[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 79 (Wednesday, April 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19207-19213]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-08397]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-822-806, A-475-836, A-580-891, A-821-824, A-791-823, A-469-816, A-
489-831, A-823-816, A-520-808, A-412-826]


Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Belarus, Italy, the Republic 
of Korea, the Russian Federation, South Africa, Spain, the Republic of 
Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, and United Kingdom: Initiation 
of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

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

DATES: Effective April 17, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Janz at (202) 482-2972 
(Belarus), Tom Bellhouse at (202) 482-0257 (Italy), David Crespo at 
(202) 482-3693 (Republic of Korea (Korea)), Terre Keaton at (202) 482-
1280 (the Russian Federation (Russia)), Moses Song at (202) 482-5041 
(South Africa), Chelsey Simonovich at (202) 482-1979 (Spain), Ryan 
Mullen at (202) 482-5260 (the Republic of Turkey (Turkey)), Julia 
Hancock at (202) 482-1394 (Ukraine), Carrie Bethea at (202) 482-1491 
(the United Arab Emirates (UAE)), and Alice Maldonado at (202) 482-4682 
(the United Kingdom), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 
DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions

    On March 28, 2017, the U.S. Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of carbon 
and alloy steel wire rod (wire rod) from Belarus, Italy, Korea, Russia, 
South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, the UAE, and the United Kingdom, 
filed in proper form on behalf of Charter Steel, Gerdau Ameristeel US 
Inc., Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc., and Nucor Corporation 
(collectively, the petitioners).\1\ The AD petitions were accompanied 
by countervailing duty (CVD) petitions on imports from Italy and 
Turkey. The petitioners are domestic producers of wire rod.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Petitioners 
``Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Belarus, Italy, the Republic 
of Korea, the Russian Federation, South Africa, Spain, the Republic 
of Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, and United Kingdom--
Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duties'' (March 28, 2017) (the Petitions).
    \2\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 31, 2017, and April 6, 2017, the Department requested 
additional information and clarification of certain areas of the 
Petitions.\3\ The petitioners filed responses to these requests on 
April 4, 2017, and on April 7, 2017, respectively.\4\ On April 5, the 
petitioners filed a submission demonstrating that, for certain 
countries, the prices they obtained for normal value were below the 
production costs. As a result, they compared export price (EP) or 
constructed export price (CEP) to normal value (NV) using constructed 
value (CV).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Country-specific letters to Petitioners from the 
Department concerning supplemental questions on each of the country-
specific records (March 31, 2017); and Memorandum to the File 
``Phone Call with Counsel to Petitioners'' (April 10, 2017).
    \4\ See Country-specific amendments to the Petitions (first and 
second amendments for each country); see also Letter to the 
Secretary of Commerce from Petitioners ``Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire 
Rod from Belarus, Italy, the Republic of Korea, the Russian 
Federation, South Africa, Spain, the Republic of Turkey, Ukraine, 
the United Arab Emirates, and United Kingdom--Petitioners' Amendment 
to Volume I Relating to General Issues'' April 4, 2017 (General 
Issues Supplement).
    \5\ See Country-specific amendments to the Petitions from the 
petitioners, ``Re: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from the 
Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, South Africa, and 
Ukraine--Existance of Below-Cost Sales'' (April 5, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of wire rod from 
Belarus, Italy, Korea, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, 
the UAE, and the United Kingdom 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 Petitions are 
accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners 
supporting their allegations.
    The Department finds that the petitioners filed these Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested 
parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also 
finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support 
with respect to the initiation of the AD investigations that the 
petitioners are requesting.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Periods of Investigation

    Because the Petitions were filed on March 28, 2017, the period of 
investigation (POI) for all investigations except Belarus is January 1, 
2016, through December 31, 2016. Because Belarus is a non-market 
economy country, the POI for that investigation is July 1, 2016, 
through December 31, 2016.

