43936 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2017 / Notices 

1See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from 

the petitioner re: ‘‘Titanium Sponge from Japan and 

Kazakhstan: Petition for the Imposition of 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duties’’ (August 

24, 2017) (the Petition). 

2 Id., Volume I of the Petition, at 1. 

3See Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petition for the 

Imposition of Countervailing and Antidumping 

Duties on Imports of Titanium Sponge from Japan 

and Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated 

August 30, 2017 (Kazakhstan CVD Supplemental 

Questionnaire). 

4See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from 

the petitioner, re: ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of 

Countervailing Duties on Titanium Sponge from 

Kazakhstan: TIMET Response to Supplemental 

Questionnaire,’’ (September 1, 2017) (Kazakhstan 

CVD Supplement). 

5See Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petitions for 

the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duties on Imports of Titanium Sponge from Japan 

and Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated 

September 8, 2017 (Second General Issues 

Supplemental Questionnaire). 

6See ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the 

Petition’’ section, below. 

7See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2). 

8See Second General Issues Supplemental 

Questionnaire; see also Second General Issues 

Supplement, at Attachement D. 

9See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; 

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

10See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21). 

11See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; 

Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 

39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and 

Compliance: Change of Electronic Filing System 

Name, 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014) for details 

of the Department’s electronic filing requirements, 

which went into effect on August 5, 2011. 

Information on help using ACCESS can be found at 

https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx, and a handbook 

can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/ 

(including hours and cost) of the 

proposed collection of information; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on respondents, including through the 

use of automated collection techniques 

or other forms of information 

technology. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and/or 

included in the request for OMB 

approval of this information collection; 

they also will become a matter of public 

record. 

Sheleen Dumas, 

Departmental PRA Lead, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2017–20037 Filed 9–19–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–07–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–834–810] 

Titanium Sponge From Kazakhstan: 

Initiation of Countervailing Duty 

Investigation 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Applicable. September 13, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit 

Astvatsatrian at (202) 482–6412 or 

Ariela Garvett at (202) 482–3609, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petition 

On August 24, 2017, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) received a countervailing 

duty (CVD) Petition concerning imports 

of titanium sponge from Kazakhstan, 

filed in proper form on behalf of 

Titanium Metals Corporation (the 

petitioner). The CVD Petition was 

accompanied by antidumping duty (AD) 

petitions concerning imports of titanium 

sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan.1

The petitioner is a domestic producer of 

titanium sponge.2

On August 30, 2017, the Department 

requested supplemental information 

pertaining to certain areas of the 

Petition.3 The petitioner filed responses 

to these requests on September 1, 2017.4

The petitioner filed revised scope 

language on September 11, 2017.5

In accordance with section 702(b)(1) 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(the Act), the petitioner alleges that the 

Government of Kazakhstan (GOK) is 

providing countervailable subsidies, 

within the meaning of section 771(5) of 

the Act, to imports of titanium sponge 

from Kazakhstan, and that such imports 

are materially injuring, or threatening 

material injury to, the domestic industry 

producing titanium sponge in the 

United States. Also, consistent with 

section 702(b)(1) of the Act, for those 

alleged programs on which we are 

initiating a CVD investigation, the 

Petition is accompanied by information 

reasonably available to the petitioner 

supporting its allegations. 

The Department finds that the 

petitioner filed this Petition on behalf of 

the domestic industry because the 

petitioner is an interested party as 

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

The Department also finds that the 

petitioner demonstrated sufficient 

industry support with respect to the 

initiation of the CVD investigation that 

the petitioner is requesting.6

Period of Investigation 

Because the Petition was filed on 

August 24, 2017, the period of 

investigation (POI) is January 1, 2016, 

through December 31, 2016.7

Scope of the Investigation 

The product covered by this 

investigation is titanium sponge from 

Kazakhstan. For a full description of the 

scope of this investigation, see the 

‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ in the 

Appendix to this notice. 

Comments on Scope of the Investigation 

During our review of the Petition, the 

Department issued questions to, and 

received responses from, the petitioner 

pertaining to the proposed scope to 

ensure that the scope language in the 

Petition would be an accurate reflection 

of the product for which the domestic 

industry is seeking relief.8

As discussed in the preamble to the 

Department’s regulations, we are setting 

aside a period for interested parties to 

raise issues regarding product coverage 

(scope).9 The Department will consider 

all comments received from interested 

parties and, if necessary, will consult 

with the interested parties prior to the 

issuance of the preliminary 

determination. If scope comments 

include factual information,10 all such 

factual information should be limited to 

public information. To facilitate 

preparation of its questionnaires, the 

Department requests all interested 

parties to submit such comments by 

5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on 

Tuesday, October 3, 2017, 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. ET on Friday, 

October 13, 2017, which is 10 calendar 

days from the initial comments 

deadline. 

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 each of the concurrent AD 

and CVD investigations. 

Filing Requirements 

All submissions to the Department 

must be filed electronically using 

Enforcement and Compliance’s 

Antidumping Duty and Countervailing 

Duty Centralized Electronic Service 

System (ACCESS).11 An electronically 


sradovich on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2017 / Notices 43937 

Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling

%20Procedures.pdf. 

12See Letter to the Embassy of Kazakhstan, 

‘‘Countervailing Duty Petition on Titanium Sponge 

from Kazakhstan: Invitation for Consultations to 

Discuss the Countervailing Duty Petition’’ (August 

28, 2017). 

13See Memorandum, re: ‘‘Consultations with 

Officials from the Government of Kazakhstan (GOK) 

Regarding the Countervailing Duty (CVD) Petition 

on Titanium Sponge from Kazakhstan’’ (September 

7, 2017). 

14See section 771(10) of the Act. 

15See 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)). 

16For a discussion of the domestic like product 

analysis as applied to this case and information 

regarding industry support, see Countervailing Duty 

Investigation Initiation Checklist: Titanium Sponge 

from Kazakhstan (Kazakhstan CVD Initiation 

Checklist), at Attachment II, ‘‘Analysis of Industry 

Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duty Petitions Covering Titanium Sponge from 

Japan and Kazakhstan.’’ The checklist is dated 

concurrently with this notice and on file 

electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents 

filed via ACCESS is also available in the Central 

Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department 

of Commerce building. 

17See Volume I of the Petition, at 6–7 and Exhibit 

GEN–20. 

18 Id. For further discussion, see Kazakhstan CVD 

Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 

19See Kazakhstan CVD Initiation Checklist, at 

Attachment II. 

20See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also 

Kazakhstan CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment 

II. 

21See Kazakhstan CVD Initiation Checklist, at 

Attachment II. 

22 Id. 

23 Id. 

filed document must be received 

successfully in its entirety by the time 

and date it is due. Documents exempted 

from the electronic submission 

requirements must be filed manually 

(i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement 

and Compliance’s APO/Dockets Unit, 

Room 18022, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20230, and 

stamped with the date and time of 

receipt by the applicable deadlines. 

Consultations 

Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) 

and (ii) of the Act, the Department 

notified representatives of the GOK of 

the receipt of the Petition, and provided 

them the opportunity for consultations 

with respect to the CVD Petition.12

Consultations with Kazakhstan were 

held via conference call on September 7, 

2017.13

Determination of Industry Support for 

the Petition 

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

that a petition be filed on behalf of the 

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

of the Act provides that a petition meets 

this requirement if the domestic 

producers or workers who support the 

petition account for: (i) At least 25 

percent of the total production of the 

domestic like product; and (ii) more 

than 50 percent of the production of the 

domestic like product produced by that 

portion of the industry expressing 

support for, or opposition to, the 

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

of the Act provides that, if the petition 

does not establish support of domestic 

producers or workers accounting for 

more than 50 percent of the total 

production of the domestic like product, 

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. 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,14 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.15

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 a petition). 

With regard to the domestic like 

product, the petitioner does not offer a 

definition of the domestic like product 

distinct from the scope of the 

investigation. Based on our analysis of 

the information submitted on the 

record, we have determined that 

titanium sponge, as defined in the 

scope, constitutes a single domestic like 

product, and we have analyzed industry 

support in terms of that domestic like 

product.16

In determining whether the petitioner 

has standing under section 702(c)(4)(A) 

of the Act, we considered the industry 

support data contained in the Petition 

with reference to the domestic like 

product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of the 

Investigation,’’ in the Appendix to this 

notice. The petitioner provided its own 

2016 production of the domestic like 

product, and compared this to the 

estimated total production of the 

domestic like product for the entire 

domestic industry.17 We relied on data 

the petitioner provided for purposes of 

measuring industry support.18

Our review of the data provided in the 

Petition, General Issues Supplement, 

and other information readily available 

to the Department indicates that the 

petitioner has established industry 

support for the Petition.19 First, the 

Petition established support from 

domestic producers (or workers) 

accounting for more than 50 percent of 

the total production of the domestic like 

product and, as such, the Department is 

not required to take further action in 

order to evaluate industry support (e.g., 

polling).20 Second, the domestic 

producers (or workers) have met the 

statutory criteria for industry support 

under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act 

because the domestic producers (or 

workers) who support the Petition 

account for at least 25 percent of the 

total production of the domestic like 

product.21 Finally, the domestic 

producers (or workers) have met the 

statutory criteria for industry support 

under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act 

because the domestic producers (or 

workers) who support the Petition 

account for more than 50 percent of the 

production of the domestic like product 

produced by that portion of the industry 

expressing support for, or opposition to, 

the Petition.22 Accordingly, the 

Department determines that the Petition 

was filed on behalf of the domestic 

industry within the meaning of section 

702(b)(1) of the Act. 

The Department finds that the 

petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of 

the domestic industry because it is an 

interested party as defined in section 

771(9)(C) of the Act, and that the 

petitioner has demonstrated sufficient 

industry support with respect to the 

CVD investigation that it is requesting 

the Department to initiate.23

Injury Test 

Because Kazakhstan is a ‘‘Subsidies 

Agreement Country’’ within the 


sradovich on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with NOTICES
43938 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2017 / Notices 

24See Volume I of the Petition, at 24–25 and 

Exhibits GEN–5 and GEN–6. 

25See Volume I of the Petition, at 1–3, 14–15, 18– 

47 and Exhibits GEN–1, GEN–2, GEN–5, GEN–6, 

GEN–10, GEN–12—GEN–15, GEN–19—GEN–26, 

GEN–30, GEN–31, and GEN–33. 

26See Kazakhstan CVD Initiation Checklist, at 

Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and 

Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 

Covering Titanium Sponge from Japan and 

Kazakhstan. 

27See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, 

Public Law 114–27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015). 

28See Dates of Application of Amendments to the 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws Made 

by the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, 80 

FR 46793 (August 6, 2015) (Applicability Notice). 

The 2015 amendments may be found at https://

www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/ 

1295/text/pl. 

29See Applicability Notice, 80 FR, at 46794–95. 

30See Petition, Volume I at 13; see also 

Kazakhstan CVD Supplement, at 1. 

31See Petition, Volume I. 

32See section 703(a)(2) of the Act. 33See section 703(a)(1) of the Act. 34See 19 CFR 351.301(b). 35See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2). 

meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, 

section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to 

this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC 

must determine whether imports of the 

subject merchandise from Kazakhstan 

materially injure, or threaten material 

injury to, a U.S. industry. 

Allegations and Evidence of Material 

Injury and Causation 

The petitioner alleges that imports of 

the subject merchandise are benefitting 

from countervailable subsidies and that 

such imports are causing, or threaten to 

cause, material injury to the U.S. 

industry producing the domestic like 

product. In addition, the petitioner 

alleges that subject imports exceed the 

negligibility threshold provided for 

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

The petitioner contends that the 

industry’s injured condition is 

illustrated by reduced market share; 

displacement of U.S. production by 

subject imports; underselling and price 

suppression or depression; decline in 

production, capacity utilization, hours 

worked, and earnings before interest 

and taxes; lost sales and revenues; and 

decline in pricing for downstream 

titanium products.25 We have assessed 

the allegations and supporting evidence 

regarding material injury, threat of 

material injury, and causation, and we 

have determined that these allegations 

are properly supported by adequate 

evidence, and meet the statutory 

requirements for initiation.26

Initiation of CVD Investigation 

Based on the examination of the CVD 

Petition, we find that the Petition meets 

the requirements of section 702 of the 

Act. Based on our review of the Petition, 

we find that there is sufficient 

information to initiate a CVD 

investigation on three of the four alleged 

programs in Kazakhstan. For a full 

discussion of the basis for our decision 

to initiate or not initiate on each 

program, see the Kazakhstan CVD 

Initiation Checklist. A public version of 

the initiation checklist for this 

investigation is available on ACCESS. 

Therefore, we are initiating a CVD 

investigation to determine whether 

imports of titanium sponge from 

Kazakhstan benefit from countervailable 

subsidies conferred by the Government 

of Kazakhstan. In accordance with 

section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will 

make our preliminary determination no 

later than 65 days after the date of this 

initiation. 

Under the Trade Preferences 

Extension Act of 2015, numerous 

amendments to the AD and CVD laws 

were made.27 The 2015 law does not 

specify dates of application for those 

amendments. On August 6, 2015, the 

Department published an interpretative 

rule, in which it announced the 

applicability dates for each amendment 

to the Act, except for amendments 

contained in section 771(7) of the Act, 

which relate to determinations of 

material injury by the ITC.28 The 

amendments to sections 776 and 782 of 

the Act are applicable to all 

determinations made on or after August 

6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to this 

CVD investigation.29

In accordance with section 703(b)(1) 

of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), 

unless postponed, we will make our 

preliminary determination no later than 

65 days after the date of this initiation. 

Respondent Selection 

Based on information from 

independent sources, the petitioner 

named one company as a producer/ 

exporter of titanium sponge in 

Kazakhstan.30 Although the Department 

normally relies on the number of 

producers/exporters identified in the 

petition and/or import data from U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to 

determine whether to select a limited 

number of producers/exporters for 

individual examination in a CVD 

investigation, the petitioner identified 

only one company as a producer/ 

exporter of titanium sponge in 

Kazakhstan: Ust-Kamenogorsk Titanium 

Magnesium Plant JSC (UKTMP). We 

currently know of no additional 

producers/exporters of merchandise 

under consideration from Kazakhstan 

and the petitioner provided information 

from independent sources as support.31

Accordingly, the Department intends to 

examine the sole producer/exporter in 

this investigation for Kazakhstan (i.e., 

the company cited above). Parties 

wishing to comment on respondent 

selection for Kazakhstan must do so 

within five days of the publication of 

this notice in the Federal Register. Any 

such comments must be submitted no 

later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the due date, 

and must be filed electronically via 

ACCESS. 

Distribution of Copies of the Petition 

In accordance with section 

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

351.202(f), a copy of the public version 

of the Petition has been provided to the 

GOK via ACCESS. To the extent 

practicable, we will attempt to provide 

a copy of the public version of the 

Petition to each exporter named in the 

Petition, as provided under 19 CFR 

351.203(c)(2). 

ITC Notification 

We will notify 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 Petition was filed, whether there is 

a reasonable indication that imports of 

titanium sponge from Kazakhstan are 

materially injuring, or threatening 

material injury to, a U.S. industry.32 A 

negative ITC determination will result 

in the investigation being terminated.33

Otherwise, this investigation will 

proceed according to statutory and 

regulatory time limits. 

Submission of Factual Information 

Factual information is defined in 19 

CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence 

submitted in response to questionnaires; 

(ii) evidence submitted in support of 

allegations; (iii) publicly available 

information to value factors under 19 

CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the 

adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 

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

the record by the Department; and (v) 

evidence other than factual information 

described in (i)–(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) 

requires any party, when submitting 

factual information, to specify under 

which subsection of 19 CFR 

351.102(b)(21) the information is being 

submitted 34 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.35 Time 


sradovich on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2017 / Notices 43939 

36See section 782(b) of the Act. 

37See also Certification of Factual Information to 

Import Administration During Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 

17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked 

questions regarding the Final Rule are available at 

http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_

info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. 

1See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce re: 

‘‘Titanium Sponge from Japan and Kazakhstan: 

Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duties’’ (August 24, 2017) (the 

Petitions). 2See Volume I of the Petitions, at 1–2. 3See Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petitions for 

the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duties on Imports of Titanium Sponge from Japan 

and Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated 

August 29, 2017 (General Issues Supplemental 

Questionnaire); see also Petition for the Imposition 

of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Titanium 

Sponge from Japan: Supplemental Questionnaire; 

and Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping 

Duties on Imports of Titanium Sponge from 

Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questionnaire. All of 

these documents are dated August 29, 2017. See 

also Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petitions for the 

Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duties on Imports of Titanium Sponge from Japan 

and Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated 

September 8, 2017 (Second General Issues 

Supplemental Questionnaire). 

4See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Petitions for the 

Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 

Continued 

limits for the submission of factual 

information are addressed in 19 CFR 

351.301, which provides specific time 

limits based on the type of factual 

information being submitted. Interested 

parties should review the regulations 

prior to submitting factual information 

in this investigation. 

Extensions of Time Limits 

Parties may request an extension of 

time limits before the expiration of a 

time limit established under 19 CFR 

351.301, or as otherwise specified by the 

Secretary. In general, an extension 

request will be considered untimely if it 

is filed after the expiration of the time 

limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. 

For submissions that are due from 

multiple parties simultaneously, an 

extension request will be considered 

untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET 

on the due date. Under certain 

circumstances, we may elect to specify 

a different time limit by which 

extension requests will be considered 

untimely for submissions which are due 

from multiple parties simultaneously. In 

such a case, we will inform parties in a 

letter or memorandum setting forth the 

deadline (including a specified time) by 

which extension requests must be filed 

to be considered timely. An extension 

request must be made in a separate, 

stand-alone submission; under limited 

circumstances we will grant untimelyfiled requests for the extension of time 

limits. Parties should review Extension 

of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 

(September 20, 2013), available at 

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013- 

09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to 

submitting factual information in this 

investigation. 

Certification Requirements 

Any party submitting factual 

information in an AD or CVD 

proceeding must certify to the accuracy 

and completeness of that information.36

Parties must use the certification 

formats provided in 19 CFR 

351.303(g).37 The Department intends to 

reject factual submissions if the 

submitting party does not comply with 

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 this investigation should ensure that 

they meet the requirements of these 

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: September 13, 2017. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix 

Scope of the Investigation 

The product covered by this investigation 

is all forms and grades of titanium sponge, 

except as specified below. Titanium sponge 

is unwrought titanium metal that has not 

been melted. Expressly excluded from the 

scope of this investigation are: 

(1) Loose particles of unwrought titanium 

metal having a particle size of less than 20 

mesh (0.84 mm); 

(2) alloyed or unalloyed briquettes of 

unwrought titanium metal that contain more 

than 0.2% oxygen on a dry weight basis; and 

(3) ultra-high purity titanium sponge. In 

ultra-high purity titanium sponge, metallic 

impurities do not exceed any of these 

amounts: 

WT % 

Aluminum 0.0005 

Chromium 0.0001 

Cobalt 0.0001 

Copper 0.0002 

Iron 0.0300 

Manganese 0.0010 

Nickel 0.0002 

Vanadium 0.0002 

Zirconium 0.0005 

Carbon 0.0150 

Hydrogen 0.0100 

Nitrogen 0.0020 

Oxygen 0.1000 

Titanium sponge is currently classified 

under subheading 8108.20.0010 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 

States (HTSUS). The HTSUS subheading is 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes; the written description of the 

scope of this investigation is dispositive. 

[FR Doc. 2017–20029 Filed 9–19–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–588–877, A–834–809] 

Titanium Sponge From Japan and 

Kazakhstan: Initiation of Less-ThanFair-Value Investigations 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Applicable September 13, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Aleksandras Nakutis at (202) 482–3147 

(Japan) and Jonathan Hill at (202) 482– 

3518 (Kazakhstan), AD/CVD Operations, 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions 

On August 24, 2017, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) received antidumping duty 

(AD) Petitions concerning imports of 

titanium sponge from Japan and 

Kazakhstan, filed in proper form on 

behalf of Titanium Metals Corporation 

(the petitioner).1 The AD Petitions were 

accompanied by a countervailing duty 

(CVD) petition concerning imports of 

titanium sponge from Kazakhstan. The 

petitioner is a domestic producer of 

titanium sponge.2 On August 29, 2017, 

September 5, 2017, and September 8, 

2017, the Department requested 

supplemental information pertaining to 

certain areas of the Petitions.3 The 

petitioner filed responses to these 

requests on August 31, 2017, September 

7, 2017, and September 11, 2017, 

respectively.4 The petitioner filed 


sradovich on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with NOTICES