[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 93 (Tuesday, May 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22486-22490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09869]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-874; C-570-059]


Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel 
From India and the People's Republic of China: Initiation of 
Countervailing Duty Investigations

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

DATES: Effective May 9, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfie Blum at (202) 482-0197 (India); 
Yasmin Bordas at (202) 482-3813 (the People's Republic of China), AD/
CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petitions

    On April 19, 2017, the U.S. Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received countervailing duty (CVD) Petitions concerning imports of 
certain cold-drawn mechanical tubing of carbon and alloy steel (cold-
drawn mechanical tubing) from India and the People's Republic of China 
(the PRC), filed in proper form on behalf of ArcelorMittal Tubular 
Products; Michigan Seamless Tube, LLC; PTC Alliance Corp.; Webco 
Industries, Inc.; and Zekelman Industries, Inc. (collectively, the 
petitioners). The CVD Petitions were accompanied by antidumping duty 
(AD) Petitions concerning imports of cold-drawn mechanical tubing from 
each of the above countries, in addition to Italy, Switzerland, the 
Federal Republic of Germany, and the Republic of Korea.\1\ The 
petitioners are domestic producers of cold-drawn mechanical tubing.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing Of Carbon And 
Alloy Steel from the People's Republic Of China, the Federal 
Republic of Germany, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and 
Switzerland--Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties,'' dated April 19, 2017 (the Petitions).
    \2\ Id., Volume I of the Petitions, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 24, 2017, the Department requested supplemental 
information pertaining to certain areas of the Petitions.\3\ The 
petitioners filed responses to these requests on April 28, 2017.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Letter from the Department, ``Petition for the 
Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Cold-Drawn 
Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from India: Supplemental 
Questions,'' dated April 24, 2017 (India CVD Supplemental 
Questionnaire); see also Letter from the Department, ``Petitions for 
the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports 
of Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel 
from the People's Republic of China, the Federal Republic of 
Germany, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Switzerland: 
Supplemental Questions,'' dated April 24, 2017 (General Issues 
Supplemental Questionnaire); see also Letter from the Department 
``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from 
the PRC: Supplemental Questions,'' dated April 24, 2017 (PRC CVD 
Supplemental Questionnaire).
    \4\ See Letter from the petitioners, ``Certain Cold-Drawn 
Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from India--Petitioners' 
Response to Supplemental Questionnaire Concerning Countervailing 
Duty Petition,'' dated April 28, 2017 (India CVD Supplement); see 
also Letter from the petitioners, ``Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical 
Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from India--Petitioners' Amendment 
to Volume I Relating to General Issues,'' dated April 28, 2017 
(General Issues Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioners, 
``Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel 
from the People's Republic of China--Petitioners' Response to 
Supplemental Questionnaire Concerning Countervailing Duty 
Petition,'' dated April 28, 2017 (PRC CVD Supplement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that the Governments of India 
(GOI) and the PRC (GOC) are providing countervailable subsidies, within 
the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to imports of cold-
drawn mechanical tubing from India and the PRC, respectively, and that 
such imports are materially injuring the domestic industry producing 
cold-drawn mechanical tubing in the United States. Also, consistent 
with section 702(b)(1) of the Act, for those alleged programs on which 
we are initiating a CVD investigation, 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 CVD investigations that the 
petitioners are requesting.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition'' 
section, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Periods of Investigation

    Because the Petitions were filed on April 19, 2017, the period of 
investigation is January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016.

