[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 156 (Tuesday, August 13, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65852-65856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-18009]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-179]


Certain Tungsten Shot From the People's Republic of China: 
Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation

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


DATES: Applicable August 6, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samuel Evans, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office IX, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2420.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petition

    On July 10, 2024, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) 
received a countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of 
certain tungsten shot (tungsten shot) from the People's Republic of 
China (China) filed in proper form on behalf of Tungsten Parts Wyoming, 
Inc. (the petitioner), a domestic producer of tungsten shot.\1\ The 
Petition was accompanied by an antidumping duty (AD) petition 
concerning imports of tungsten shot from China.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Petitioner's Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties'' dated July 10, 2024 
(Petition).
    \2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 22, 2024, Commerce tolled the deadline for this 
administrative proceeding by seven days.\3\ The deadline for the 
initiation is now August 6, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Memorandum, ``Tolling of Deadlines for Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Proceedings,'' dated July 22, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Between July 12 and 30, 2024, Commerce requested supplemental 
information from the petitioner regarding the Petition in supplemental 
questionnaires.\4\ The petitioner responded to Commerce's supplemental 
questionnaires between July 18 and August 1, 2024.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Supplemental Questions,'' dated 
July 12, 2024 (General Issues Questionnaire); ``Supplemental 
Questions,'' dated July 15, 2024; and ``Supplemental Questions,'' 
dated July 25, 2024; see also Memorandum, ``Phone Call with Counsel 
to the Petitioner,'' dated July 22, 2024 (July 22 Memorandum).
    \5\ See Petitioner's Letters, ``Petitioner's Response to 
Supplemental Questions Regarding Common Issues and Injury Volume I 
of the Petitions,'' dated July 18, 2024 (First General Issues 
Supplement); ``Petitioner's Response to Supplemental Questions 
Regarding Volume II of the Petitions,'' dated July 18, 2024; 
``Petitioner's Response to Supplemental Questions Regarding Volume 
III of the Petitions,'' dated July 22, 2024; ``Petitioner's Response 
to Second Supplemental Questions Regarding Volume I of the 
Petitions,'' dated July 24, 2024 (Second General Issues Supplement); 
``Petitioner's Response to Third Supplemental Questions Regarding 
Volume I of the Petitions,'' dated July 26, 2024 (Third General 
Issues Supplement); and ``Response to Supplemental Questions 
Regarding Volume III of the Petition,'' dated August 1, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that the Government of China 
(GOC) is providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of 
sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to Chinese producers of tungsten 
shot, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening 
material injury to, the industry producing tungsten shot in the United 
States. Consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(b), the alleged programs for which we are initiating this CVD 
investigation are supported by information in the Petition that is 
reasonably available to the petitioner.
    Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of 
the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the 
petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the 
initiation of the requested CVD investigation.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See section on ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petition,'' infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    Because the Petition was filed on July 10, 2024, the period of 
investigation (POI) is January 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is tungsten shot from 
China. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see 
the appendix to this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigation

    Between July 12 and July 22, 2024, Commerce requested information 
and clarification from the petitioner regarding the proposed scope to 
ensure that the scope language in the Petition is an accurate 
reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking 
relief.\8\ Between July 18 and July 24, 2024, the petitioner provided 
clarifications and revised the scope.\9\ The description of merchandise 
covered by this investigation, as described in the appendix to this 
notice, reflects these clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See General Issues Questionnaire; see also July 22 
Memorandum.
    \9\ See First General Issues Supplement at 1; see also Second 
General Issues Supplement at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are 
setting aside a period for parties to raise issues regarding product 
coverage (i.e., scope).\10\ Commerce will consider all scope comments 
received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with 
interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary

[[Page 65853]]

determination. If scope comments include factual information, all such 
factual information should be limited to public information.\11\ To 
facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that 
scope comments be submitted by 5 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on August 26, 
2024, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. 
Any rebuttal scope comments, which may include factual information, 
must be filed by 5 p.m. ET on September 5, 2024, which is 10 calendar 
days from the initial comment deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 
27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble); see also 19 CFR 351.312.
    \11\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce requests that any factual information that the parties 
consider relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during 
the time period identified above. 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 scope 
comments must also be filed on the records of the concurrent AD and CVD 
investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically via 
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), unless an exception 
applies.\12\ An electronically filed document must be received 
successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 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 using ACCESS 
can be found at: https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook_on_Electronic_Filing_Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce 
notified the GOC of the receipt of the Petition and provided an 
opportunity for consultations with respect to the Petition.\13\ While 
the GOC provided comments on the Petition, it did not request 
consultations.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Commerce's Letter, Invitation for Consultations, dated 
July 15, 2024.
    \14\ See GOC's Letter, ``Comments on Countervailing Duty 
Petition on Certain Tungsten Shot from the People's Republic of 
China (C-570-179),'' dated July 28, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 U.S. 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,\15\ 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.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \16\ 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 Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United 
States, 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the investigation.\17\ Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that tungsten shot, as 
defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and 
we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like 
product.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Petition at Volume I (pages 8-11 and Exhibit I-9); see 
also First General Issues Supplement at 3-4 and Exhibit I-SUPP-5.
    \18\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as 
applied to this case and information regarding industry support, see 
Checklist, ``Certain Tungsten Shot from the People's Republic of 
China,'' dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice 
(China CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of 
Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Petitions Covering Certain Tungsten Shot from the People's Republic 
of China (Attachment II). This checklist is on file electronically 
via ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 
732(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 petitioner provided its 
own production of the domestic like product in 2023.\19\ The petitioner 
stated that there are no other known producers of tungsten shot in the 
United States; therefore, the Petition is supported by 100 percent of 
the U.S. industry.\20\ We relied on data provided by the petitioner for 
purposes of measuring industry support.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Petition at Volume I (page 2 and Exhibits I-3 and I-
10); see also Third General Issues Supplement at 2 and Exhibit I-
SUPP3-1.
    \20\ See Petition at Volume I (page 2 and Exhibit I-3); see also 
First General Issues Supplement at 2-3 and Exhibits I-SUPP-1 through 
I-SUPP-4; and Second General Issues Supplement at 2 and Exhibits I-
SUPP-3 and I-SUPP-4.
    \21\ See Petition at Volume I (page 2 and Exhibit I-3); see also 
First General Issues Supplement at 2-3 and Exhibits I-SUPP-1 through 
I-SUPP-4; Second General Issues Supplement at 2 and Exhibits I-SUPP-
3 and I-SUPP-4; and Third General Issues Supplement at 1 and Exhibit 
I-SUPP3-1. For further discussion, see Attachment II of the China 
CVD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the First General 
Issues Supplement, the Second General Issues Supplement, the Third 
General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to 
Commerce indicates that the petitioner has established

[[Page 65854]]

industry support for the Petition.\22\ 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).\23\ 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.\24\ 
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.\25\ 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.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Attachment II of the China CVD Initiation Checklist.
    \23\ Id.; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
    \24\ See Attachment II of the China CVD Initiation Checklist.
    \25\ Id.
    \26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because China 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 China materially 
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry, or whether the 
establishment of a U.S. industry is materially retarded, by reason of 
imports of the subject merchandise from China.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Retardation, Material Injury, and 
Causation