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is wire rod from 
Belarus, Italy, Korea, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, 
the UAE, and the United Kingdom. For a full description of the scope of 
these investigations, see the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in 
Appendix I of this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigations

    During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions 
to, and received responses from, the petitioners pertaining to the 
proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions would 
be an accurate

[[Page 19208]]

reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking 
relief.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See General Issues Supplement, at 1-4 and Exhibits I-SUPP-2 
and I-SUPP-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations, we 
are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage (scope).\8\ 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 Monday, May 8, 2017, which is the next 
business day after 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, May 18, 2017, which is 10 
calendar days from the deadline for initial comments.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 
27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping 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, 1401 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 will provide interested parties an opportunity to 
provide comments on the appropriate physical characteristics of wire 
rod to be reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaires. 
This information will be used to identify the key physical 
characteristics of the merchandise under consideration in order to 
report the relevant factors and costs of production accurately as well 
as to develop appropriate product-comparison criteria.
    Subsequent to the publication of this notice, the Department will 
be releasing a proposed list of physical characteristics and product-
comparison criteria, and interested parties will have the opportunity 
to 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 used by manufacturers to describe wire rod, 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.
    The Department intends to establish a deadline for relevant 
comments and submissions at the time it releases the proposed list of 
physical characteristics and product-comparison criteria. All comments 
and submissions to the Department must be filed electronically using 
ACCESS, as explained above, on the records of the Belarus, Italy, 
Korea, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, the UAE, and the 
United Kingdom less-than-fair-value investigations.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    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

[[Page 19209]]

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 Petitions).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that wire rod, as defined 
in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product and we have 
analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For the petitioners' submission regarding industry support, 
see Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire 
Rod from Belarus, Italy, the Republic of Korea, the Russian 
Federation, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab 
Emirates, and United Kingdom, (Attachment II); For a discussion of 
the domestic like product analysis as applied to these cases, see 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Carbon and 
Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Belarus (Belarus AD Initiation Checklist), 
at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Italy (Italy AD 
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty 
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod 
from Korea (Korea AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Carbon and 
Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Russia (Russia AD Initiation Checklist), 
at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from South Africa (South 
Africa AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty 
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod 
from Spain (Spain AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Carbon and 
Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Turkey (Turkey AD Initiation Checklist), 
at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Ukraine (Ukraine AD 
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty 
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod 
from UAE (UAE AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; and 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Carbon and 
Alloy Steel Wire Rod from United Kingdom (United Kingdom AD 
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are 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 the petitioners have standing under section 
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in Appendix I of 
this notice. The petitioners provided 2016 production of the domestic 
like product for all supporters of the Petitions, and compared this to 
the total production of the domestic like product for the entire 
domestic industry.\14\ We relied on data the petitioners provided for 
purposes of measuring industry support.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 3 and Exhibit I-3; see 
also General Issues Supplement, at 4-5 and Exhibits I-SUPP-4 and I-
SUPP-5.
    \15\ Id. For further discussion, see Belarus AD Initiation 
Checklist, Italy AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation 
Checklist, Russia AD Initiation Checklist, South Africa AD 
Initiation Checklist, Spain AD Initiation Checklist, Turkey AD 
Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist, UAE AD 
Initiation Checklist, and United Kingdom AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, General Issues 
Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department 
indicates that the petitioners have established industry support for 
the Petitions.\16\ First, the Petitions 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).\17\ 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 Petitions account for at least 25 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product.\18\ 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 Petitions 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 Petitions.\19\ Accordingly, the Department 
determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic 
industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Belarus AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, Russia AD Initiation 
Checklist, South Africa AD Initiation Checklist, Spain AD Initiation 
Checklist, Turkey AD Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD Initiation 
Checklist, UAE AD Initiation Checklist, and United Kingdom AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \17\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also Belarus AD 
Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD 
Initiation Checklist, Russia AD Initiation Checklist, South Africa 
AD Initiation Checklist, Spain AD Initiation Checklist, Turkey AD 
Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist, UAE AD 
Initiation Checklist, and United Kingdom AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II.
    \18\ See Belarus AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, Russia AD Initiation 
Checklist, South Africa AD Initiation Checklist, Spain AD Initiation 
Checklist, Turkey AD Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD Initiation 
Checklist, UAE AD Initiation Checklist, and United Kingdom AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions 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 investigations that 
they are requesting that the Department initiate.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The 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 NV. In addition, with regard to Korea, 
Russia, Spain, Turkey, and Ukraine, the petitioners allege that subject 
imports exceed the three percent negligibility threshold provided for 
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 16-17 and Exhibit I-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With regard to Belarus, Italy, South Africa, the UAE, and the 
United Kingdom, while the allegedly dumped imports from each of these 
countries do not individually exceed the statutory requirements for 
negligibility, the petitioners provide data demonstrating that the 
aggregate import share from these five countries is 10.15 percent, 
which exceeds the seven percent threshold established by the exception 
in section 771(24)(A)(ii) of the Act.\22\ Therefore, the subject 
imports from these countries are not negligible for purposes of the 
material injury analysis in these Petitions.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Section 771(24)(A)(ii) of the Act states ``{i{time} mports 
that would otherwise be negligible under clause (i) shall not be 
negligible if the aggregate volume of imports of the merchandise 
from all countries described in clause (i) with respect to which 
investigations were initiated on the same day exceeds 7 percent of 
the volume of all such merchandise imported in to the United States 
during the applicable 12-month period.''
    \23\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 17-18 and Exhibit I-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price suppression 
or depression; declines in production capacity, net sales, and U.S. 
producers' average U.S. shipments unit value; negative impacts on 
domestic industry employment, including declines in wages paid to 
production-related workers; declines in financial performance; and lost 
sales and

