[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59001-59004]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23388]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-991]


Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: 
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

DATES: Effective Date: September 25, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Renkey or Paul Walker, AD/CVD 
Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202.482.2312 or 202.482.0413, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petition

    On August 29, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the ``Department'') 
received a countervailing duty (``CVD'') petition concerning imports of 
chlorinated isocyanurates (``chlorinated isos'') from the People's 
Republic of China (``PRC''), filed in proper form by Clearon Corp. and 
Occidental Chemical Corporation (``Petitioners''), domestic producers 
of chlorinated isos. The CVD petition was accompanied by an antidumping 
duty (``AD'') petition concerning imports of chlorinated isos from 
Japan.\1\ On September 4 and 5, 2013, the Department issued additional 
requests for information and clarification of certain areas of the 
Petition. Based on the Department's requests, Petitioners timely filed 
additional information pertaining to the Petition on September 9, 
2013.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 
Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Japan and Countervailing Duties on 
Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China, dated 
August 29, 2013 (hereafter referred to as the ``Petition'').
    \2\ See Petitioners' September 9, 2013 response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the ``Act''), Petitioners allege that producers/exporters of 
chlorinated isos in the PRC received countervailable subsidies within 
the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, and that imports 
from these producers/exporters materially injure, or threaten material 
injury to, an industry in the United States.
    The Department finds that Petitioners filed this Petition on behalf 
of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined 
in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and Petitioners have demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that 
it is requesting the Department to initiate (see ``Determination of 
Industry Support for the Petition'' below).

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (``POI'') is 1/1/12--12/31/12, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).

Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are chlorinated isos 
from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of the investigation, 
please see the ``Scope of Investigation'' in the appendix to this 
notice.

Comments on the Scope of the Investigation

    During our review of the Petition, we solicited information from 
Petitioners to ensure that the proposed scope language is an accurate 
reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking 
relief. Moreover, as discussed in the preamble to the Department's 
regulations,\3\ we are setting aside a period for interested parties to 
raise issues regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all 
interested parties to submit such comments by October 8, 2013, which is 
20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. All comments 
must be filed on the record of the PRC CVD investigation, as well as 
the concurrent Japan AD investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Import Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS''). An 
electronically filed document must be received successfully in its 
entirety by the Department's electronic records system, IA ACCESS, by 
the time and date set by the Department. Documents excepted from the 
electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in 
paper form) with the Import Administration'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 deadline established by the Department.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 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%20Filing%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, the Department 
held consultations with the government of the PRC (hereinafter, the 
``GOC'') with respect to the Petition on September 12, 2013.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See ``Countervailing Duty Petition on Chlorinated 
Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Consultations 
with the Government of the People's Republic of China,'' dated 
September 12, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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,

[[Page 59002]]

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 U.S. 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,\6\ 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.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See section 771(10) of the Act
    \7\ 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, Petitioners do not offer 
a definition of 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 chlorinated isos, as defined in the 
scope of the investigation, constitute a single domestic like product 
and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like 
product.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China 
(``Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry 
Support for the Petitions Covering Chlorinated Isocyanurates from 
Japan and the People's Republic of China (``Attachment II''). This 
checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and 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 Petitioners have 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 Investigation'' section above. To 
establish industry support, Petitioners provided their production of 
the domestic like product in 2012, and compared this to the estimated 
total production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic 
industry.\9\ Petitioners estimated total 2012 production of the 
domestic like product using their own production data and knowledge of 
the industry.\10\ We have relied upon data Petitioners provided for 
purposes of measuring industry support.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 3-4, and Volume II of the 
Petition, at Exhibits GEN-9 and GEN-12.
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on information provided in the Petition, supplemental 
submission, and other information readily available to the Department, 
we determine that 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 Petition account for at 
least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like 
product.\12\ Based on information provided in the Petition, 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. 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.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id.
    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition 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 investigation that they are 
requesting the Department initiate.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