    Section 703(a)(1)(B) of the Act states that the ITC ``shall 
determine . . . whether there is a reasonable indication that the 
establishment of an industry in the United States is materially 
retarded by reason of imports of the subject merchandise.'' The 
petitioner alleges that imports of subject merchandise are benefiting 
from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are materially 
retarding the establishment of the U.S. industry producing tungsten 
shot.\27\ The petitioner argues that that its production has been 
``modest'' and has not stabilized and, therefore, the U.S. industry 
producing tungsten shot has not been established.\28\ To support its 
argument, the petitioner examined the five factors \29\ the ITC 
considers to determine if an industry is established,\30\ as set forth 
in the ITC's AD/CVD Handbook.\31\ If the ITC determines that an 
industry is not established, it then considers whether the performance 
of the industry reflects normal start-up difficulties or whether the 
imports of the subject merchandise have materially retarded the 
establishment of the industry.\32\ The petitioner contends that the 
domestic industry has performed substantially worse than what could 
reasonably be expected during normal start-up conditions, thereby 
demonstrating that the establishment of the domestic industry has been 
materially retarded by subject imports.\33\ The petitioner also alleges 
that, in the alternative, 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 benefitting 
from countervailable subsidies.\34\ In addition, the petitioner alleges 
that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided under 
section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Petition at Volume I (pages 11-25 and Exhibits I-3, I-
7, and I-10 through I-14); see also Second General Issues Supplement 
at 3 and Exhibit I-SUPP2-3; and Third General Issues Supplement at 1 
and Exhibit I-SUPP3-1.
    \28\ See Petition at Volume I (pages 13-18 and Exhibits I-3 and 
I-10); see also Second General Issues Supplement at 3 and Exhibit I-
SUPP2-3; and Third General Issues Supplement at 1 and Exhibit I-
SUPP3-1.
    \29\ For a discussion of the factors related to whether an 
industry is established, see China CVD Initiation Checklist at 
Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material 
Retardation, Material Injury, and Causation for the Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Tungsten Shot from 
the People's Republic of China (Attachment III).
    \30\ See Petition at Volume I (pages 13-18 and Exhibits I-3 and 
I-10); see also Third General Issues Supplement at 1 and Exhibit I-
SUPP3-1.
    \31\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Handbook (14th 
Ed.), USITC Pub. 4540 (June 2015) (AD/CVD Handbook), at II-33.
    \32\ Id.
    \33\ See Petition at Volume I (Exhibit I-13); see also Second 
General Issues Supplement at 3.
    \34\ See Petition at Volume I (page 25).
    \35\ Id. at 21-22 and Exhibit I-12; see also First General 
Issues Supplement at 4; and Second General Issues Supplement at 2-3 
and Exhibit I-SUPP2-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner contends that the industry's materially retarded, or 
in the alternative, injured condition is illustrated by a significant 
volume of subject imports; significant market share of subject imports; 
lost sales and revenues; underselling and price depression and/or 
suppression; and negative impact on income and financial 
performance.\36\ We assessed the allegations and supporting evidence 
regarding material retardation, material injury, threat of material 
injury, causation, as well as negligibility, and we have determined 
that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and 
meet the statutory requirements for initiation.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Petition at Volume I (pages 11-30 and Exhibits I-3, I-
7, and I-10 through I-18); see also First General Issues Supplement 
at 4-5 and Exhibit I-SUPP-6; Second General Issues Supplement at 2-3 
and Exhibits I-SUPP2-2 through I-SUPP2-3; and Third General Issues 
Supplement at 1 and Exhibit I-SUPP3-1.
    \37\ See Attachment III of the China CVD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of CVD Investigation

    Based upon our examination of the Petition and supplemental 
responses, we find that they meet the requirements of section 702 of 
the Act. Therefore, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine 
whether imports of tungsten shot from China benefit from 
countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOC. 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.
    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 37 of the 38 
programs alleged by the petitioner. For a full discussion of the basis 
for our decision to initiate an investigation of each program, see the 
China CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation 
checklist for this investigation is available in ACCESS.

