[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 47 (Thursday, March 10, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12711-12716]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05405]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-042]


Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip From the People's Republic of 
China: Initiation of Less Than Fair Value Investigation

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

DATES: Effective March 3, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni Page at (202) 482-1398 and 
Lingjun Wang (202) 482-2316, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and 
Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petition

    On February 12, 2016, the Department of Commerce (Department) 
received an antidumping duty (AD) petition concerning imports of 
stainless steel sheet and strip (stainless sheet and strip) from the 
People's Republic of China (PRC), filed in proper form on behalf of AK 
Steel Corporation, Allegheny Ludlum, LLC d/b/a ATI Flat Rolled 
Products, North American Stainless, and Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC, 
(collectively, Petitioners).\1\ The AD petition was accompanied by a 
countervailing duty (CVD) petition for stainless steel and strip from 
the PRC.\2\ Petitioners are domestic producers of stainless sheet and 
strip, which represents the domestic industry engaged in the 
manufacture of stainless sheet and strip in the United States.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties 
and Countervailing Duties: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from the 
People's Republic of China, (February 12, 2016) (the Petition).
    \2\ Id.
    \3\ See Volume I of the Petition at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 17 and 23, 2016, the Department requested additional 
information and clarification of certain areas of the Petition,\4\ and 
Petitioners timely filed responses to these requests on February 19, 
22, and 25, 2016 and an amendment to the scope section of the 
petition.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Letters from the Department to Petitioners entitled 
``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duties on Imports of Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from the 
People's Republic of China: Supplemental Questions,'' (February 17, 
2016) (General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire); and ``Petition 
for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Stainless 
Steel Sheet and Strip from the People's Republic of China,'' 
(February 17, 2016) (AD Supplemental Questionnaire); see also 
Memorandum to the File, ``Phone Call with Counsel to Petitioners,'' 
(February 23, 2016)
    \5\ See Petitioners' Response to the AD Supplemental 
Questionnaire, (February 19, 2016) (AD Petition Supplement); 
Petitioners' Response to the General Issues Supplemental 
Questionnaire, (February 19, 2016) (General Issues Supplement); 
Petitioners' Submission of Signed Declaration Included in Responses 
to the Department's Supplemental Questionnaire Relating to 
Antidumping Duty Petition, (February 22, 2016) (AD Petition 
Supplement Signed Declaration); and Second General Issues Supplement 
to the Petition, (February 25, 2016) (Second General Issues 
Supplement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), Petitioners allege that imports of stainless sheet 
and strip 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 Petitioners 
supporting their allegations.
    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition on behalf 
of the domestic industry because Petitioners satisfy the definition of 
an interested party in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department 
also finds that Petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support 
with respect to the initiation of the AD investigation that Petitioners 
are requesting.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petition'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    Because the Petition was filed on February 12, 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 products covered by this investigation are stainless sheet and 
strip 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, Petitioners 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.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also 
General Issues Supplement; Memorandum to the File, ``Phone Call with 
Counsel to Petitioners,'' (February 23, 2016); and Second General 
Issues Supplement.

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

[[Page 12712]]

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,\8\ we 
are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage (i.e., the 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 
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 March 23, 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 Monday, April 4, 2016, because 10 calendar days 
after the initial comments deadline falls on Saturday, April 2, 
2016.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 
27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1) (``For both electronically filed 
and manually filed documents, if the applicable due date falls on a 
non-business day, the Secretary will accept documents that are filed 
on the next business day.'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 be filed on the record of the AD investigation, as well 
as the concurrent CVD investigation.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\10\ 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 and 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 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 stainless sheet and strip 
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 as 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 stainless sheet and strip, 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 of the physical characteristics defining a product. 
Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important physical 
characteristics first and the least important characteristics last.
    In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in 
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all comments must be 
filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 23, 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 April 4, 2016. All comments and submissions to the 
Department must be filed electronically using ACCESS.

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,\11\ 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.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \12\ 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

[[Page 12713]]

``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 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 stainless sheet and strip 
constitutes a single domestic like product and we have analyzed 
industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip 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 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether Petitioners have 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. Petitioners provided their production of the domestic like 
product in 2015, as well as an estimate of total production of the 
domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.\14\ To 
establish industry support, Petitioners compared their own production 
to total estimated production of the domestic like product for the 
entire domestic industry.\15\ We have relied upon data Petitioners 
provided for purposes of measuring industry support.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 4-5 and Exhibits GEN-1 and 
GEN-12.
    \15\ Id. For further discussion, see PRC AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \16\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the Second General 
Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to the 
Department indicates that Petitioners have 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 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 AD investigation that they are 
requesting the Department to initiate.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    Petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the domestic 
like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with 
material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise 
sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, Petitioners allege 
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 13 and Exhibit GEN-6; see 
also Second General Issues Supplement, at 4-5 and Exhibit GEN-Supp. 
6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share, underselling and price suppression 
or depression, lost sales and revenues, reductions in U.S. production, 
shipments, and capacity utilization, decreased employment, and 
financial deterioration.\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 14-19 and Exhibits GEN-6 
and GEN-8 through GEN-12; see also Second General Issues Supplement, 
at 4-5 and Exhibit GEN-Supp. 5.
    \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 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from the People's Republic 
of China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegation 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 the investigation of stainless sheet and strip 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