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

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    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, Petitioners allege 
that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for 
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 112-113 and Volume IV of 
the Petition, at Exhibit CVD-86.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price depression 
or suppression; lost sales and revenues; decline in production, 
shipments, and capacity utilization; reduced employment-related 
variables; and decline in financial performance.\16\ 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.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 96-132, Volume II of the 
Petition, at Exhibits GEN-2 and GEN-9 through GEN-17, and Volume IV 
of the Petition, at Exhibit CVD-86.
    \17\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of 
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 
Petitions Covering Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Japan and the 
People's Republic of China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a 
CVD proceeding 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 petitioners 
supporting the allegations.
    The Department has examined the Petition on chlorinated isos from 
the PRC and finds that it complies with the requirements of section 
702(b)(1) of the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 702(b)(1) 
of the Act, we are

[[Page 59003]]

initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether producers/exporters 
of chlorinated isos in the PRC receive countervailable subsidies. For a 
discussion of evidence supporting our initiation determination, see the 
CVD Initiation Checklist which accompanies this notice.
    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 29 alleged 
programs. For the other nine programs alleged by Petitioners, we have 
determined that the requirements for initiation have not been met. For 
a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not 
initiate on each program, see the CVD Initiation Checklist.

Respondent Selection

    For this investigation, the Department intends to select 
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') data 
for U.S. imports during the POI (i.e., calendar year 2012) under the 
following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers: 
2933.69.6015, 2933.69.6021, 2933.69.6050, 3808.50.4000, 3808.94.5000, 
and 3808.99.9500. We intend to release the CBP data under 
Administrative Protective Order (``APO'') to all parties with access to 
information protected by APO within five days of the announcement of 
the initiation of this investigation. Interested parties may submit 
comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within seven 
calendar days of release of this data. 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. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements 
must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the Import 
Administration'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 deadline 
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://ia.ita.doc.gov/apo.

Distribution of Copies of the CVD 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 representatives of the GOC. Because of the particularly 
large number of producers/exporters identified in the Petition, the 
Department considers the service of the public version of the petition 
to the foreign producers/exporters satisfied by the delivery of the 
public version to the GOC, 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 Determination 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 subsidized chlorinated isos from the PRC 
materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.\18\ 
A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being 
terminated.\19\ Otherwise, the investigation will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
    \19\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 this investigation. 
Please review the final rule, available at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt, 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.\20\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect for company/government officials as well as their 
representatives in all AD or CVD investigations or proceedings 
initiated on or after August 16, 2013, including this 
investigation.\21\ The formats for the revised certifications are 
provided at the end of the Final Rule. The Department intends to reject 
factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the 
revised certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See section 782(b) of the Act
    \21\ See Certification of Factual Information To Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (``Final Rule'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.

    Dated: September 18, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix

Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are chlorinated 
isocyanurates. Chlorinated isocyanurates are derivatives of cyanuric 
acid, described as chlorinated s-triazine triones. There are three 
primary chemical compositions of chlorinated isocyanurates: (1) 
trichloroisocyanuric acid (``TCCA'') 
(Cl3(NCO)3), (2) sodium dichloroisocyanurate 
(dihydrate) (NaCl2(NCO)3 X 2H2O), 
and (3) sodium dichloroisocyanurate (anhydrous) 
(NaCl2(NCO)3). Chlorinated isocyanurates are 
available in powder, granular and solid (e.g., tablet or stick) 
forms.
    Chlorinated isocyanurates are currently classifiable under 
subheadings 2933.69.6015, 2933.69.6021, 2933.69.6050, 3808.50.4000, 
3808.94.5000, and 3808.99.9500 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
the United States (``HTSUS''). The tariff classification

[[Page 59004]]

2933.69.6015 covers sodium dichloroisocyanurates (anhydrous and 
dihydrate forms) and trichloroisocyanuric acid. The tariff 
classifications 2933.69.6021 and 2933.69.6050 represent basket 
categories that include chlorinated isocyanurates and other 
compounds including an unfused triazine ring. The tariff 
classifications 3808.50.4000, 3808.94.5000 and 3808.99.9500 cover 
disinfectants that include chlorinated isocyanurates. The HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The 
written description of the scope of the investigation is 
dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2013-23388 Filed 9-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P