[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8913-8918]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03756]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-038]


Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric From the People's Republic of 
China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice.

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

DATES: Effective Date: February 16, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Heaney at (202) 482-4475 or 
Scott Hoefke (202) 482-4947, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement & 
Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petition

    On January 20, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received an antidumping duty (AD) petition concerning imports of 
certain amorphous silica fabric (silica fabric) from the People's 
Republic of China (PRC), filed in proper form on behalf of Auburn 
Manufacturing, Inc. (Auburn) (Petitioner).\1\ The AD petition was 
accompanied by a countervailing duty (CVD) petition for the PRC.\2\ 
Petitioner is a domestic producer of silica fabric.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric 
from the PRC, dated January 20, 2016 (the Petition) at Volumes I and 
II.
    \2\ Id. at Volume III.
    \3\ See Volume I of the Petition at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 27, 2016, the Department requested additional 
information and clarification of certain areas of the Petition.\4\ 
Petitioner filed responses to these requests on February 1, 2016.\5\ On 
February 10, 2016, Petitioner submitted further clarification regarding 
the scope of the investigation.\6\ On January 27, 2016, the Department 
determined to toll all deadlines four business days as a result of the 
Federal Government closure during snowstorm Jonas, which is applicable 
to this initiation.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Letters from the Department to Petitioner entitled ``Re: 
Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duties on Imports of Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's 
Republic of China: Supplemental Questions dated January 27, 2016 
(General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire) and ``Re: Petition for 
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Amorphous 
Silica Fabric from the People's Republic of China: Supplemental 
Questions Antidumping'' dated January 27, 2016.
    \5\ See ``Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's 
Republic of China: Amendment to Volume I of the Petition'' dated 
February 1, 2016 (General Issues Supplement); see also ``Re: Certain 
Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's Republic of China: 
Amendment to Volume II of the Petition'' dated February 1, 2016 (AD 
Supplemental Response).
    \6\ See Scope Supplement to the Petition, dated February 10, 
2016 (Scope Supplement).
    \7\ See Memorandum to the Record from Ron Lorentzen, Acting 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, regarding 
``Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Government 
Closure During Snowstorm Jonas,'' dated January 27, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), Petitioner alleges that imports of silica fabric 
from the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States 
at less-than-fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, 
and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material 
injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, consistent with 
section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petition is accompanied by 
information reasonably available to Petitioner supporting its 
allegations.
    The Department finds that Petitioner filed this Petition on behalf 
of the domestic industry because Petitioner is an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also finds that 
Petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the 
initiation of the AD investigation that Petitioner is requesting.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petition'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    Because the Petition was filed on January 20, 2016, the period of 
investigation (POI) is, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), July 1, 2015 
through December 31, 2015.

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is silica fabric from the 
PRC. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the 
``Scope of the Investigation,'' in Appendix I of this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigation

    During our review of the Petition, the Department issued questions 
to, and received responses from, Petitioner pertaining to the proposed 
scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petition would be an 
accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is 
seeking relief.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Memorandum to the File, Phone Call with Counsel to 
Petitioner,'' dated February 10, 2016; see also Letter from 
Petitioner to the Department, ``Certain Amorphous Silica Fiber from 
the People's Republic of China: Scope Clarification Letter,'' dated 
February 10, 2016; see also Memorandum to the File, ``Phone Call 
with Counsel to Petitioner,'' dated February 12, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,\10\ 
we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage (scope). The Department will consider all 
comments received from parties and, if necessary, will 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

[[Page 8914]]

public information. In order 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 Monday, March 7, 
2016, 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 Thursday, March 17, 2016, which is 10 calendar 
days after the initial comments deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 
27323 (May 19, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department requests that any factual information the parties 
consider relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during 
this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that 
additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the 
investigation may be relevant, the party may contact the Department and 
request permission to submit the additional information. All such 
comments must also be filed on the record of the concurrent CVD 
investigation.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement & Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\11\ An electronically 
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the 
time and date when it is due. Documents excepted from the electronic 
submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) 
with Enforcement & Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See 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/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires

    The Department requests comments from interested parties regarding 
the appropriate physical characteristics of silica fabric to be 
reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaires. This 
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics 
of the subject merchandise in order to report the relevant factors and 
costs of production accurately as well as to develop appropriate 
product-comparison criteria.
    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that 
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of 
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to 
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product 
characteristics and (2) product-comparison criteria. We note that it is 
not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-
comparison criteria. We base product-comparison criteria on meaningful 
commercial differences among products. In other words, although there 
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers 
to describe silica fabric, it may be that only a select few product 
characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical 
characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the 
order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching 
products. Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important 
physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics 
last.
    In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in 
developing and issuing the AD questionnaire, all comments must be filed 
by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 7, 2016, which is 20 calendar days from the 
signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 
5:00 p.m. ET on March 14, 2016. All comments and submissions to the 
Department must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained 
above, on the record of this less-than-fair-value investigation.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department 
shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to 
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by 
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a 
statistically valid sampling method to poll the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. 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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \13\ 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, 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 silica fabric, as defined in the 
scope, constitutes a single domestic like product and we have analyzed 
industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's Republic of China 
(PRC AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of 
Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Petitions Covering Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's 
Republic of China (Attachment II). This 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 18022 of the main Department of Commerce 
building.

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

[[Page 8915]]

    In determining whether Petitioner has standing under section 
732(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 Appendix I of this 
notice. To establish industry support, Petitioner provided its own 
production of the domestic like product in 2015, and conservatively 
compared this to the estimated total production of the silica fabric 
(both industrial grade and aerospace grade) for the entire domestic 
industry.\15\ We have relied upon data Petitioner provided for purposes 
of measuring industry support.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 4-6; see also General 
Issues Supplement, at 1-2 and Exhibit Supp. I-1.
    \16\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petition, General Issues 
Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department 
indicates that Petitioner has established industry support.\17\ 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).\18\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the 
statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) 
of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the 
Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the 
domestic like product.\19\ Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) 
have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 
732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) 
who support the 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.\20\ 
Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petition was filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) 
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Id.
    \18\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also PRC AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \19\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that 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 it has demonstrated sufficient 
industry support with respect to the AD investigation that it is 
requesting the Department initiate.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    Petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic 
like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with 
material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise 
sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, Petitioner alleges 
that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for 
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 37 and Exhibit I-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price suppression 
or depression; lost sales and revenues; declines in domestic industry 
production, capacity utilization, and U.S. shipments; declines in 
financial performance; and declines in employment indicators.\23\ 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.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 22-25, 34-48, and Exhibits 
I-12--I-14 and I-15--I-26.
    \24\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's Republic 
of China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Sales at Less-Than-Fair Value

    The following is a description of the allegation of sales at less-
than-fair value upon which the Department based its decision to 
initiate an investigation of imports of silica fabric from the PRC. The 
sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. 
price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the initiation 
checklist.

Export Price

    Petitioner based U.S. price on an offer for sale for silica fabric 
from a Chinese producer. Petitioner made deductions from U.S. price for 
movement expenses consistent with the delivery terms.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 7-10 and AD Exhibits 6 
through 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    Petitioner stated that the Department has found the PRC to be a 
non-market economy (NME) country in every administrative proceeding in 
which the PRC has been involved.\26\ In accordance with section 
771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the presumption of NME status remains in 
effect until revoked by the Department. The presumption of NME status 
for the PRC has not been revoked by the Department and, therefore, 
remains in effect for purposes of the initiation of this investigation. 
Accordingly, the NV of the product is appropriately based on factors of 
production (FOPs) valued in a surrogate market economy country, in 
accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. In the course of this 
investigation, all parties, and the public, will have the opportunity 
to provide relevant information related to the issues of the PRC's NME 
status and the granting of separate rates to individual exporters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioner claims that Thailand is an appropriate surrogate country 
because it is a market economy that is at a level of economic 
development comparable to that of the PRC and it is a significant 
producer of comparable merchandise.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Id. at 3-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the information provided by Petitioner, we believe it is 
appropriate to use Thailand as a surrogate country for initiation 
purposes. Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit 
comments regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly 
available information to value FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled 
date of the preliminary determination.

