[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 144 (Monday, July 27, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45173-45177]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16221]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-834-811]


Silicon Metal from the Republic of Kazakhstan: Initiation of 
Countervailing Duty Investigation

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

DATES: Applicable July 20, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Justin Neuman; AD/CVD Operations, 
Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0486.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petition

    On June 30, 2020, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) received a 
countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of silicon metal 
from the Republic of Kazakhstan (Kazakhstan), filed in proper form on 
behalf of the petitioners,\1\ domestic producers of silicon metal.\2\ 
The Petition was accompanied by antidumping duty (AD) petitions 
concerning imports of silicon metal from Bosnia and Herzegovina, 
Iceland, and Malaysia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The petitioners are Globe Specialty Metals, Inc. and 
Mississippi Silicon LLC.
    \2\ See Petitioners' Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Silicon Metal from Bosnia and 
Herzegovina, Iceland, the Republic of Kazakhstan, and Malaysia,'' 
dated June 30, 2020 (the Petition).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 6 and 7, 2020, Commerce requested supplemental information 
pertaining to certain aspects of the Petition in separate supplemental 
questionnaires.\3\ The petitioners filed

[[Page 45174]]

responses to the supplemental questionnaires on July 8 and 10, 2020, 
respectively.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Silicon Metal from Bosnia and 
Herzegovina, Iceland, and Malaysia and Countervailing Duties on 
Imports from Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questions,'' dated July 6, 
2020; and ``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on 
Imports of Silicon Metal from Kazakhstan: Supplemental Questions,'' 
dated July 7, 2020.
    \4\ See Petitioners' Letters, ``Silicon Metal from Bosnia and 
Herzegovina, Iceland, and Malaysia and Kazakhstan: General Volume 
Petition Supplement,'' dated July 8, 2020 (General Issues 
Supplement); and ``Silicon Metal from Kazakhstan: Volume V Petition 
Supplement,'' dated July 10, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that the Government of 
Kazakhstan (GOK) is providing countervailable subsidies, within the 
meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of silicon 
metal in Kazakhstan, and that imports of such products are materially 
injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic silicon metal 
industry in the United States. Consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the 
Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged programs on which we are 
initiating a CVD investigation, the petitioners provided reasonably 
available information in the Petition to support their allegations.
    Commerce finds that the petitioners filed the Petition on behalf of 
the domestic industry, because the petitioners are an interested party, 
as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that 
the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support necessary for 
the initiation of the requested CVD investigation.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Period of Investigation

    Because the Petition was filed on June 30, 2020, the period of 
investigation is January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019.

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is silicon metal from 
Kazakhstan. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, 
see the appendix to this notice.

Scope Comments

    As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are 
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding 
product coverage (i.e., scope).\6\ Commerce will consider all comments 
received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with 
interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary 
determination. If scope comments include factual information,\7\ all 
such factual information should be limited to public information. 
Commerce requests that all interested parties submit such comments by 
5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on August 10, 2020, which is 21 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 
August 20, 2020, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment 
deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble).
    \7\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically via 
Enforcement and Compliance's AD and CVD Centralized Electronic Service 
System (ACCESS), unless an exception applies.\8\ An electronically-
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the 
time and date it is due.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 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 Commerce's electronic filing 
requirements, effective 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, Commerce 
notified representatives of the GOK of the receipt of the Petition and 
provided them the opportunity for consultations with respect to the 
Petition.\9\ Consultations were held with the GOK on July 13, 2020.\10\ 
The GOK submitted consultation remarks on July 14, 2020.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Commerce's Letter, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on 
Silicon Metal from Kazakhstan: Invitation for Consultations,'' dated 
July 1, 2020.
    \10\ See Memorandum, ``Consultations with Officials from the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan Regarding the 
Countervailing Duty Investigation of Silicon Metal from the Republic 
of Kazakhstan,'' dated July 14, 2020.
    \11\ See GOK's Letter, ``Silicon Metal from Kazakhstan,'' dated 
July 14, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce 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 Commerce 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 Commerce 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, Commerce'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

[[Page 45175]]

be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition).
    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 investigation.\14\ Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that silicon metal, as 
defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and 
we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like 
product.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Volume I of the Petition at 25-28.
    \15\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as 
applied to these cases, and information regarding industry support, 
see the Kazakhstan CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II 
(``Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Silicon Metal from Bosnia and 
Herzegovina, Iceland, Malaysia, and Kazakhstan'') (Attachment II). 
This checklist is dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, 
this notice and is on file electronically via ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 Petition with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in the appendix to 
this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioners provided 
their actual 2019 production of the domestic like product.\16\ To 
estimate the 2019 production for the entire U.S. silicon metal 
industry, the petitioners relied on their own 2019 production data and 
estimated production data reported for the non-petitioning producer (DC 
Alabama).\17\ We relied on data provided by the petitioners for 
purposes of measuring industry support.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Volume I of the Petition at 3-4 and Exhibits I-2 and I-
3; see also General Issues Supplement at 2.
    \17\ See Volume I of the Petition at 3-4 and Exhibit I-5; see 
also General Issues Supplement at 2.
    \18\ See Volume I of the Petition at 3-4 and Exhibit I-5; see 
also General Issues Supplement at 2. For further discussion, see 
Attachment II of the Kazakhstan CVD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the General Issues 
Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce 
indicates that the petitioners have established industry support for 
the Petition.\19\ First, the Petition established support from domestic 
producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product and, as such, Commerce is not 
required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support 
(e.g., polling).\20\ 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 Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product.\21\ 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 Petition account for more than 
50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by 
that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, 
the Petition.\22\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petition 
was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Volume I of the Petition at 3-4 and Exhibits I-2, I-3, 
and I-5; see also General Issues Supplement at 2. For further 
discussion, see Attachment II of the Kazakhstan CVD Initiation 
Checklist.
    \20\ See Attachment II of the Kazakhstan CVD Initiation 
Checklist; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
    \21\ See Attachment II of the Kazakhstan CVD Initiation 
Checklist.
    \22\ Id.
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because Kazakhstan is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the 
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act 
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine 
whether imports of the subject merchandise from Kazakhstan 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.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Volume I of the Petition at 31 and Exhibit I-31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports; 
declining market share; underselling; price depression and suppression; 
lost sales and revenues; declines in capacity, production, shipments, 
employment, prices, revenue, and profitability; and declining financial 
performance.\25\ We assessed the allegations and supporting evidence 
regarding material injury, threat of material injury, causation, and 
negligibility, and we have determined that these allegations are 
properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory 
requirements for initiation.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Volume I of the Petition at 41-68 and Exhibits I-1, I-5 
through I-7, I-10, I-13, I-15, I-16, I-18, I-20, I-23, I-24, I-32, 
I-34, and I-37 through I-59.
    \26\ See Kazakhstan CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III 
(``Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Silicon Metal from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iceland, 
Kazakhstan, and Malaysia'') (Attachment III).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of CVD Investigation

    Based upon an examination of the Petition and supplemental 
responses, we find that the Petition meets the requirements of section 
702 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating a CVD investigation to 
determine whether imports of silicon metal from Kazakhstan benefit from 
countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOK.
    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on all eight of 
the alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our 
decision to initiate on each program, see Kazakhstan CVD Initiation 
Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this 
investigation is available on ACCESS. In accordance with section 
703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we 
will make our preliminary determination no later than 65 days after the 
date of this initiation.

Respondent Selection

    In the Petition, the petitioners named two companies as producers 
of silicon metal in Kazakhstan, as well as two additional companies as 
potential exporters.\27\ On July 10, 2020, Commerce released U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of silicon 
metal from Kazakhstan under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States numbers listed in the appendix to this notice 
under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access 
to information protected by APO and indicated that interested parties 
wishing to comment on the CBP data must do so within three business 
days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of this 
investigation.\28\ However, based on the

[[Page 45176]]

CBP data, Commerce determines that there was not a large number of 
producers/exporters of silicon metal during the POI. Commerce therefore 
intends to follow its standard practice in CVD investigations and 
calculate company-specific subsidy rates for each publicly-identifiable 
company included in the CBP data. Therefore, we are selecting JSC NMC 
Tau-Ken Samruk and Tau-Ken Temir LLP as mandatory respondents in this 
proceeding. Interested parties that wish to comment on this selection, 
or on the CBP data, may do so within three business days of the 
publication date of this notice. Commerce will not accept rebuttal 
comments regarding the CBP data or respondent selection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Volume I of the Petition at 2.
    \28\ See Memorandum, ``Petition for the Imposition of 
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Silicon Metal from Kazakhstan: 
Release of Entry Data,'' dated July 10, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such 
applications may be found on Commerce's website at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo. 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. on the date noted 
above, unless an exception applies.

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been 
provided to the GOK via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, Commerce 
will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petition to 
each exporter named in the Petition, as provided under 19 CFR 
351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

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

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of silicon metal from Kazakhstan are materially 
injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.\29\ A 
negative ITC determination will result in this investigation being 
terminated.\30\ Otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to 
the statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
    \30\ 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 Commerce; 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 351.301(b) 
the information is being submitted \31\ 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.\32\ 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 this investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \32\ 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 Commerce. 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. 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, Commerce 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, Commerce 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 Commerce will grant untimely-filed requests for 
the extension of time limits. Parties should review Extension of Time 
Limits, 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 extension requests or factual information in this 
investigation.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\33\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\34\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \34\ 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. Instructions for filing such 
applications may be found on the Commerce website at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo. Parties wishing to participate in this 
investigation should ensure that they meet the requirements of 19 CFR 
351.103(d) (e.g., by filing a notice of appearance). Note that Commerce 
has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving 
documents containing business proprietary information, until further 
notice.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD Service Requirements 
Due to COVID-19; Extension of Effective Period, 85 FR 41363 (July 
10, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702(c) and 
777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).

    Dated: July 20, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of this investigation covers all forms and sizes of 
silicon metal, including silicon metal powder. Silicon metal 
contains at least 85.00 percent but less than 99.99 percent silicon, 
and less than 4.00 percent iron, by actual weight. Semiconductor 
grade silicon (merchandise containing at least 99.99 percent silicon 
by actual weight and classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule
    of the United States (HTSUS) subheading 2804.61.0000) is 
excluded from the scope of this investigation.
    Silicon metal is currently classifiable under subheadings 
2804.69.1000 and 2804.69.5000 of the HTSUS. While the HTSUS numbers 
are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the

[[Page 45177]]

written description of the scope remains dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2020-16221 Filed 7-24-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P