[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 201 (Tuesday, October 18, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71705-71709]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25178]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-489-830]


Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar From the Republic of Turkey: 
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation

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

DATES: Effective October 11, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kaitlin M. Wojnar at (202) 482-3857, 
AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petition

    On September 20, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received a countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of 
steel concrete reinforcing bar (rebar) from the Republic of Turkey 
(Turkey),\1\ filed in proper form, on behalf of the Rebar Trade Action 
Coalition and its individual members (collectively, Petitioners).\2\ 
The CVD petition was accompanied by antidumping duty (AD) petitions 
concerning imports of rebar from Japan, Taiwan, and the Turkey.\3\ 
Petitioners are domestic producers of rebar.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Letter from Petitioners, ``Petition for the Imposition 
of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Steel Concrete Reinforcing 
Bar from Japan, Taiwan, and the Republic of Turkey,'' September 20, 
2016 (Petition), at Volume V.
    \2\ The Rebar Trade Action Coalition includes Bayou Steel Group, 
Byer Steel Group, Inc., Commercial Metals Company, Gerdau Ameristeel 
U.S. Inc., Nucor Corporation, and Steel Dynamics, Inc. Id., Volume I 
at 1.
    \3\ See Petition, Volumes II-IV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 22 and 23, 2016, the Department requested additional 
information and clarification of certain aspects of the Petition.\4\ 
Petitioners responded to these requests on between September 27 and 
October 5, 2016.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Letter from the Department, ``Petition for the 
Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Steel Concrete 
Reinforcing Bar from the Republic of Turkey: Supplemental 
Questions,'' September 22, 2016; see also Letter from the 
Department, ``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 
Imports of Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Japan, Taiwan, and 
the Republic of Turkey and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Steel 
Concrete Reinforcing Bar from the Republic of Turkey: Supplemental 
Questions,'' September 23, 2016 (General Issues Supplemental 
Questionnaire).
    \5\ See Letter from Petitioners, ``Supplement to the Petition 
for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Steel Concrete 
Reinforcing Bar from the Republic of Turkey: Response to the 
Department's Supplemental Questions,'' September 27, 2016; see also 
Letter from Petitioners, ``Supplement to the Petition for the 
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Steel 
Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Japan, Taiwan, and the Republic of 
Turkey: Response to the Department's Supplemental Questions,'' 
September 28, 2016 (General Issues Supplement); Letter from 
Petitioners, ``Supplement to the Petition for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Steel Concrete Reinforcing 
Bar from Japan, Taiwan, and the Republic of Turkey: Response to the 
Department's Supplemental Questions,'' October 4, 2016 (Second 
General Issues Supplement); Letter from Petitioners, ``Steel 
Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Japan, Taiwan, and the Republic of 
Turkey: Revised Scope, Amendment to the Petition for the Imposition 
of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,'' October 5, 2016.

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

[[Page 71706]]

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), Petitioners allege that the Government of Turkey 
(the GOT) is providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of 
sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to manufacturers, producers, or 
exporters of rebar from Turkey and that imports of such rebar are 
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry in 
the United States. Additionally, consistent with section 702(b)(1) of 
the Act, the Petition is accompanied by information reasonably 
available to Petitioners supporting their allegations of programs in 
Turkey on which we are initiating a CVD investigation.
    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition on behalf 
of the domestic industry because Petitioners are interested parties, as 
defined by section 771(9)(C) of the Act. As discussed in the 
``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition'' section, below, 
the Department also finds that Petitioners demonstrated sufficient 
industry support with respect to initiation of the requested CVD 
investigation.

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation is January 1, 2015, through December 
31, 2015.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is rebar from Turkey. For 
a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the Appendix 
to this notice.

Comments on the 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 accurately 
reflected the products for which the domestic industry is seeking 
relief.\7\ As a result of those exchanges, the scope of the Petition 
was modified to clarify the description of merchandise covered by the 
Petition. The class or kind of merchandise covered by this initiation, 
as described in the Appendix to this notice, reflects that 
clarification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also 
General Issues Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,\8\ we 
are setting aside a period of time for interested parties to raise 
issues regarding product coverage (i.e., scope). The Department will 
consider all comments received and, if necessary, consult with parties 
prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. If scope 
comments include factual information,\9\ all such factual information 
should be limited to public information. In order to facilitate 
preparation of its questionnaires, the Department requests that all 
interested parties submit scope comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) 
on October 31, 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 November 10, 2016, which 
is 10 calendar days after the deadline for initial comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 
27323 (May 19, 2007).
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\10\ An electronically-
filed document must be successfully received, in its entirety, by the 
date and time it is due. Any document 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, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the applicable 
deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 19 CFR 351.303 (describing general filing 
requirements); see also Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective 
Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011) (detailing the 
Department's electronic filing requirements, which went into effect 
on August 5, 2011). Helpful information on using ACCESS can be found 
at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx, and the ACCESS handbook is 
available at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filing%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A) of the Act, the Department 
notified representatives of the GOT of its receipt of the Petition and 
provided them with the opportunity for consultations regarding the CVD 
allegations.\11\ On October 6, 2016, the Department held consultations 
with the GOT.\12\ All letters and memoranda pertaining to these 
consultations are available via ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Letter from the Department, ``Petition for 
Countervailing Duties on Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from the 
Republic of Turkey,'' September 21, 2016.
    \12\ See Department Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Petition 
on Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from the Republic of Turkey,'' 
October 6, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department 
shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to 
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by 
subparagraph (A), or (ii) determine industry support using a 
statistically valid sampling method to poll the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers, as a whole, of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs the Department to look to

[[Page 71707]]

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,\13\ 
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.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \14\ 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 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 rebar, as defined in the scope, 
constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have analyzed 
industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from the Republic of 
Turkey (CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, ``Analysis of 
Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Petitions Covering Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Japan, 
Taiwan, and the Republic of Turkey.'' The CVD Initiation Checklist 
is dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically 
via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available 
in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of 
Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 the Investigation,'' in the Appendix to 
this notice. To establish industry support, Petitioners provided their 
2015 shipments of the domestic like product, and compared their 
shipments to estimated total shipments of the domestic like product for 
the entire domestic industry.\16\ Because production data for the U.S. 
rebar industry for 2015 is not reasonably available to Petitioners, and 
Petitioners have established that shipments are a reasonable proxy for 
production data,\17\ we have relied upon the shipment data provided by 
Petitioners for purposes of measuring industry support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Petition, Volume I at 3, Exhibit I-4, and Exhibit I-31; 
see also General Issues Supplement at 3-6, Exhibit I-Supp-4, and 
Exhibit I-Supp-7.
    \17\ See General Issues Supplement at 5, Exhibit I-Supp-4, and 
Exhibit I-Supp-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petition, General Issues 
Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department 
indicates that Petitioners have established industry support.\18\ 
First, the Petition established support from domestic producers and 
workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total shipments of 
the domestic like product,\19\ and, as such, the Department is not 
required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support 
(e.g., polling).\20\ Second, the domestic producers and workers have 
met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 
702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers and workers 
who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total 
shipments of the domestic like product.\21\ Finally, the domestic 
producers and workers have met the statutory criteria for industry 
support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic 
producers and workers who support the Petition account for more than 50 
percent of the shipments of the domestic like product produced by that 
portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the 
Petition.\22\ Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petition 
was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
    \19\ As discussed above, Petitioners established that shipments 
are a reasonable proxy for production data. Section 351.203(e)(1) of 
the Department's regulations states, ``production levels may be 
established by reference to alternative data that the Secretary 
determines to be indicative of production levels.''
    \20\ See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also CVD 
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
    \21\ See CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition on behalf 
of the domestic industry because they are interested parties, as 
defined in sections 771(9)(C) and (F) of the Act, and they have 
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD 
investigation that they are requesting the Department initiate.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because Turkey 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 Turkey 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.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See General Issues Supplement at 6-8, Exhibit I-Supp-8, and 
Exhibit I-Supp-9; see also Second General Issues Supplement at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price suppression 
or depression; lost sales and revenues; declines in production, 
capacity utilization, and U.S. shipments; negative impact on employment 
variables; and decline in financial performance.\25\ We have assessed 
the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, 
threat of material injury, and causation, and we have determined that 
these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet 
the statutory requirements for initiation.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Petition, Volume I at 14, 18-48, Exhibit I-5, Exhibit 
I-8, Exhibit I-20, and Exhibits I-23 through I-59; see also General 
Issues Supplement at 6-8, Exhibit I-Supp-7, Exhibit I-Supp-8, 
Exhibit I-Supp-9 and Exhibit I-Supp-10; Second General Issues 
Supplement at 1-2.
    \26\ See CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, ``Analysis 
of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Steel 
Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Japan, Taiwan, and the Republic of 
Turkey.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a 
CVD investigation whenever an interested party files a CVD petition on 
behalf of an industry that (1) alleges the elements necessary for the 
imposition of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act and (2) is 
accompanied by information

