Rule.34 The 

Department intends to reject factual 

submissions if the submitting party does 

not comply with the applicable revised 

certification requirements. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

Interested parties must submit 

applications for disclosure under APO 

in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On 

January 22, 2008, the Department 

published Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Documents Submission Procedures; 

APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 

22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate 

in these investigations should ensure 

that they meet the requirements of these 

procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of 

appearance as discussed in 19 CFR 

351.103(d)). 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. 

Date: November 5, 2014. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

Appendix I 

Scope of the Investigations 

The merchandise covered by these 

investigations is circular welded carbon and 

alloy steel (other than stainless steel) pipe of 

a kind used for oil or gas pipelines (welded 

line pipe), not more than 24 inches in 

nominal outside diameter, regardless of wall 

thickness, length, surface finish, end finish, 

or stenciling. Welded line pipe is normally 

produced to the American Petroleum 

Institute (API) specification 5L, but can be 

produced to comparable foreign 

specifications, to proprietary grades, or can 

be non-graded material. All pipe meeting the 

physical description set forth above, 

including multiple-stenciled pipe with an 

API or comparable foreign specification line 

pipe stencil is covered by the scope of these 

investigations. 

The welded line pipe that is subject to 

these investigations is currently classifiable 

in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 

7305.11.1030, 7305.11.5000, 7305.12.1030, 

7305.12.5000, 7305.19.1030, 7305.19.5000, 

7306.19.1010, 7306.19.1050, 7306.19.5110, 

and 7306.19.5150. The subject merchandise 

may also enter in HTSUS 7305.11.1060 and 

7305.12.1060. While the HTSUS subheadings 

are provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the written description of the 

scope of these investigations is dispositive. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26894 Filed 11–13–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

Notice of Availability for a Finding of 

No Significant Impact and 

Environmental Assessment for 

Potential Slant Test Well Project in the 

Monterey Bay National Marine 

Sanctuary 

AGENCY: Monterey Bay National Marine 

Sanctuary (MBNMS), Office of National 

Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS), National 

Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA), Department of Commerce 

(DOC). 

ACTION: Notice of availability for final 

environmental assessment and finding 

of no significant impact. 

SUMMARY: Monterey Bay National 

Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS), which is 

part of the Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean 

Service (NOS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

has finalized an Environmental 

Assessment (EA) which analyzed the 

potential impacts of a slant test well 

project proposed by California 

American Water, a privately-owned 

water and wastewater company, and 

prepared a Finding of No Significant 

Impact (FONSI) to the environmental 

resources within MBNMS and adjacent 

shoreline areas. The proposed project 

described in the EA has been evaluated 

for consistency with the National 

Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1431 

et seq.), sanctuary goals and objectives, 

and ONMS and MBNMS permitting 

regulations. The environmental impacts 

of the permitted action are described in 

the EA, pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq.) and related implementing 

regulations. The final EA and FONSI are 

available for download on the MBNMS 

Web site at: http://

montereybay.noaa.gov/new/

welcome.html#calam. 

ADDRESSES: You may review these 

documents, identifying #NOAA–NOS– 

2014–0078, at www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Bridget Hoover, Water Quality 

Protection Program Director, Monterey 

Bay National Marine Sanctuary, 99 

Pacific Street, Building 455a, Monterey, 

CA 93940. Phone: (831) 647–4217. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: California 

American Water proposes development 

and temporary operation of a slant test 

well to obtain information regarding the 

geologic, hydrogeologic, and water 

quality characteristics of the underlying 

aquifers. MBNMS proposes to authorize 

two state agency permits or other 

approvals that would allow 

development of California American 

Water’s proposed slant test well project. 

The data obtained during the 24-month 

testing and monitoring phase would be 

used to facilitate the planning and final 

design of a proposed subsurface slant 

well intake system and desalination 

plant to serve as the primary future 

water supply source of the Monterey 

Peninsula. The slant test well would be 

drilled in the coastal foredune area of an 

existing CEMEX sand mining facility in 

the central coast of California, and 

would extend diagonally under the floor 

of the Pacific Ocean into the submerged 

lands of MBNMS. The slant test well 

would pump up to 2,500 gallons per 

minute from the underlying aquifers for 

a 24-month operational testing and 

monitoring period. The pumped water, 

consisting of untreated, tidallyinfluenced groundwater, would be 

discharged into MBNMS via an existing 

ocean outfall pipeline extending 

approximately 2 miles offshore. The 

project includes the development of up 

to four clusters of monitoring wells to 

evaluate the hydrogeologic response to 

pumping activities. Upon completion of 

the testing and monitoring activities, the 

slant test well and all appurtenant 

facilities would be decommissioned, 

excavated, and removed, and the site 

restored to its original condition. 

The project requires authorization of 

a state permit from MBNMS for the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES