Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Notices 67419 

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 Countervailing 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 Countervailing 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 Line Pipe from the Republic 

of Korea: Response to the Department’s 

Supplemental Questions,’’ dated October 24, 2014, 

‘‘Welded API Line Pipe from Turkey: Response to 

Supplemental Questions,’’ dated October 24, 2014, 

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). 

• Import Tariff and Value-Added Tax 

(VAT) Exemptions for FIEs and Certain 

Domestic Enterprises Using Imported 

Equipment in Encouraged Industries 

• Export Incentive Payments Characterized 

as ‘‘VAT Rebates’’ 

• VAT Rebates to Welfare Enterprises 

• Provision of Green Tubes for LTAR 

• Provision of Steel Rounds for LTAR 

• Provision of Hot-Rolled Steel for LTAR 

• Provision of Coking Coal for LTAR 

• Provision of Land-Use Rights Within 

Designated Geographical Areas for LTAR 

• Provision of Land to SOEs for LTAR 

• Provision of Electricity at LTAR To Drill 

Pipe Producers Located in Jiangsu 

Province 

• Provision of Water at LTAR To Drill Pipe 

Producers Located in Jiangsu Province 

• Technology To Improve Trade R&D Fund 

• Outstanding Growth Private Enterprise 

and Small and Medium-Sized 

Enterprises 

• Development in Jiangyin Fund 

• GOC and Sub-Central Government 

Grants, Loans, and Other Incentives for 

Development of Famous Brands and 

China World Top Brands 

• Scientific Innovation Award 

• Development Fund Grant 

• State Key Technology Project Fund 

• Export Assistance Grants 

• Programs To Rebate Antidumping Legal 

Fees 

• Grants and Tax Benefits to Loss-Making 

SOEs at National and Local Level 

• Subsidies Provided To Drill Pipe 

Producers Located in Economic and 

Technological Development Zones 

(ETDZs) in Tianjin Binhai New Area 

• Subsidies Provided To Drill Pipe 

Producers Located in ETDZs in Tianjin 

Economic and Technological 

Development Areas 

• Subsidies Provided To Drill Pipe 

Producers Located in High-Tech 

Industrial Development Zones 

8. Conclusion 

[FR Doc. 2014–26787 Filed 11–12–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–580–877, C–489–823] 

Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of 

Korea and the Republic of Turkey: 

Initiation of Countervailing Duty 

Investigations 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: November 13, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rebecca Trainor at (202) 482–4007 or 

Reza Karamloo at (202) 482–4470 

(Republic of Korea); Elizabeth Eastwood 

at (202) 482–3874 or Dennis McClure at 

(202) 482–5973 (Republic of Turkey), 

AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, 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 

countervailing duty (CVD) petitions 

concerning imports of welded line pipe 

from the Republic of Korea (Korea) and 

the Republic of Turkey (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 CVD 

petitions were accompanied by two 

antidumping duty (AD) petitions.1 The 

petitioners are domestic producers of 

welded line pipe.2

On October 21, 2014, the Department 

requested information and clarification 

for certain areas 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 702(b)(1) 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(the Act), the petitioners allege that the 

Government of Korea (GOK) and the 

Government of Turkey (GOT) are 

providing countervailable subsidies 

(within the meaning of sections 701 and 

771(5) of the Act) to imports of welded 

line pipe from Korea and Turkey, 

respectively, and that such imports are 

materially injuring, or threatening 

material injury to, an industry in the 

United States. Also, consistent with 

section 702(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 CVD investigations that 

the petitioners are requesting.5

Periods of Investigation 

The period of the investigation for 

both Korea and Turkey is January 1, 

2013, through December 31, 2013. 

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 determination. 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
67420 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 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 Letters of invitation from the Department to 

the GOK and the GOT, both dated October 17, 2014. 

10See Memorandum to the File, ‘‘Consultations 

with Officials from the Government of the Republic 

of Korea Regarding the Countervailing Duty Petition 

Concerning Welded Line Pipe,’’ dated November 5, 

2014; see also Memorandum to the File, 

‘‘Consultations with Officials from the Government 

of the Republic of Turkey Regarding the 

Countervailing Duty Petition Concerning Welded 

Line Pipe,’’ dated November 4, 2014. 

11See supra note 8 for information pertaining to 

IA ACCESS. 

12See section 771(10) of the Act. 

13See 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)). 

14For a discussion of the domestic like product 

analysis in this case, see Countervailing Duty 

Investigation Initiation Checklist: Welded Line Pipe 

from the Republic of Korea (Korea CVD 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 Countervailing Duty 

Investigation Initiation Checklist: Welded Line Pipe 

from the Republic of Turkey (Turkey CVD 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. 

15See General Issues Supplement, at 3–5 and 

Exhibits 3 and 4; see also Second General Issues 

Supplement, at Attachment 1. 

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. 

The Department 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 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. 

Consultations 

Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of 

the Act, the Department notified 

representatives of the GOK and the GOT 

of the receipt of the Petitions. Also, in 

accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) 

of the Act, the Department provided 

representatives of the GOK and the GOT 

the opportunity for consultations with 

respect to the Petitions.9 Consultations 

were held separately with the GOK and 

GOT on November 4, 2014.10 All 

memoranda are on file electronically via 

IA ACCESS.11

Determination of Industry Support for 

the Petitions 

Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires 

that a petition be filed on behalf of the 

domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) 

of the Act provides that a petition meets 

this requirement if the domestic 

producers or workers who support the 

petition account for: (i) At least 25 

percent of the total production of the 

domestic like product; and (ii) more 

than 50 percent of the production of the 

domestic like product produced by that 

portion of the industry expressing 

support for, or opposition to, the 

petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) 

of the Act provides that, if the petition 

does not establish support of domestic 

producers or workers accounting for 

more than 50 percent of the total 

production of the domestic like product, 

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,12 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.13

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.14

In determining whether the 

petitioners have standing under section 

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

the industry support data contained in 

the Petitions with reference to the 

domestic like product as defined in the 

‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ in 

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.15

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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Notices 67421 

16See Letter from U.S. Steel, dated October 27, 

2014, at 1–2. 

17See 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. 

18See Korea CVD Initiation Checklist and Turkey 

CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 

19 Id. 

20 Id. 

21 Id. 

22See General Issues Supplement, at 6 and 

Exhibit 7. 

23See 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. 

24See Korea CVD Initiation Checklist and Turkey 

CVD 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. 25See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I–4. 

Turkey.16 In an additional submission 

on October 31, 2014, U.S. Steel 

provided its 2013 production of the 

domestic like product.17

We have relied upon data that the 

petitioners and U.S. Steel provided for 

purposes of measuring industry 

support.18

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 702(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.19 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 

702(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 702(b)(1) 

of the Act.20

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 CVD 

investigations that they are requesting 

the Department initiate.21

Injury Test 

Because Korea and Turkey are 

‘‘Subsidies Agreement Countries’’ 

within the meaning of section 701(b) of 

the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act 

applies to these investigations. 

Accordingly, the ITC must determine 

whether imports of the subject 

merchandise from Korea and Turkey 

materially injure, or threaten material 

injury to, a U.S. industry. 

Allegations and Evidence of Material 

Injury and Causation 

The petitioners allege that imports of 

the subject merchandise are 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 petitioners 

allege that subject imports exceed the 

negligibility threshold provided for 

under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.22

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.23 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.24

Initiation of Countervailing Duty 

Investigations 

Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires 

the Department to initiate a CVD 

investigation whenever an interested 

party files a CVD petition on behalf of 

an industry that: (1) Alleges the 

elements necessary for an imposition of 

a duty under section 701(a) of the Act; 

and (2) is accompanied by information 

reasonably available to the petitioner 

supporting the allegations. 

In the Petitions, the petitioners allege 

that producers/exporters of welded line 

pipe in Korea and Turkey benefited 

from countervailable subsidies 

bestowed by the governments of these 

countries, respectively. The Department 

has examined the Petitions and finds 

that they comply with the requirements 

of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. 

Therefore, in accordance with section 

702(b)(1) of the Act, we are initiating 

CVD investigations to determine 

whether manufacturers, producers, or 

exporters of welded line pipe from 

Korea and Turkey receive 

countervailable subsidies from the 

governments of these countries, 

respectively. 

Korea 

Based on our review of the Petition, 

we find that there is sufficient 

information to initiate a CVD 

investigation of 22 of the 23 alleged 

programs. For a full discussion of the 

basis for our decision to initiate or not 

initiate on each program, see Korea CVD 

Initiation Checklist. 

Turkey 

Based on our review of the Petition, 

we find that there is sufficient 

information to initiate a CVD 

investigation of 16 of the 18 alleged 

programs. For a full discussion of the 

basis for our decision to initiate or not 

initiate on each program, see Turkey 

CVD Initiation Checklist. 

A public version of the initiation 

checklist for each investigation is 

available on IA ACCESS and at http:// 

trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp. 

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 this 

initiation. 

Respondent Selection 

The petitioners named 13 companies 

as producers/exporters of welded line 

pipe from Korea and 13 companies as 

producers/exporters of welded line pipe 

from Turkey.25 Following standard 

practice in CVD investigations, 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 the following Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 

numbers: 7305.11.10.30, 7305.11.50.00, 

7305.12.10.30, 7305.12.50.00, 

7305.19.10.30, 7306.19.10.10, 

7306.19.10.50, 7306.19.51.10, and 

7306.19.51.50. 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
67422 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Notices 

26See section 703(a) of the Act. 