[[Page 19210]]

revenues.\24\ 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.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id., at 10-12, 23-37, and Exhibits I-8, I-10--I-12, and I-
14--I-15.
    \25\ See Belarus AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Belarus, Italy, the 
Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, South Africa, Spain, 
Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, and United Kingdom 
(Attachment III); see also Italy AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment III; Korea AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; 
Russia AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; South Africa AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; Spain AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment III; Turkey AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment III; Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; 
UAE AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; and United Kingdom 
AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

    The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less 
than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to 
initiate AD investigations of imports of wire rod from Belarus, Italy, 
Korea, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, the UAE, and the 
United Kingdom. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments 
relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the 
country-specific initiation checklists.

Export Price

    For Turkey, the petitioners based U.S. price on EP using price 
quotes for sales of wire rod produced in, and exported from, the 
subject county and offered for sale in the United States.\26\ For 
Belarus, Italy, Korea, Russia, South Africa, Spain, the UAE, and 
Ukraine, the petitioners based EP on average unit values (AUVs) of 
publicly available import data.\27\ Where applicable, the petitioners 
made deductions from U.S. price for movement expenses and trading 
company/importer mark-ups, consistent with the terms of sale.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Turkey AD Initiation Checklist.
    \27\ See Belarus AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist Korea AD Initiation Checklist, South Africa AD Initiation 
Checklist, Spain AD Initiation Checklist; Russia AD Initiation 
Checklist, UAE AD Initiation Checklist, and Ukraine AD Initiation 
Checklist.
    \28\ See Spain AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, Turkey AD Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD Initiation 
Checklist, South Africa AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation 
Checklist, UAE AD Initiation Checklist, and United Kingdom AD 
Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Constructed Export Price

    For Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, because the petitioners had reason 
to believe the sale was made through a U.S. affiliate, the petitioners 
based CEP on a price quote/offer for sale of wire rod produced in, and 
exported from, those countries.\29\ For the United Kingdom, because the 
petitioners had reason to believe the first transaction relating to the 
entry of goods into the United States was to a U.S. affiliate, the 
petitioners based CEP on AUVs of publicly available import data.\30\ 
The petitioners made deductions from U.S. price for movement expenses 
consistent with the delivery terms.\31\ Where applicable, the 
petitioners also deducted from U.S. price trading company/importer 
mark-ups.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Belarus AD Initiation Checklist, Russia AD Initiation 
Checklist, and Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist.
    \30\ See United Kingdom AD Initiation Checklist.
    \31\ Id.
    \32\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    For Korea, Russia, South Africa, Turkey, and Ukraine, the 
petitioners provided home market price information obtained through 
market research for wire rod produced in, and offered for sale in, each 
of these countries.\33\ For all five of these countries, the 
petitioners provided a declaration from a market researcher for the 
price information.\34\ Where applicable, the petitioners made 
deductions for movement expenses, taxes, and imputed credit expenses, 
consistent with the terms of sale.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist, Russia AD Initiation 
Checklist, South Africa AD Initiation Checklist, Turkey AD 
Initiation Checklist, and Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist.
    \34\ Id.
    \35\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Korea, Russia, South Africa, and Ukraine, the petitioners also 
provided information that sales of wire rod in the respective home 
markets were made at prices below the cost of production (COP) and also 
calculated NV based on CV.\36\ For Italy, Spain, the UAE, and the 
United Kingdom, the petitioners were unable to obtain home market price 
quotes for wire rod and calculated NV based on CV.\37\ For further 
discussion of COP and NV based on CV, see below.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist, Russia AD Initiation 
Checklist, South Africa AD Initiation Checklist, and Ukraine AD 
Initiation Checklist.
    \37\ See Italy AD Initiation Checklist, Spain AD Initiation 
Checklist, UAE AD Initiation Checklist; and United Kingdom AD 
Initiation Checklist.
    \38\ In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade Preferences 
Extension Act of 2015, amending section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for 
all of the investigations, the Department will request information 
necessary to calculate the CV and COP to determine whether there are 
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign 
like product have been made at prices that represent less than the 
COP of the product. The Department no longer requires a COP 
allegation to conduct this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to Belarus, the petitioners stated that the Department 
has found Belarus to be a non-market economy (NME) country in prior 
administrative proceedings in which Belarus has been involved.\39\ 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 Belarus 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 
for Belarus is appropriately based on factors of production (FOPs) 
valued in a surrogate market economy country, in accordance with 
section 773(c) of the Act.\40\ In the course of this investigation, all 
parties, and the public, will have the opportunity to provide relevant 
information related to the granting of separate rates to individual 
exporters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See Volume II of the Petitions, at 4-5.
    \40\ See Belarus AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners claim that South Africa is an appropriate surrogate 
country because it is a market economy that is at a level of economic 
development comparable to that of Belarus and it is a significant 
producer of the merchandise under consideration.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ Id.; see also section 773(c) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the information provided by the petitioners, we believe it 
is appropriate to use South Africa 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 no later than 30 days 
before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination.