Respondent Selection

    In the Petition, the petitioner identified 10 companies in China as 
producers and/or exporters of tungsten shot.\38\ Commerce intends to 
follow its standard practice in CVD investigations and calculate 
company-specific subsidy rates in this investigation. In the event that 
Commerce determines that the number of companies is large, and it 
cannot individually examine each company based upon Commerce's 
resources, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents based on 
quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires issued to the potential 
respondents. Commerce normally selects mandatory respondents in CVD 
investigations using U.S. Customs and

[[Page 65855]]

Border Protection (CBP) entry data for U.S. imports under the 
appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 
subheadings listed in the scope of the investigation. However, for this 
investigation, the main HTSUS subheading under which the subject 
merchandise would enter (9306.29.0000) is a basket category under which 
non-subject merchandise may enter. Therefore, we cannot rely on CBP 
entry data in selecting respondents. Instead, we intend to issue Q&V 
questionnaires to each potential respondent for which the petitioner 
has provided a complete address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Petition at Volume I (Exhibit GEN-8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exporters/producers of tungsten shot from China that do not receive 
Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the Q&V 
questionnaire and can obtain the Q&V questionnaire from Enforcement and 
Compliance's website at https://access.trade.gov/resources/questionnaires/questionnaires-ad.html. Responses to the Q&V 
questionnaire must be submitted by the relevant Chinese producers/
exporters no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on August 20, 2024, which is two 
weeks from the signature date of this notice. All Q&V responses must be 
filed electronically via ACCESS. An electronically filed document must 
be received successfully, in its entirety, by ACCESS no later than 5:00 
p.m. ET on the deadline noted above. Commerce intends to finalize its 
decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication 
of this notice.

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 GOC via ACCESS. Furthermore, 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 its 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 tungsten shot from China materially retard 
the establishment of a U.S. industry, or that subject imports are 
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. 
industry.\39\ A negative ITC determination will result in the 
investigation being terminated.\40\ Otherwise, this CVD investigation 
will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
    \40\ 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 of production 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). Section 351.301(b) of 
Commerce's regulations requires any party, when submitting factual 
information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) 
the information is being submitted \41\ 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.\42\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \42\ 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(c), 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.\43\ 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 a letter or memorandum of 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, standalone submission; Commerce will grant untimely filed 
requests for the extension of time limits only in limited cases where 
we determine, based on 19 CFR 351.302(c), that extraordinary 
circumstances exist. Parties should review Commerce's regulations 
concerning time limits for submission of factual information prior to 
submitting factual information in this investigation.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See 19 CFR 351.302.
    \44\ See 19 CFR 351.301; see also Extension of Time Limits; 
Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), and Regulations 
Improving and Strengthening the Enforcement of Trade Remedies 
Through the Administration of the Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Laws, 89 FR 20766 (March 25, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\45\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\46\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \46\ 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: 
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
administrative protective order in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 
Parties wishing to participate in this investigation should ensure that 
they meet the requirements of 19 CFR 351.103(d) (e.g., by filing the 
required letters of appearance). Note that Commerce has amended certain 
of its requirements pertaining to the service of documents in 19 CFR 
351.303(f).\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See Administrative Protective Order, Service, and Other 
Procedures in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 88 FR 
67069 (September 29, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Dated: August 6, 2024.
Scott Fullerton,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Operations.

Appendix--Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by the investigation is certain tungsten 
spheres or

[[Page 65856]]

balls, also known as shot, that are 92.6 percent or greater tungsten 
by weight, not including the weight of any additional coating. In 
scope shot have a diameter ranging from 1.5 millimeters (mm) to 10.0 
mm. Subject shot can be referred to as ``Tungsten Super Shot.'' 
Merchandise is covered regardless of the combination of compounds 
that comprise the non-tungsten material and whether or not the 
tungsten shot is additionally coated with another material, 
including but not limited to copper, nickel, iron, or metallic 
alloys.
    Tungsten shot subject to the investigation may be classified 
under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) subheading: 9306.29.0000. Merchandise may also be entered 
under HTSUS subheading 8101.99.8000. The HTSUS subheadings are 
provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written 
description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2024-18009 Filed 8-12-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P