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is cold-drawn 
mechanical tubing from India and the PRC. 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 reflection of the products for which the domestic 
industry is seeking relief.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also 
General Issues Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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).\7\ The Department will consider all 
comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will 
consult with the interested parties prior to the issuance of the 
preliminary determinations. If scope comments include factual 
information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)) all such factual information 
should be limited to public information. 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 Tuesday, May 30, 
2017, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this 
notice.\8\ Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual 
information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on Thursday, June 8, 2017, 
which is 10 calendar days from the initial comments deadline.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \8\ The twenty-day deadline falls on May 29, 2017, a federal 
holiday; accordingly, our due date will be on the next business day.
    \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

[[Page 22487]]

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 Duty 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 it is due. Documents exempted 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, the 
Department notified representatives of the GOI and the GOC of the 
receipt of the Petitions, and provided representatives of the GOI and 
the GOC the opportunity for consultations with respect to the CVD 
Petitions. Consultations with the GOC were held via conference call on 
May 5, 2017, and consultations with the GOI were held at the 
Department's main building on May 9, 2017.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Memorandum to the File regarding ``Ex-Parte Meeting 
with Officials from the Government of the People's Republic of China 
on the Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical 
Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from the People's Republic of 
China,'' dated May 5, 2017. See also Memorandum to the File 
regarding ``Ex-Parte Meeting with Officials from the Government of 
India on the Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain Cold-Drawn 
Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from India,'' dated May 
9, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    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 producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which 
is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has 
been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like 
product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and 
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\12\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a 
separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department's 
determination is subject to limitations of time and information. 
Although this may result in different definitions of the like product, 
such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary 
to law.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \13\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
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 cold-drawn mechanical 
tubing, as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like 
product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic 
like product.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
these cases, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy 
Steel from the People's Republic of China (PRC CVD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Cold-
Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from the People's 
Republic of China, the Federal Republic of Germany, India, Italy, 
the Republic of Korea, and Switzerland (Attachment II); and 
Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain 
Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from India 
(India CVD 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 
702(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 or U.S. shipments 
of the domestic like product for all supporters of the Petitions, and 
compared this to the estimated total production of the domestic like 
product for the entire domestic industry.\15\ We relied on data the 
petitioners provided for purposes of measuring industry support.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2-3 and Exhibits GEN-3--
GEN-5; see also General Issues Supplement, at 6-8 and Exhibits GEN-
SUPP-3 and GEN-SUPP-4.
    \16\ Id. For further discussion, see PRC CVD Initiation 
Checklist and India CVD 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.\17\ 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.,

[[Page 22488]]

polling).\18\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the 
statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) 
of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the 
Petitions 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 702(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.\20\ Accordingly, the Department determines that the 
Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the 
meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist and India CVD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \18\ See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also PRC CVD 
Initiation Checklist and India CVD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II.
    \19\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist and India CVD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \20\ 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 CVD investigations that 
they are requesting that the Department initiate.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Injury Test

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

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The 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, the petitioners 
allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided 
for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\22\ In CVD petitions, section 
771(24)(B) of the Act provides that imports of subject merchandise from 
developing and least developed countries must exceed the negligibility 
threshold of four percent. The petitioners also demonstrate that 
subject imports from India, which has been designated as a least 
developed country under section 771(36)(B) of the Act, exceed the 
negligibility threshold of four percent.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 15-16; see also General 
Issues Supplement, at 9 and Exhibit GEN-SUPP-5.
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price suppression 
or depression; lost sales and revenues; decreased production, capacity 
utilization, and U.S. shipments; declines in employment of production-
related workers, wages paid, and hours worked; and declines in 
financial performance.\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 12-30 and Exhibits GEN-3, GEN-12 and GEN-14--GEN-
17.
    \25\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy 
Steel from the People's Republic of China, the Federal Republic of 
Germany, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Switzerland 
(Attachment III); and India CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment 
III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of CVD Investigations

    Based on the examination of the CVD Petitions, we find that the 
Petitions meet the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore we 
are initiating CVD investigations to determine whether imports of cold-
drawn mechanical tubing from the PRC and India benefit from 
countervailable subsidies conferred by the governments of these 
countries. 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 no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation.
    Under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, numerous 
amendments to the AD and CVD laws were made.\26\ 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.\27\ 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 these CVD 
investigations.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
    \27\ 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.
    \28\ See Applicability Notice, 80 FR at 46794-95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

India

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on all of the 32 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate on each program, see the India CVD Initiation Checklist.