Factors of Production

    Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by 
Belarusian producers/exporters is not reasonably available, the 
petitioners relied on a surrogate company's actual consumption of 
direct materials, labor, energy, packing materials, and financial 
ratios from a South African producer as an estimate of Belarusian 
manufacturers' FOPs.\42\ The petitioners

[[Page 19211]]

valued the estimated FOPs using surrogate values from South Africa,\43\ 
and used the average POI exchange rate to convert the data to U.S. 
dollars.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See Volume II of the Petitions, at 5 and Exhibits AD-BY-3 
and AD-BY-4; see also Amendment to Belarus Petition, dated April 4, 
2017 (Belarus Amendment), at 1-3 and Exhibit AD-BY-SUPP-3; see also 
Belarus AD Initiation Checklist.
    \43\ See Volume II of the Petitions, at 5 and Exhibit AD-BY-4; 
see also Belarus Amendment, at 1-3 and Exhibit AD-BY-SUPP-4; and 
Second Amendment to Belarus Petition, dated April 7, 2017 (Belarus 
2nd Amendment), at Exhibit AD-BY-SUPP2-4; see also Belarus AD 
Initiation Checklist.
    \44\ Id., at 17 and Exhibit AD-CN-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value

    Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost 
of manufacturing (COM), SG&A, financial expenses, and packing expenses. 
The petitioners calculated COM based on the experience of a surrogate 
producer, adjusted for known differences between the surrogate producer 
and the producer(s) of the respective country (i.e., Italy, Korea, 
Russia, South Africa, Spain, Ukraine, the UAE, and the United Kingdom), 
during the proposed POI.\45\ Using publicly available data to account 
for price differences, the petitioners multiplied the surrogate usage 
quantities by the submitted value of the inputs used to manufacture 
wire rod in each country.\46\ For Italy, Korea, Russia, South Africa, 
Spain, Ukraine, the UAE, and the United Kingdom, labor and energy rates 
were derived from publicly available sources multiplied by the product-
specific usage rates.\47\ For Italy, Korea, Russia, South Africa, 
Spain, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom, to determine factory overhead, 
SG&A, and financial expense rates, the petitioners relied on financial 
statements of companies they asserted were producers of identical or 
comparable merchandise operating in the respective foreign country.\48\ 
For the UAE, because the financial statements of companies that were 
producers of identical or comparable merchandise operating in the 
respective foreign country were not available, the petitioners relied 
on the financial data from a U.S. producer.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See Italy AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation 
Checklist, Russia AD Initiation Checklist, South Africa AD 
Initiation Checklist, Spain AD Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD 
Initiation Checklist, UAE AD Initiation Checklist, and United 
Kingdom AD Initiation Checklist.
    \46\ Id.
    \47\ Id.
    \48\ See Italy AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation 
Checklist, Russia AD Initiation Checklist, South Africa AD 
Initiation Checklist, Spain AD Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD 
Initiation Checklist, and United Kingdom AD Initiation Checklist.
    \49\ See UAE AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Korea, Russia, South Africa, and Ukraine, because certain home 
market prices fell below COP, pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b), 
and 773(e) of the Act, as noted above, the petitioners calculated NVs 
based on CV for those countries.\50\ For Italy, Spain, the UAE, and the 
United Kingdom, the petitioners indicated they were unable to obtain 
home market or third country prices; accordingly, the petitioners based 
NV only on CV for those countries.\51\ Pursuant to section 773(e) of 