    Petitioners based U.S. prices on price quotes for stainless sheet 
and strip produced in the PRC by affiliated companies of Baosteel Group 
Corporations (Baosteel) and Taiyuan Iron & Steel (Group) Co., Ltd. 
(TISCO), and offered for sale to customers in the United States.\25\ 
Petitioners made deductions from U.S. price for movement expenses 
consistent with the delivery terms, as well as deductions for 
distributor mark-up and unrebated VAT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Volume II of the Petition at 2, Exhibits AD-1A and AD-
1B; see also, AD Petition Supplement at 2 and Exhibit AD-Supp. 1A; 
and AD Petition Supplement Signed Declaration at Attachment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    Petitioners 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 (FOP) 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners claim that Thailand is an appropriate surrogate country 
because it is a market economy that is at a level of economic 
development comparable to

[[Page 12714]]

that of the PRC and it is a significant producer of comparable 
merchandise.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Id., at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the information provided by Petitioners, 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 (FOP)

    Petitioners based the FOPs for materials, labor, and energy on 
average major U.S. producers' consumption rates for producing stainless 
sheet and strip adjusted for known differences that can be quantified 
based on the experience of the U.S. industry, as an estimate of the PRC 
producers' FOPs.\28\ Petitioners valued the estimated FOPs using 
surrogate values from Thailand, with the exception of surrogate 
financial ratios.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Id., at 6 and Exhibit AD-9.
    \29\ Id., at Exhibit AD-10. As discussed in the PRC AD 
Initiation Checklist, Petitioners used surrogate financial ratios 
from the financial statements of a Mexican steel producer, because 
they were unable to obtain publicly available financial statements 
of an integrated steel producer in Thailand, and to the best of 
their knowledge, many Thai producers also benefit from potentially 
countervailable subsidies. Id., at 7 and 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Raw Materials

    Petitioners valued the FOPs for raw materials using public import 
data for Thailand obtained from the Global Trade Atlas (GTA) for the 
POI.\30\ Petitioners 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, Petitioners exclude imports 
that were labeled as originating from an unidentified country. 
Petitioners added to these import values the average inland freight 
charges for importing goods into Thailand as reported in Doing Business 
2016: Thailand, based on the distance from the nearest port to the PRC 
producer's mill.\31\ The Department determines that the surrogate 
values used by Petitioners are reasonably available, and thus, are 
acceptable for purposes of initiation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Id., at Exhibit AD-13.
    \31\ Id., at 7 and Exhibits AD-3A; see also AD Petition 
Supplement, at 3 and AD-Supp. 3A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Labor

    Petitioners valued labor using The 2012 Business and Industrial 
Census: Manufacturing Industry, Whole Kingdom, published by the 
National Statistical Office of Thailand.\32\ Specifically, Petitioners 
relied on data pertaining to wages earned by Thai workers engaged in 
the manufacturing sector of the economy.\33\ Petitioners inflated the 
wage rate using data for the Thailand Consumer Price Index (CPI) 
published for the POI.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Id., at 8 and Exhibit AD-15.
    \33\ Id.
    \34\ Id., at Exhibits AD-12 and AD-15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Packing Materials

    Petitioners valued the packing materials used by PRC producers 
based on Thai import data for the POI obtained from GTA.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Id., at Exhibits AD-10A, AD-10B, and AD-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Energy/Water

    Petitioners valued electricity using data published by the 
Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand.\36\ In addition, 
Petitioners valued natural gas using Thai import data of liquid natural 
gas and universal conversion factors.\37\ Further, Petitioners valued 
water using the tariff rate published by the Thai Metropolitan 
Waterworks Authority.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Id., at 7 and Exhibit AD-14A.
    \37\ Id., at Exhibit AD-14B.
    \38\ See AD Petition Supplement at 3-4 and Exhibit AD-Supp.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Petitioners relied on surrogate financial ratios (i.e., factory 
overhead, Selling, General & Administrative expenses, and profit) it 
calculated using the 2014 audited financial statement of Grupo Simec, 
S.A.B. de C.V., a Mexican producer of comparable merchandise (i.e., 
processed steel products).\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See Volume II of the Petition at 7 and Exhibit AD-16; for 
further discussion of the surrogate financial ratios, see PRC AD 
Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by Petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of stainless sheet and strip 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 stainless sheet and 
strip from the PRC are 51.07 and 76.64 percent.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Less Than Fair Value Investigation

    Based upon the examination of the AD Petition on stainless sheet 
and strip 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 stainless sheet and 
strip 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 will 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.\41\ 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.\42\ 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.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
    \42\ 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'').
    \43\ 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