[[Page 71708]]

reasonably available to Petitioners supporting the allegations.
    Petitioners allege that exporters/producers of rebar in Turkey 
benefited from countervailable subsidies bestowed by the GOT. The 
Department examined the Petition 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 initiating a CVD 
investigation to determine whether manufacturers, producers, and/or 
exporters of rebar from Turkey not covered by an existing CVD order on 
rebar from Turkey receive countervailable subsidies from the GOT.
    On June 29, 2015, the President of the United States signed the 
Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 (TPEA) into law, which made 
numerous amendments to the Act.\27\ The TPEA does not specify dates of 
application for those amendments. On August 6, 2015, the Department 
published an interpretative rule, in which it announced the 
applicability dates for each amendment to the Act, except for 
amendments contained in section 771(7) of the Act, which relate to 
determinations of material injury by the ITC.\28\ The amendments to 
sections 776 and 782 of the Act are applicable to all determinations 
made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to this CVD 
investigation.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See TPEA, Public Law 114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
    \28\ 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). 
The 2015 amendments may be found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
    \29\ 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), at 
46794-95. The 2015 amendments may be found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 21 of 23 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate or not initiate on each program, see CVD Initiation 
Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this 
investigation is available on ACCESS.
    In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary 
determination in this investigation no later than 65 days after the 
date of initiation.

Respondent Selection

    Petitioners named one company as an exporter/producer of rebar from 
Turkey that is not currently subject to an existing CVD order on 
imports of rebar from Turkey.\30\ Following standard practice in CVD 
investigations, the Department will, where appropriate, select 
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for 
U.S. imports of rebar from Turkey during the period of investigation. 
We intend to release CBP data under Administrative Protective Order 
(APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO within 
five business days of publication of this Federal Register notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Petition, Volume V at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such 
applications may be found on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.

Distribution of Copies of the 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 GOT via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will 
attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petition to each 
known exporter/producer, as named in the Petition,\31\ consistent with 
19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Petition, Volume I at Exhibit I-19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ITC Notification

    We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
702(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    Within 45 days of the date on which the Petition was filed, the ITC 
will preliminarily determine whether there is a reasonable indication 
that imports of rebar from Turkey are materially injuring, or 
threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.\32\ A negative ITC 
determination will result in the investigation being terminated.\33\ 
Otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to statutory and 
regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
    \33\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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) through (iv). The regulation 
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. Specific time 
limits for submission of factual information, based on the type of 
factual information being submitted, are provided at 19 CFR 351.301. 
Parties should review the regulations prior to submitting factual 
information in this investigation.

Extension of Time Limits

    Parties may request the extension of a time limit established under 
19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary, before the 
applicable time limit has expired. In general, an extension request 
will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the 
time limit. 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 deadline after which 
extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions that are 
due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will 
inform parties in the letter or memorandum establishing the applicable 
time limit. An extension request must be made in a separate, stand-
alone submission. In limited circumstances, we will grant untimely-
filed extension requests.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify the accuracy and completeness of that information.\35\ 
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

[[Page 71709]]

August 16, 2013, should use the revised certification formats provided 
at the end of the Final Rule.\36\ The Department intends to reject 
factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the 
applicable revised certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \36\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (``Final Rule''). Answers 
to frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available 
at http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the 
Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 
22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in this investigation should 
ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., 
filing letters of appearance, as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and 
777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: October 11, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise subject to this investigation is steel concrete 
reinforcing bar imported in either straight length or coil form 
(rebar) regardless of metallurgy, length, diameter, or grade or lack 
thereof. Subject merchandise includes deformed steel wire with bar 
markings (e.g., mill mark, size, or grade) and which has been 
subjected to an elongation test.
    The subject merchandise includes rebar that has been further 
processed in the subject country or a third country, including but 
not limited to cutting, grinding, galvanizing, painting, coating, 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 rebar.
    Specifically excluded are plain rounds (i.e., nondeformed or 
smooth rebar). Also excluded from the scope is deformed steel wire 
meeting ASTM A1064/A1064M with no bar markings (e.g., mill mark, 
size, or grade) and without being subject to an elongation test.
    At the time of the filing of the petition, there was an existing 
countervailing duty order on steel reinforcing bar from the Republic 
of Turkey. Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar From the Republic of 
Turkey, 79 FR 65,926 (Dep't Commerce Nov. 6, 2014) (2014 Turkey CVD 
Order). The scope of this countervailing duty investigation with 
regard to rebar from Turkey covers only rebar produced and/or 
exported by those companies that are excluded from the 2014 Turkey 
CVD Order. At the time of the issuance of the 2014 Turkey CVD Order, 
Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S. was the only 
excluded Turkish rebar producer or exporter.
    The subject merchandise is classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) primarily under item numbers 
7213.10.0000, 7214.20.0000, and 7228.30.8010. The subject 
merchandise may also enter under other HTSUS numbers including 
7215.90.1000, 7215.90.5000, 7221.00.0017, 7221.00.0018, 
7221.00.0030, 7221.00.0045, 7222.11.0001, 7222.11.0057, 
7222.11.0059, 7222.30.0001, 7227.20.0080, 7227.90.6030, 
7227.90.6035, 7227.90.6040, 7228.20.1000, and 7228.60.6000.
    HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes; 
however, the written description of the scope remains dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2016-25178 Filed 10-17-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P