the Act, CV consists of the COM, SG&A, financial expenses, packing 
expenses, and profit. The petitioners calculated CV using the same 
average COM, SG&A, and financial expenses, to calculate COP.\52\ The 
petitioners relied on the financial statements of the same producers 
that they used for calculating manufacturing overhead, SG&A, and 
financial expenses to calculate the profit rate.\53\ For South Africa, 
Ukraine, and the United Kingdom, because the relevant financial 
statements indicated that the companies were operating at a loss, the 
petitioners did not include profit in CV.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist, Russia AD Initiation 
Checklist, South Africa AD Initiation Checklist, and Ukraine AD 
Initiation Checklist.
    \51\ See Italy AD Initiation Checklist, Spain AD Initiation 
Checklist, UAE AD Initiation Checklist, and United Kingdom AD 
Initiation Checklist.
    \52\ See Italy AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation 
Checklist, Russia AD Initiation Checklist, South Africa AD 
Initiation Checklist, Spain AD Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD 
Initiation Checklist, UAE AD Initiation Checklist, and United 
Kingdom AD Initiation Checklist.
    \53\ Id.
    \54\ See South Africa AD Initiation Checklist, Ukraine AD 
Initiation Checklist, and United Kingdom AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of wire rod from Belarus, Italy, Korea, Russia, 
South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, the UAE, and the United Kingdom 
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than 
fair value. Based on comparisons of EP, or CEP, to NV in accordance 
with sections 772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for 
wire rod are as follows: (1) Belarus ranges from 161.75 to 280.02 
percent;\55\ (2) Italy is 18.89 percent; \56\ (3) Korea ranges from 
33.96 to 43.25 percent; \57\ (4) Russia ranges from 214.06 to 756.93 
percent; \58\ (5) South Africa ranges from 128.66 to 142.26 percent; 
\59\ (6) Spain is 32.70 percent; \60\ (7) Turkey is 37.67 percent; \61\ 
(8) Ukraine ranges from 21.23 to 44.03 percent; \62\ (9) the UAE is 
84.10 percent; \63\ and (10) the United Kingdom is 147.63 percent.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ See Belarus AD Initiation Checklist.
    \56\ See Italy AD Initiation Checklist.
    \57\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
    \58\ See Russia AD Initiation Checklist.
    \59\ See South Africa AD Initiation Checklist.
    \60\ See Spain AD Initiation Checklist.
    \61\ See Turkey AD Initiation Checklist.
    \62\ See Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist.
    \63\ See UAE AD Initiation Checklist.
    \64\ See United Kingdom AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the AD Petitions on wire rod from 
Belarus, Italy, Korea, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, 
the UAE, and the United Kingdom, we find that the Petitions meet the 
requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD 
investigations to determine whether imports of wire rod from Belarus, 
Italy, Korea, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, the UAE, 
and the United Kingdom 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 determinations no later than 140 days after 
the date of this initiation.
    On June 29, 2015, the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 made 
numerous amendments to the AD and CVD law.\65\ 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.\66\ 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 these investigations.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
    \66\ 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).
    \67\ 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

    The petitioners named a single company in Belarus,\68\ 12 companies 
in Italy,\69\ 16 companies in Korea,\70\ 21 companies in Russia,\71\ 
nine companies in Spain,\72\ three companies in South

[[Page 19212]]

