[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 220 (Friday, November 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68213-68217]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26894]


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

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties: Welded API Line Pipe from South Korea and 
Turkey, dated October 16, 2014 (the Petitions).
    \2\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 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.
    \4\ See ``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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also 
General Issues Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department requests that any factual information the parties 
consider

[[Page 68214]]

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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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) 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 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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \10\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered

[[Page 68215]]

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See General Issues Supplement, at 3-5 and Exhibits 3 and 4; 
see also Second General Issues Supplement, at Attachment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Letter from U.S. Steel, dated October 27, 2014, at 1-2.
    \14\ See 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have relied upon data that the petitioners and U.S. Steel 
provided for purposes of measuring industry support.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist and Turkey AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Id.
    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 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 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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See General Issues Supplement, at 6 and Exhibit 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See 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.
    \21\ See 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See 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.
    \24\ See Turkey AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist and Turkey AD Initiation 
Checklist.
    \26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
    \28\ See Turkey AD Supplement, at 3.

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

[[Page 68216]]

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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \31\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    On April 10, 2013, the Department published Definition of Factual 
Information and Time Limits for Submission of Factual Information: 
Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 2013), which modified two 
regulations related to AD and CVD proceedings: the definition of 
factual information (19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits for 
the submission of factual information (19 CFR 351.301). The final rule 
identifies five categories of factual information in 19 CFR 
351.102(b)(21), which are summarized as follows: (i) Evidence submitted 
in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of 
allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors 
under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration 
under 19 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

[[Page 68217]]

clarifies the circumstances under which the Department will grant 
untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. These 
modifications are effective for all segments initiated on or after 
October 21, 2013. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 
(September 20, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \34\ 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. 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