The PRC

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on all of the 34 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate on each program, see the PRC CVD Initiation Checklist.
    A public version of the initiation checklist for each 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 no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation.

Respondent Selection

    The petitioners named 39 companies as producers/exporters of cold-
drawn mechanical tubing in India and 91 in the PRC.\29\ 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 cold-drawn mechanical tubing 
during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States subheadings. 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 the 
announcement of the initiation of this investigation. Interested 
parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance 
with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications

[[Page 22489]]

may be found on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Petition, Volume I at Exhibit I-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties may submit comments regarding the CBP data and 
respondent selection by 5:00 p.m. ET on the seventh calendar day after 
publication of this notice. Interested pParties wishing to submit 
rebuttal comments should submit those comments five calendar days after 
the deadline for initial comments.
    Comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An 
electronically-filed document must be received successfully, in its 
entirety, by ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the date noted above. 
If respondent selection is necessary, within 20 days of publication of 
this notice, we intend to make our decisions regarding respondent 
selection based upon comments received from interested parties and our 
analysis of the record information.

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been 
provided to the GOI and GOC 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 
702(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 cold-drawn mechanical tubing from India and 
the PRC are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a 
U.S. industry.\30\ A negative ITC determination will result in the 
investigations being terminated.\31\ Otherwise, these investigations 
will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
    \31\ 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)-(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires 
any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which 
subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 
\32\ 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.\33\ 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. Interested parties should review the 
regulations prior to submitting factual information in these 
investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \33\ 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 351.301, 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 351.301 expires. For submissions 
that are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request 
will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the 
due date. Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a 
different time limit by which extension requests will be considered 
untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties 
simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform parties in the letter or 
memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified time) by 
which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. An 
extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; 
under limited circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for 
the extension of time limits. Parties should 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.\34\ 
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.\35\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable revised 
certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \35\ 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 this investigation should 
ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the 
filing of 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: May 9, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Operations.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigations

    The scope of these investigations covers cold-drawn mechanical 
tubing of carbon and alloy steel (cold-drawn mechanical tubing) of 
circular cross-section, in actual outside diameters less than 331 
mm, and regardless of wall thickness, surface finish, end finish or 
industry specification. The subject cold-drawn mechanical tubing is 
a tubular product with a circular cross-sectional shape that has 
been cold-drawn or otherwise cold-finished after the initial tube 
formation in a manner that involves a change in the diameter or wall 
thickness of the tubing, or both. The subject cold-drawn mechanical 
tubing may be produced from either welded (e.g., electric resistance 
welded, continuous welded, etc.) or seamless (e.g., pierced, 
pilgered or extruded, etc.) carbon or alloy steel tubular products. 
It may also be heat treated after cold working. Such heat treatments 
may include, but are not limited to, annealing, normalizing, 
quenching and

[[Page 22490]]