Africa,\73\ 22 companies in Turkey,\74\ four companies in Ukraine,\75\ 
three companies in the UAE,\76\ and six companies in the United 
Kingdom, \77\ as producers/exporters of wire rod. Following standard 
practice in AD investigations involving market economy countries, in 
the event the Department determines that the number of companies is 
large and it cannot individually examine each company based upon the 
Department's resources, where appropriate, the Department intends to 
select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 
data for U.S. imports under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States numbers listed with the scope in Appendix I, 
below. We also intend to release the CBP data under Administrative 
Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information 
protected by APO on the record within five business days of 
announcement of the initiation of these investigations. Comments 
regarding the CBP data and respondent selection should be submitted 
seven calendar days after the placement of the CBP data on the record 
of these investigations. Parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments 
should submit those comments five calendar days after the deadline for 
the initial comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ See Volume I at Exhibit I-7; and Belarus AD Initiation 
Checklist.
    \69\ Id.; and Italy AD Initiation Checklist.
    \70\ Id., and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
    \71\ Id.; and Russia AD Initiation Checklist.
    \72\ Id.; and Spain AD Initiation Checklist.
    \73\ Id.; and South Africa AD Initiation Checklist.
    \74\ Id.; and Turkey AD Initiation Checklist.
    \75\ Id.; and Ukraine AD Initiation Checklist.
    \76\ Id.; and UAE AD Initiation Checklist.
    \77\ Id.; and United Kingdom AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners identified only one company as a producer/exporter 
of wire rod in Belarus: Byelorussian Steel Works.\78\ We currently know 
of no additional producers/exporters of merchandise under consideration 
from Belarus and the petitioners provided information from an 
independent third-party source as support.\79\ Accordingly, the 
Department intends to examine all known producers/exporters in the 
investigation for Belarus (i.e., the company cited above for this 
investigation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ See Belarus AD Initiation Checklist.
    \79\ See Volume I of the Petitions at 9 and Exhibits I-7 and I-
15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, with respect to the Belarus, although we intend to 
select the company identified in the petition as a mandatory 
respondent, in accordance with our standard practice for respondent 
selection in cases involving NME countries, other exporters/producers 
of wire rod from Belarus may submit a response to the Department's 
quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires for consideration of respondent 
selection. Exporters/producers of wire rod from Belarus can obtain a 
copy of the Q&V questionnaire along with filing instructions on the 
Enforcement and Compliance Web site at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp. The Q&V response must be submitted by all 
Belarusian exporters/producers no later than May 1, 2017. All Q&V 
responses must be filed electronically via ACCESS.
    Comments for the above-referenced investigations must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be 
received successfully in its entirety by the Department's electronic 
records system, ACCESS, by 5:00 p.m. ET by the dates noted above. We 
intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 
days of publication of this notice.

Separate Rates

    In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation, 
exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate application.\80\ 
The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application in 
the Belarus 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.\81\ Exporters and producers who submit a separate-rate 
application and are 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 Belarus 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \80\ 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).
    \81\ 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.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \82\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been 
provided to the governments of Belarus, Italy, Korea, Russia, South 
Africa, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, the UAE, and the United Kingdom via 
ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of 
the public version of the Petitions to each exporter named in the 
Petitions, 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 Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of wire rod from Belarus, Italy, Korea, Russia, 
South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, the UAE, and/or the United 
Kingdom are materially injuring or threatening material injury to a 
U.S. industry.\83\ A negative ITC determination for any country will 
result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that 
country; \84\ otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \83\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \84\ 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

[[Page 19213]]

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 \85\ 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.\86\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \85\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \86\ 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. 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.\87\ 
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.\88\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \87\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \88\ 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 
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 these investigations 
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, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).

    Dated: April 17, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigations

    The merchandise covered by these investigations are certain hot-
rolled products of carbon steel and alloy steel, in coils, of 
approximately round cross section, less than 19.00 mm in actual 
solid cross-sectional diameter. Specifically excluded are steel 
products possessing the above-noted physical characteristics and 
meeting the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 
definitions for (a) stainless steel; (b) tool steel; (c) high-nickel 
steel; (d) ball bearing steel; or (e) concrete reinforcing bars and 
rods. Also excluded are free cutting steel (also known as free 
machining steel) products (i.e., products that contain by weight one 
or more of the following elements: 0.1 percent or more of lead, 0.05 
percent or more of bismuth, 0.08 percent or more of sulfur, more 
than 0.04 percent of phosphorous, more than 0.05 percent of 
selenium, or more than 0.01 percent of tellurium). All products 
meeting the physical description of subject merchandise that are not 
specifically excluded are included in this scope.
    The products under investigation are currently classifiable 
under subheadings 7213.91.3011, 7213.91.3015, 7213.91.3020, 
7213.91.3093; 7213.91.4500, 7213.91.6000, 7213.99.0030, 
7227.20.0030, 7227.20.0080, 7227.90.6010, 7227.90.6020, 
7227.90.6030, and 7227.90.6035 of the HTSUS. Products entered under 
subheadings 7213.99.0090 and 7227.90.6090 of the HTSUS also may be 
included in this scope if they meet the physical description of 
subject merchandise above. Although the HTSUS subheadings are 
provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written 
description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2017-08397 Filed 4-25-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P