Factors of Production

    Petitioner based the FOPs for materials, labor, and energy on its 
consumption rates for producing silica fabric as it did not have access 
to the consumption rates of PRC producers of the subject 
merchandise.\28\ Petitioner notes that it chose its production 
experience because, like the Chinese producer from which the U.S. price 
quote was obtained, Petitioner is an integrated producer of silica 
fabric.\29\ Petitioner valued the estimated factors of production using 
surrogate values from Thailand.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 11 and AD Exhibit 23.
    \29\ Id. at 11.
    \30\ Id. at 12 and AD Exhibit 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Raw Materials

    Petitioner valued the FOPs for raw materials (e.g., hydrochloric 
acid,

[[Page 8916]]

acrylic polymers, lime, etc.) using reasonably available, public import 
data for Thailand obtained from the Global Trade Atlas (GTA) for the 
period covering June 2015 to November 2015, the most recent POI-
contemporaneous data available at the time the Petition was filed.\31\ 
Petitioner excluded all import values from countries previously 
determined by the Department to maintain broadly available, non-
industry-specific export subsidies and from countries previously 
determined by the Department to be NME countries. In addition, in 
accordance with the Department's practice, the average import value 
excludes imports that were labeled as originating from an unidentified 
country. The Department determines that the surrogate values used by 
Petitioner are reasonably available and, thus, are acceptable for 
purposes of initiation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Id. at AD Exhibit 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Labor

    Petitioner valued labor using monthly Thai labor data published by 
Thailand's National Statistics Office (NSO).\32\ Specifically, 
Petitioner relied on data pertaining to wages and benefits earned by 
Thai workers engaged in the manufacturing sector of the Thai 
economy.\33\ Petitioner converted the wage rates to hourly and 
converted to U.S. dollars using the average exchange rate during the 
POI.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Id. at 13 and AD Exhibit 15.
    \33\ Id.
    \34\ Id. at 14 and AD Exhibits 15 and 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Packing Materials

    Petitioner valued the packing materials used by PRC producers based 
on Thai import data obtained from GTA for the period covering June 2015 
to November 2015.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See Volume II of the Petition at 16 and AD Exhibit 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Energy

    Petitioner calculated energy usage based upon its own production 
experience associated with both electricity and natural gas.\36\ 
Petitioner valued natural gas using the average unit value of imports 
of liquefied natural gas into Thailand, as reported by GTA.\37\ To 
value electricity, Petitioner used public information, as compiled by 
the Thai Metropolitan Electricity Authority.\38\ This information was 
reported in Thai baht, converted into U.S. dollars/kilowatt hours, and 
multiplied by Petitioner's factor usage rates.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Id. at 15.
    \37\ Id. at 16 and AD Exhibits 12, 18 and 23; see also AD 
Supplemental Response, at 1-2 and AD-Supp. Exhibit 3.
    \38\ Id. at 15-16 and AD Exhibit 19.
    \39\ Id. at AD Exhibits 17 19, Exhibit 22 and Exhibit 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yield Loss

    Petitioner based its calculation of yield loss upon its own 
production experience incurred during the leaching and dry line process 
stages.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Id. at 15 and AD Exhibit 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Factory Overhead, Selling, General and Administrative 
Expenses, and Profit

    Petitioner calculated surrogate financial ratios (i.e., 
manufacturing overhead, SG&A expenses, and profit) using the 2014 
audited financial statement of Thai Toray Textile Mills Public Company, 
a Thai producer of comparable merchandise (i.e., an industrial 
textile).\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ Id. at 15-16 and AD Exhibit 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by Petitioner, there is reason to 
believe that imports of silica fabric from the PRC are being, or are 
likely to be, sold in the United States at less-than-fair value. Based 
on comparisons of EP to NV, in accordance with section 773(c) of the 
Act, the estimated dumping margin for silica fabric from the PRC is 
160.28 percent.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See Volume II of the Petition at 17 and AD Exhibit 24; see 
also PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation

    Based upon the examination of the AD Petition on silica fabric from 
the PRC, we find that the Petition meets the requirements of section 
732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an AD investigation to 
determine whether imports of silica fabric from the PRC are being, or 
are likely to be, sold in the United States at less-than-fair value. In 
accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we intend to make our preliminary 
determination no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.
    On June 29, 2015, the President of the United States signed into 
law the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, which made numerous 
amendments to the AD and CVD law.\43\ 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.\44\ The amendments to 
sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are applicable to all 
determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply 
to this AD investigation.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
    \44\ See 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).
    \45\ Id. at 46794-95. The 2015 amendments may be found at 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Respondent Selection

    Petitioner named 81 companies as producers/exporters of silica 
fabric.\46\ In accordance with our standard practice for respondent 
selection in cases involving NME countries, we intend to issue Q&V 
questionnaires to producers/exporters of merchandise subject to the 
investigation \47\ and base respondent selection on the responses 
received. In addition, the Department will post the Q&V questionnaire 
along with filing instructions on the Enforcement and Compliance Web 
site at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit 11.
    \47\ See Appendix I, ``Scope of the Investigations.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exporters/producers of silica fabric from the PRC that do not 
receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the 
Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy from the Enforcement & 
Compliance Web site. The Q&V response must be submitted by the relevant 
PRC exporters/producers no later than March 1, 2016, which is two weeks 
from the signature date of this notice. All Q&V responses must be filed 
electronically via ACCESS.

Separate Rates

    In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation, 
exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate application.\48\ 
The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application in 
the PRC investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself, 
which is available on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separate-rate 
application will be due 30 days after publication of this initiation 
notice.\49\ Exporters and

[[Page 8917]]

producers who submit a separate-rate application and have been selected 
as mandatory respondents will be eligible for consideration for 
separate-rate status only if they respond to all parts of the 
Department's AD questionnaire as mandatory respondents. The Department 
requires that respondents from the PRC submit a response to both the 
Q&V questionnaire and the separate-rate application by their respective 
deadlines in order to receive consideration for separate-rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and 
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation 
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin 
05.1).
    \49\ Although in past investigations this deadline was 60 days, 
consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(a), which states that ``the Secretary 
may request any person to submit factual information at any time 
during a proceeding,'' this deadline is now 30 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use of Combination Rates

    The Department will calculate combination rates for certain 
respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME 
investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin 
states:

    {w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate 
rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will 
now assign in its NME Investigation will be specific to those 
producers that supplied the exporter during the period of 
investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the 
exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise 
to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both 
to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated 
separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms 
receiving the weighted-average of the individually calculated rates. 
This practice is referred to as the application of ``combination 
rates'' because such rates apply to specific combinations of 
exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned 
to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the 
firm in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter 
during the period of investigation.\50\

    \50\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petition has been 
provided to the government of the PRC 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 
732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determinations by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petition were filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of silica fabric from the PRC are materially 
injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry.\51\ A 
negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being 
terminated; \52\ otherwise, this investigation will proceed according 
to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \52\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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). Any party, when submitting 
factual information, must specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 
351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted \53\ 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.\54\ Time 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. Please review the regulations prior to 
submitting factual information in these investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \54\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351, 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 expires. 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 the 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 untimely-filed requests for the extension 
of time limits. 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 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.\55\ 
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 petition 
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.\56\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \56\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration during Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also 
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
administrative protective order (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 in 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.