27 Id. 

28See Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 

57790 (September 20, 2013). 

29See section 782(b) of the Act. 

30See 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. 

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 

702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.202(f), copies of the public version 

of the Petitions have been provided to 

the GOK and GOT 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 GOK and GOT, consistent with 19 

CFR 351.203(c)(2). 

ITC Notification 

We have notified the ITC of our 

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 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.26 A negative ITC 

determination for either country will 

result in the investigation being 

terminated with respect to that 

country; 27 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.28 The modification 

clarifies that parties may request an 

extension of time limits before a time 

limit established under Part 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 

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.29

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.30 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Notices 67423 

1See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 79 

FR 44743 (August 1, 2014). 

2 Id. 

3See Petitioners’ August 18, 2014, submission. 

4See Petitioners’ September 2, 2014, submission. 

5For the full scope of the Order, see ‘‘Issues and 

Decision Memorandum for the Expedited First 

Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on 

Certain Kitchen Appliance Shelving and Racks from 

the People’s Republic of China’’ from Christian 

Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. 

Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance, dated concurrently 

with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (‘‘Issues 

and Decision Memorandum’’). 

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

appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 

351.103(d)). 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to sections 702 and 777(i) of 

the Act. 

Dated: 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. 2014–26897 Filed 11–12–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–941] 

Certain Kitchen Appliance Shelving 

and Racks From the People’s Republic 

of China: Final Results of Expedited 

First Sunset Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On August 1, 2014, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

‘‘Department’’) published the notice of 

initiation of the first five-year (‘‘sunset’’) 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on certain kitchen appliance shelving 

and racks (‘‘KASR’’) from the People’s 

Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) pursuant to 

section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 

as amended (the ‘‘Act’’).1 As a result of 

this sunset review, the Department finds 

that revocation of the antidumping duty 

order on KASR from the PRC would be 

likely to lead to continuation or 

recurrence of dumping. The magnitude 

of the dumping margins likely to prevail 

is indicated in the ‘‘Final Results of 

Review’’ section of this notice. 

DATES: Effective Date: November 13, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Irene Gorelik, AD/CVD Operations, 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–6905. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

As noted above, on August 1, 2014, 

the Department published the initiation 

of the first sunset review of KASR from 

the PRC.2 On August 18, 2014, 

Nashville Wire Products, Inc. 

(‘‘Nashville Wire’’) and SSW Holding 

Company, Inc. (‘‘SSW’’) (collectively, 

‘‘Petitioners’’) timely notified the 

Department of their intent to participate 

within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 

351.218(d)(1)(i), claiming domestic 

interested party status under section 

771(9)(C) of the Act.3 On September 2, 

2014, the Department received an 

adequate substantive response from 

Petitioners within the deadline 

specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).4

We received no responses from 

respondent interested parties. As a 

result, the Department conducted an 

expedited (120-day) sunset review of the 

order, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of 

the Act and 19 CFR 

351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). 

Scope of the Order 

The scope of the order consists of 

shelving and racks for refrigerators, 

freezers, combined refrigerator-freezers, 

other refrigerating or freezing 

equipment, cooking stoves, ranges, and 

ovens (‘‘certain kitchen appliance 

shelving and racks’’ or ‘‘the 

merchandise under order’’). 

The merchandise subject to the order 

is currently classifiable in the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) statistical 

reporting numbers 8418.99.8050, 

8418.99.8060, 7321.90.5000, 

7321.90.6090, 8516.90.8000 and 

8419.90.9520. Although the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the scope of the 

order is dispositive.5

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in this sunset review 

are addressed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. The issues discussed in 

the Issues and Decision Memorandum 

include the likelihood of continuation 

or recurrence of dumping and the 

magnitude of the margins likely to 

prevail if the order were to be revoked. 

Parties may find a complete discussion 

of all issues raised in the review and the 

corresponding recommendations in this 

public memorandum which is on file 

electronically via Enforcement and 

Compliance’s Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Centralized 

Electronic Service System (‘‘IA 

ACCESS’’). IA ACCESS is available to 

registered users at http://

iaaccess.trade.gov, and is available to all 

parties in the Central Records Unit, 

room 7046 of the main Department of 

Commerce building. In addition, a 

complete version of the Decision 

Memorandum can be accessed directly 

on the Internet at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. 

The signed and electronic versions of 

the Issues and Decision Memorandum 

are identical in content. 

Final Results of Review 

Pursuant to section 752(c) of the Act, 

the Department determines that 

revocation of the order would be likely 

to lead to continuation or recurrence of 

dumping at weighted-average margins 

up to 95.99 percent. 

Administrative Protective Order 

This notice also serves as the only 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) 

of their responsibility concerning the 

return or destruction of proprietary 

information disclosed under APO in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 

Timely notification of the return of 

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and terms of an 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES