[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 138 (Thursday, July 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46738-46740]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15392]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-151]


Countervailing Duty Investigation of Tin Mill Products From the 
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Critical 
Circumstances, in Part

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily 
determines that critical circumstances exist, in part, with respect to 
imports of tin mill products from one exporter/producer of tin mill 
products in the countervailing duty (CVD) investigation of tin mill 
products from the People's Republic of China (China).

DATES: Applicable July 20, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Genevieve Coen at (202) 482-3251 or 
Melissa Porpotage at (202) 482-1413; AD/CVD Operations, Office II, 
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 
20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    In response to a petition filed on January 18, 2023, Commerce 
initiated a CVD investigation concerning tin mill products from 
China.\1\ On June 16, 2023, Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. and the United Steel, 
Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial 
and Service Workers International Union (collectively, the petitioners) 
filed a timely allegation, pursuant to section 703(e)(1) of the Tariff 
Act of 1930, as amended, (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.206, that critical 
circumstances exist with respect to tin mill products from China.\2\ 
Commerce published its preliminary CVD determination on June 26, 
2023.\3\ In the Preliminary Determination, we examined two mandatory 
respondents and assigned the all-others rate based upon the rate 
assigned to the single participating mandatory respondent, Shougang 
Jingtang United Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. (Jingtang Iron). We applied 
adverse facts available (AFA) to the second mandatory respondent, 
Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. (Baoshan Iron).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Tin Mill Products from the People's Republic of China: 
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 88 FR 9476 
(February 14, 2023) (Initiation Notice).
    \2\ See Petitioners' Letter, ``Petitioners' Allegation of 
Critical Circumstances,'' dated June 16, 2023 (Critical 
Circumstances Allegation).
    \3\ See Tin Mill Products from the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and 
Alignment of Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty 
Determination, 88 FR 41373 (June 26, 2023) (Preliminary 
Determination) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum 
(PDM).
    \4\ See Preliminary Determination PDM at 9-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 703(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.206(c)(1) and (2)(ii), because the petitioners submitted the 
critical circumstances allegation more than 30 days before the 
scheduled date of the final determination, Commerce will make a 
preliminary finding as to whether there is a reasonable basis to 
believe or suspect that critical circumstances exist and will issue a 
preliminary critical circumstances determination within 30 days after 
the allegation is filed.

Critical Circumstances Allegation

    The petitioners allege that there was a massive increase of imports 
of tin mill products from China and provided monthly import data 
comparing a base period of November 2022 through January 2023 to a 
comparison period of February through April 2023.\5\ This comparison 
shows an increase of 23.6 percent in imports from China, which is 
``massive'' under 19 CFR 351.206(h)(2). The petitioners also allege 
that there is a reasonable basis to believe that there are subsidies in 
this investigation which are inconsistent with the World Trade 
Organization Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM 
Agreement).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Critical Circumstances Allegation at 4-6.
    \6\ See section 771(8)(A) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Critical Circumstances Analysis

    Section 703(e)(1) of the Act provides that Commerce will determine 
that critical circumstances exist in CVD investigations if there is a 
reasonable basis to believe or suspect that: (A) the alleged 
countervailable subsidy is inconsistent with the SCM Agreement; and (B) 
there have been massive imports of the subject merchandise over a 
relatively short period.\7\ Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.206(h)(2), imports 
must increase by at least 15 percent during the ``relatively short 
period'' to be considered ``massive,'' and 19 CFR 351.206(i) defines a 
``relatively short period'' as normally being the period beginning on 
the date the proceeding

[[Page 46739]]

begins (i.e., the date the petition is filed) and ending at least three 
months later.\8\ The regulations also provide, however, that if 
Commerce finds that importers, or exporters or producers, had reason to 
believe, at some time prior to the beginning of the proceeding, that a 
proceeding was likely, Commerce may consider a period of not less than 
three months from that earlier time.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Commerce limits its critical circumstances findings to those 
subsidies contingent upon export performance or use of domestic over 
imported goods (i.e., those prohibited under Article 3 of the SCM 
Agreement). See, e.g., Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty 
Determination and Final Negative Critical Circumstances 
Determination: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire from Germany, 67 
FR 55808, 55809-10 (August 30, 2002).
    \8\ See 19 CFR 351.102 and 19 CFR 351.206.
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.206(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alleged Countervailable Subsidies Are Inconsistent With the SCM 
Agreement

    To determine whether an alleged countervailable subsidy is 
inconsistent with the SCM Agreement, in accordance with section 
703(e)(1)(A) of the Act, Commerce considered the evidence currently on 
the record of this investigation. As determined in the Preliminary 
Determination, we found the Export Buyer's Credit Program to be export-
contingent, and we applied AFA to find that the non-cooperating 
mandatory respondent Baoshan Iron used the following programs which the 
record indicates are export-contingent, rendering them inconsistent 
with the SCM Agreement: Export Seller's Credit; Export Buyer's Credit; 
Foreign Trade Development Fund Grants; Export Assistance Grants; and 
Subsidies for the Development of Famous Brands and China World Top 
Brands.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Preliminary Determination PDM at 19 and Appendix I; see 
also Petitioners' Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Tin Mill 
Products from Canada, China, Germany, Netherlands, South Korea, 
Taiwan, Turkey, and the United Kingdom,'' dated January 18, 2023, at 
Volume X.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, Commerce preliminarily determines, for purposes of this 
critical circumstances determination, that there are subsidies in this 
investigation that are inconsistent with the SCM Agreement.

Massive Imports

    In determining whether there have been ``massive imports'' over a 
``relatively short period,'' pursuant to section 703(e)(1)(B) of the 
Act, Commerce normally compares the import volumes of the subject 
merchandise for at least three months immediately preceding the filing 
of the petition (i.e., the ``base period'') to a comparable period of 
at least three months following the filing of the petition (i.e., the 
``comparison period''). In this case, Commerce compared the import 
volumes of subject merchandise, as provided by the cooperating 
mandatory respondent, Jingtang Iron,\11\ for the four months 
immediately preceding and four months following the filing of the 
petition, ending with the month prior to the Preliminary Determination. 
Imports normally will be considered massive when imports during the 
comparison period have increased by 15 percent or more compared to 
imports during the base period.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Jingtang Iron's Letter, ``Shipment Data for Critical 
Circumstances,'' dated July 7, 2023.
    \12\ See 19 CFR 351.206(h)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the petition was filed on January 18, 2023, to determine 
whether there was a massive surge in imports for the cooperating 
mandatory respondent, Commerce compared the total volume of shipments 
during the period October 2022 through January 2023 with the volume of 
shipments during the following four-month period of February 2023 
through May 2023. Based on this analysis, we preliminarily determine 
that there was no massive surge in imports for the cooperating 
mandatory respondent, Jingtang Iron.
    For ``all others,'' we applied our normal practice and analyzed 
monthly shipment data for the same time period, using import data from 
Global Trade Atlas (GTA),\13\ adjusted to remove the cooperating 
mandatory respondent's shipment data. Although the quantity of 
shipments reported by Jingtang Iron for one month each in the base and 
comparison periods was greater than the quantity of imports recorded in 
the GTA statistics for the U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule categories 
included in the petition for those months, we considered the data 
generally probative and analyzed the overall shipment data by comparing 
the base and comparison periods, respectively. Based on this analysis, 
we find that there were no massive imports for ``all other'' producers 
from China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Commerce gathered GTA data under the following harmonized 
tariff schedule numbers: 7210.11.0000, 7210.12.0000, 7210.50.0020, 
7210.50.0090, 7212.10.0000, 7212.50.0000, 7225.99.0090, 
7226.99.0180.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in the Preliminary Determination, we preliminarily 
applied total AFA to Baoshan Iron because it failed to cooperate in 
this proceeding.\14\ For Baoshan Iron, we preliminarily determine, in 
accordance with section 776(b) of the Act, that there was a massive 
surge in imports between the base and comparison periods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Preliminary Determination PDM at 9-16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion

    Based on the criteria and findings discussed above, we 
preliminarily determine that critical circumstances exist with respect 
to imports of tin mill products from China produced or exported by 
Baoshan Iron. We preliminarily determine that critical circumstances do 
not exist with respect to imports of tin mill products from China with 
respect to Jingtang Iron or all other producers.

Final Critical Circumstances Determinations

    We will make a final critical circumstances determination 
concerning critical circumstances in the final CVD determination, which 
is currently scheduled for October 30, 2023.

Public Comment

    A schedule for case briefs or other written comments will be 
established at a later date. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised 
in case briefs, may be submitted no later than seven days after the 
deadline date for case briefs.\15\ Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and 
(d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this 
investigation are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) a 
statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a 
table of authorities.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See 19 CFR 351.309(d)(1).
    \16\ See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Electronically filed documents must be received successfully in 
their entirety by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the due dates 
established.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 703(e)(2)(A) of the Act, for Baoshan 
Iron, we intend to direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to 
suspend liquidation of any unliquidated entries of subject merchandise 
from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after March 28, 2023, which is 90 days prior to the date of publication 
of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register. For such 
entries, CBP shall require a cash deposit equal to the estimated 
preliminary subsidy rates established in the Preliminary Determination. 
This suspension of liquidation will remain in effect until further 
notice.

U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) Notification

    In accordance with section 703(f) of the Act, we will notify the 
ITC of this preliminary determination of critical circumstances.
    This determination is issued and published pursuant to section 
703(f) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206.


[[Page 46740]]


    Dated: July 14, 2023.
Lisa W. Wang,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2023-15392 Filed 7-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P