    Dated: February 16, 2016.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is woven (whether from 
yarns or rovings)

[[Page 8918]]

industrial grade amorphous silica fabric, which contains a minimum 
of 90 percent silica (SiO2) by nominal weight, and a 
nominal width in excess of 8 inches. The investigation covers 
industrial grade amorphous silica fabric regardless of other 
materials contained in the fabric, regardless of whether in roll 
form or cut-to-length, regardless of weight, width (except as noted 
above), or length. The investigation covers industrial grade 
amorphous silica fabric regardless of whether the product is 
approved by a standards testing body (such as being Factory Mutual 
(FM) Approved), or regardless of whether it meets any governmental 
specification.
    Industrial grade amorphous silica fabric may be produced in 
various colors. The investigation covers industrial grade amorphous 
silica fabric regardless of whether the fabric is colored. 
Industrial grade amorphous silica fabric may be coated or treated 
with materials that include, but are not limited to, oils, 
vermiculite, acrylic latex compound, silicone, aluminized polyester 
(Mylar[supreg]) film, pressure-sensitive adhesive, or other coatings 
and treatments. The investigation covers industrial grade amorphous 
silica fabric regardless of whether the fabric is coated or treated, 
and regardless of coating or treatment weight as a percentage of 
total product weight. Industrial grade amorphous silica fabric may 
be heat-cleaned. The investigation covers industrial grade amorphous 
silica fabric regardless of whether the fabric is heat-cleaned.
    Industrial grade amorphous silica fabric may be imported in 
rolls or may be cut-to-length and then further fabricated to make 
welding curtains, welding blankets, welding pads, fire blankets, 
fire pads, or fire screens. Regardless of the name, all industrial 
grade amorphous silica fabric that has been further cut-to-length or 
cut-to-width or further finished by finishing the edges and/or 
adding grommets, is included within the scope of this investigation.
    Subject merchandise also includes (1) any industrial grade 
amorphous silica fabric that has been converted into industrial 
grade amorphous silica fabric in China from fiberglass cloth 
produced in a third country; and (2) any industrial grade amorphous 
silica fabric that has been further processed in a third country 
prior to export to the United States, including but not limited to 
treating, coating, slitting, cutting to length, cutting to width, 
finishing the edges, adding grommets, or any other processing that 
would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the 
investigation if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-
scope industrial grade amorphous silica fabric.
    Excluded from the scope of the investigation is amorphous silica 
fabric that is subjected to controlled shrinkage, which is also 
called ``pre-shrunk'' or ``aerospace grade'' amorphous silica 
fabric. In order to be excluded as a pre-shrunk or aerospace grade 
amorphous silica fabric, the amorphous silica fabric must meet the 
following exclusion criteria: (l) The amorphous silica fabric must 
contain a minimum of 98 percent silica (SiO2) by nominal 
weight; (2) the amorphous silica fabric must have an areal shrinkage 
of 4 percent or less; (3) the amorphous silica fabric must contain 
no coatings or treatments; and (4) the amorphous silica fabric must 
be white in color. For purposes of this scope, ``areal shrinkage'' 
refers to the extent to which a specimen of amorphous silica fabric 
shrinks while subjected to heating at 1800 degrees F for 30 minutes.
    Areal shrinkage is expressed as the following percentage:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN23FE16.001
    
    Also excluded from the scope are amorphous silica fabric rope 
and tubing (or sleeving). Amorphous silica fabric rope is a knitted 
or braided product made from amorphous silica yarns. Silica tubing 
(or sleeving) is braided into a hollow sleeve from amorphous silica 
yarns.
    The subject imports are normally classified in subheadings 
7019.59.4021, 7019.59.4096, 7019.59.9021, and 7019.59.9096 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), but may 
also enter under HTSUS subheadings 7019.40.4030, 7019.40.4060, 
7019.40.9030, 7019.40.9060, 7019.51.9010, 7019.51.9090, 
7019.52.9010, 7019.52.9021, 7019.52.9096 and 7019.90.1000. HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes only; 
the written description of the scope of this investigation is 
dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2016-03756 Filed 2-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P