    Petitioners named 158 companies from the PRC as producers/exporters 
of stainless sheet and strip.\44\ Following standard practice for 
respondent selection in cases involving NME countries, we intend to 
issue quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires to each potential 
respondent, for which Petitioners have provided a complete address, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See Volume I of Petition at Exhibit GEN-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exporters/producers of stainless sheet and strip from the PRC that 
do not receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response 
to the Q&V

[[Page 12715]]

questionnaire and can obtain a copy from the Enforcement and Compliance 
Web site. The Q&V response must be submitted by all PRC exporters/
producers no later than March 17, 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.\45\ 
The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application 
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.\46\ Exporters and 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 
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 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).
    \46\ 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.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ 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), a copy 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 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 stainless sheet and strip from the PRC are 
materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. 
industry.\48\ A negative ITC determination will result in the 
investigation being terminated; \49\ otherwise, this investigation will 
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \49\ 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 \50\ 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.\51\ 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 this investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \51\ 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. 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. Please 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.html, 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.\52\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect for company/government officials, as well as their 
representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of petitions 
filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD 
proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the 
formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final 
Rule.\53\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does

[[Page 12716]]

not comply with applicable revised certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \53\ 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: March 3, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is stainless steel 
sheet and strip, whether in coils or straight lengths. Stainless 
steel is an alloy steel containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less 
of carbon and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or without 
other elements. The subject sheet and strip is a flat-rolled product 
with a width that is greater than 9.5 mm and with a thickness of 
0.3048 mm and greater but less than 4.75 mm, and that is annealed or 
otherwise heat treated, and pickled or otherwise descaled. The 
subject sheet and strip may also be further processed (e.g., cold-
rolled, annealed, tempered, polished, aluminized, coated, painted, 
varnished, trimmed, cut, punched, or slit, etc.) provided that it 
maintains the specific dimensions of sheet and strip set forth above 
following such processing. The products described include products 
regardless of shape, and include products of either rectangular or 
non-rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved 
subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been 
``worked after rolling'' (e.g., products which have been beveled or 
rounded at the edges).
    For purposes of the width and thickness requirements referenced 
above: (1) Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product 
is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual 
measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions 
set forth above; and (2) where the width and thickness vary for a 
specific product (e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-
rectangular cross-section, the width of certain products with non-
rectangular shape, etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or 
thickness applies.
    All products that meet the written physical description, and in 
which the chemistry quantities do not exceed any one of the noted 
element levels listed above, are within the scope of this 
investigation unless specifically excluded.
    Subject merchandise includes stainless steel sheet and strip 
that has been further processed in a third country, including but 
not limited to cold-rolling, annealing, tempering, polishing, 
aluminizing, coating, painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, 
punching, and/or slitting, 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 stainless steel 
sheet and strip.
    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are the following: 
(1) Sheet and strip that is not annealed or otherwise heat treated 
and not pickled or otherwise descaled; (2) plate (i.e., flat-rolled 
stainless steel products of a thickness of 4.75 mm or more); and (3) 
flat wire (i.e., cold-rolled sections, with a mill edge, rectangular 
in shape, of a width of not more than 9.5 mm).
    The products under investigation are currently classifiable 
under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 
subheadings 7219.13.0031, 7219.13.0051, 7219.13.0071, 7219.13.0081, 
7219.14.0030, 7219.14.0065, 7219.14.0090, 7219.23.0030, 
7219.23.0060, 7219.24.0030, 7219.24.0060, 7219.32.0005, 
7219.32.0020, 7219.32.0025, 7219.32.0035, 7219.32.0036, 
7219.32.0038, 7219.32.0042, 7219.32.0044, 7219.32.0045, 
7219.32.0060, 7219.33.0005, 7219.33.0020, 7219.33.0025, 
7219.33.0035, 7219.33.0036, 7219.33.0038, 7219.33.0042, 
7219.33.0044, 7219.33.0045, 7219.33.0070, 7219.33.0080, 
7219.34.0005, 7219.34.0020, 7219.34.0025, 7219.34.0030, 
7219.34.0035, 7219.34.0050, 7219.35.0005, 7219.35.0015, 
7219.35.0030, 7219.35.0035, 7219.35.0050, 7219.90.0010, 
7219.90.0020, 7219.90.0025, 7219.90.0060, 7219.90.0080, 
7220.12.1000, 7220.12.5000, 7220.20.1010, 7220.20.1015, 
7220.20.1060, 7220.20.1080, 7220.20.6005, 7220.20.6010, 
7220.20.6015, 7220.20.6060, 7220.20.6080, 7220.20.7005, 
7220.20.7010, 7220.20.7015, 7220.20.7060, 7220.20.7080, 
7220.90.0010, 7220.90.0015, 7220.90.0060, and 7220.90.0080. Although 
the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes, the written description of the scope of this proceeding is 
dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2016-05405 Filed 3-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P