tempering, stress relieving or finish annealing. Typical cold-
drawing methods for subject merchandise include, but are not limited 
to, drawing over mandrel, rod drawing, plug drawing, sink drawing 
and similar processes that involve reducing the outside diameter of 
the tubing with a die or similar device, whether or not controlling 
the inside diameter of the tubing with an internal support device 
such as a mandrel, rod, plug or similar device.
    Subject cold-drawn mechanical tubing is typically certified to 
meet industry specifications for cold-drawn tubing including but not 
limited to:
    (1) American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or 
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) specifications ASTM 
A-512, ASTM A-513 Type 3 (ASME SA513 Type 3), ASTM A-513 Type 4 
(ASME SA513 Type 4), ASTM A-513 Type 5 (ASME SA513 Type 5), ASTM A-
513 Type 6 (ASME SA513 Type 6), ASTM A-519 (cold-finished);
    (2) SAE International (Society of Automotive Engineers) 
specifications SAE J524, SAE J525, SAE J2833, SAE J2614, SAE J2467, 
SAE J2435, SAE J2613;
    (3) Aerospace Material Specification (AMS) AMS T-6736 (AMS 
6736), AMS 6371, AMS 5050, AMS 5075, AMS 5062, AMS 6360, AMS 6361, 
AMS 6362, AMS 6371, AMS 6372, AMS 6374, AMS 6381, AMS 6415;
    (4) United States Military Standards (MIL) MIL-T-5066 and MIL-T-
6736;
    (5) foreign standards equivalent to one of the previously listed 
ASTM, ASME, SAE, AMS or MIL specifications including but not limited 
to:
    (a) German Institute for Standardization (DIN) specifications 
DIN 2391-2, DIN 2393-2, DIN 2394-2);
    (b) European Standards (EN) EN 10305-1, EN 10305-2, EN 10305-4, 
EN 10305-6 and European national variations on those standards 
(e.g., British Standard (BS EN), Irish Standard (IS EN) and German 
Standard (DIN EN) variations, etc.);
    (c) Japanese Industrial Standard (JIS) JIS G 3441 and JIS G 
3445; and
    (6) proprietary standards that are based on one of the above-
listed standards.
    The subject cold-drawn mechanical tubing may also be dual or 
multiple certified to more than one standard. Pipe that is multiple 
certified as cold-drawn mechanical tubing and to other 
specifications not covered by this scope, is also covered by the 
scope of these investigations when it meets the physical description 
set forth above.
    Steel products included in the scope of these investigations are 
products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of 
the other contained elements; and (2) the carbon content is 2 
percent or less by weight.
    For purposes of this scope, the place of cold-drawing determines 
the country of origin of the subject merchandise. Subject 
merchandise that is subject to minor working in a third country that 
occurs after drawing in one of the subject countries including, but 
not limited to, heat treatment, cutting to length, straightening, 
nondestruction testing, deburring or chamfering, remains within the 
scope of the investigations.
    All products that meet the written physical description are 
within the scope of these investigations unless specifically 
excluded or covered by the scope of an existing order. Merchandise 
that meets the physical description of cold-drawn mechanical tubing 
above is within the scope of the investigations even if it is also 
dual or multiple certified to an otherwise excluded specification 
listed below. The following products are outside of, and/or 
specifically excluded from, the scope of these investigations:
    (1) Cold-drawn stainless steel tubing, containing 10.5 percent 
or more of chromium by weight and not more than 1.2 percent of 
carbon by weight;
    (2) products certified to one or more of the ASTM, ASME or 
American Petroleum Institute (API) specifications listed below:

     ASTM A-53;
     ASTM A-106;
     ASTM A-179 (ASME SA 179);
     ASTM A-192 (ASME SA 192);
     ASTM A-209 (ASME SA 209);
     ASTM A-210 (ASME SA 210);
     ASTM A-213 (ASME SA 213);
     ASTM A-334 (ASME SA 334);
     ASTM A-423 (ASME SA 423);
     ASTM A-498;
     ASTM A-496 (ASME SA 496);
     ASTM A-199;
     ASTM A-500;
     ASTM A-556;
     ASTM A-565;
     API 5L; and
     API 5CT

except that any cold-drawn tubing product certified to one of the 
above excluded specifications will not be excluded from the scope if 
it is also dual- or multiple-certified to any other specification 
that otherwise would fall within the scope of these investigations.
    The products subject to the investigations are currently 
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) under item numbers: 7304.31.3000, 7304.31.6050, 
7304.51.1000, 7304.51.5005, 7304.51.5060, 7306.30.5015, 
7306.30.5020, 7306.50.5030. Subject merchandise may also enter under 
numbers 7306.30.1000 and 7306.50.1000. The HTSUS subheadings above 
are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written 
description of the scope of the investigations is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2017-09869 Filed 5-15-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P