2016-10631. Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate From Brazil, the People's Republic of China, and the Republic of Korea: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations

AGENCY:

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

DATES:

Effective Date: April 28, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nicholas Czajkowski at [phone] (Brazil); Katie Marksberry at [phone] (the People's Republic of China); and John Drury at [phone] (Republic of Korea), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petitions

On April 8, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department) received countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of certain carbon and alloy cut-to-length plate (CTL plate) from Brazil, the People's Republic of China (PRC), and the Republic of Korea (Korea), filed in proper form on behalf of ArcelorMittal USA LLC, Nucor Corporation, and SSAB Enterprises, LLC (collectively, Petitioners). The CVD petitions were accompanied by antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of CTL plate from all of the above countries, in addition to Austria, Belgium, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Taiwan, and Turkey.^[1] Petitioners are domestic producers of CTL plate.^[2]

On April 13, 2016, and April 21, 2016, the Department requested supplemental information pertaining to certain areas of the Petition.^[3] Petitioners filed responses to these requests on April 18, 2016, and April 25, 2016, respectively.^[4] Additionally, on April 13, 2016, the Department requested supplemental information pertaining to certain areas of the Petition with respect to Brazil ^[5] and the Republic of Korea.^[6] Petitioners filed responses to these requests on April 18, 2016.^[7]

In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Petitioners allege that the Governments of Brazil (GOB), the PRC (GOC), and Korea (GOK) are providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to imports of CTL plate from Brazil, the PRC, and Korea, respectively, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry 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 Petition is accompanied by information reasonably available to Petitioners supporting their allegations.

The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because Petitioners are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also finds that Petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the CVD investigations that Petitioners are requesting.^[8]

Period of Investigations

The period of investigation is January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015.^[9]

Scope of the Investigation

The product covered by these investigations is CTL plate from Brazil, the PRC, and Korea. For a full description of the scope of these investigations, see 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 Petitioners pertaining to the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petition would be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.^[10]

As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,^[11] we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., scope). 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 determination. If scope comments include factual information,^[12] all such factual information should be limited to public information. In order to facilitate preparation of its questionnaire, the Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Wednesday, May 18, 2016, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on Tuesday, May 31, 2016, which is the next business day after 10 calendar days from the initial comments deadline.^[13]

The Department requests that any factual information the parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during this time 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 the Department and request permission to submit the additional information. All such comments must be filed on the record of the concurrent CVD investigations, as well as the AD investigations of CTL plate from Austria, Belgium, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Taiwan, and Turkey.

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).^[14] An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the applicable deadlines.

Consultations

Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, the Department notified representatives of the GOB, GOC and GOK of the receipt of the Petition. Also, in accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, the Department provided representatives of the GOB, GOC and GOK the opportunity for consultations with respect to the CVD Petitions. Consultations with the GOB were held at the Department's main building on April 26, 2016. The GOC submitted consultation comments to the Department on April 23, 2016, in lieu of holding consultations.^[15] All invitation letters and memoranda regarding these consultations are on file electronically via ACCESS.^[16]

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,^[17] 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.^[18]

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, 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 CTL Plate constitutes a single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.^[19]

In determining whether 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. To establish industry support, Petitioners provided their shipments of the domestic like product in 2015, as well as the 2015 shipments of Universal Stainless & Alloy Products, Inc., a supporter of the Petitions, and compared these shipments to the estimated total shipments of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.^[20] Because data regarding total production of the domestic like product are not reasonably available to Petitioners and Petitioners have established that shipments are a reasonable proxy for production,^[21] we have relied on the shipment data provided by Petitioners for purposes of measuring industry support.^[22]

Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department indicates that Petitioners have established industry support.^[23] First, the Petitions established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total shipments ^[24] of the domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).^[25] Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act for all of the Petitions because the domestic producers (or workers) who support each of the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total shipments of the domestic like product.^[26] Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act for all of the Petitions because the domestic producers (or workers) who support each of the Petitions account for more than 50 percent of the shipments of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petitions.^[27] 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.

The Department finds that 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 the Department initiate.^[28]

Injury Test

Because Brazil, the PRC, and Korea 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 Brazil, the PRC, and Korea materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

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, with regard to the PRC and Korea, Petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.^[29]

In CVD petitions, section 771(24)(A) of the Act provides that imports of subject merchandise must exceed the negligibility threshold of three percent, except that imports of subject merchandise from developing countries in CVD investigations must exceed the negligibility threshold of four percent, pursuant to section 771(24)(B) of the Act. Brazil has been designated as a developing country.^[30]

While the allegedly subsidized imports from Brazil do not individually meet the statutory negligibility threshold of four percent, Petitioners allege and provide supporting evidence that there is the potential that imports from Brazil will imminently exceed the negligibility threshold and, therefore, are not negligible for purposes of a threat determination.^[31] Petitioners' arguments regarding the potential for imports to imminently exceed the negligibility threshold are consistent with the statutory criterial for “negligibility in threat analysis” under section 771(24)(A)(iv) of the Act, which provides that imports shall not be treated as negligible if there is a potential that subject imports from a country will imminently exceed the statutory requirements for negligibility.

Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by reduced market share; declines in production, capacity utilization, U.S. shipments, labor hours, and wages; underselling and price suppression or depression; deteriorating financial performance; and lost sales and revenues.^[32] 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.^[33]

Initiation of CVD Investigation

Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a CVD investigation whenever an interested party files a CVD petition on behalf of an industry that (1) alleges the elements necessary for an imposition of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act and (2) is accompanied by information reasonably available to Petitioners supporting the allegations.

Petitioners allege that producers/exporters of CTL plate in Brazil, the PRC, and Korea benefit from countervailable subsidies bestowed by the governments of these countries, respectively. The Department examined the Petitions and finds that they comply with the requirements of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Act, we are initiating CVD investigations to determine whether manufacturers, producers, and/or exporters of CTL plate from Brazil, the PRC, and Korea receive countervailable subsidies from the governments of these countries, respectively.

On June 29, 2015, the President of the United States signed into law the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, which made numerous amendments to the AD and CVD law.^[34] 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.^[35] 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.^[36]

Brazil

Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 24 of the 25 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the Brazil 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 43 of the 44 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the PRC CVD Initiation Checklist.

Korea

Based on our review of the petition, out of the 42 alleged programs, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 39 programs and to partially initiate an investigation regarding one program. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see the Korea 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

Petitioners named three companies as producers/exporters of CTL plate in Brazil, 56 in the PRC, and 21 in Korea.^[37] In the event the Department determines the number of companies subject to each investigation is large, the Department intends to follow its standard practice in CVD investigations, and, where appropriate, select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of CTL plate during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers. 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 publication of this Federal Register notice. Comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection should be submitted seven calendar days after the placement of the CBP data on the record of this investigation. Parties 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. We intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this notice. 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 the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/​apo.

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 GOB, GOC and GOK via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petitions to each known exporter (as named in the Petitions), consistent with 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 Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of CTL plate from Brazil, the PRC, and Korea are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.^[38] A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated.^[39] Otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.

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 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. 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. Parties should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information in this investigation.

Extension of Time Limits Regulation

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. on the due date. Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/​fdsys/​pkg/​FR-2013-09-20/​html/​2013-22853.htm,, prior to submitting factual information in 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.^[40] 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.^[41] The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable revised certification requirements.

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: April 28, 2016.

Paul Piquado,

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigations

The products covered by these investigations are certain carbon and alloy steel hot-rolled or forged flat plate products not in coils, whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances (cut-to-length plate). Subject merchandise includes plate that is produced by being cut-to-length from coils or from other discrete length plate and plate that is rolled or forged into a discrete length. The products covered include (1) Universal mill plates (i.e., flat-rolled products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 mm but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness of not less than 4 mm, which are not in coils and without patterns in relief), and (2) hot-rolled or forged flat steel products of a thickness of 4.75 mm or more and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures at least twice the thickness, and which are not in coils, whether or not with patterns in relief. The covered products described above may be rectangular, square, circular or other shapes and include products of either rectangular or non-rectangular cross-section where such non-rectangular cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been “worked after rolling”, (e.g., products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges).

For purposes of the width and thickness requirements referenced above, the following rules apply:

(1) Except where otherwise stated where the nominal and actual thickness or width measurements vary, a product from a given subject country is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions set forth above unless the product is already covered by an order existing on that specific country (e.g., orders on hot-rolled flat-rolled steel); and

(2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific product (e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-rectangular cross-section, the width of certain products with non-rectangular shape, etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or thickness applies.

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.

Subject merchandise includes cut-to-length plate that has been further processed in the subject country or a third country, including but not limited to pickling, oiling, levelling, annealing, tempering, temper rolling, skin passing, painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, punching, beveling, and/or slitting, or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigations if performed in the country of manufacture of the cut-to-length plate.

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. The following products are outside of, and/or specifically excluded from, the scope of these investigations:

(1) Products clad, plated, or coated with metal, whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastic or other non-metallic substances;

(2) military grade armor plate certified to one of the following specifications or to a specification that references and incorporates one of the following specifications:

• MIL-A-12560,
• MIL-DTL-12560H,
• MIL-DTL-12560J,
• MIL-DTL-12560K,
• MIL-DTL-32332,
• MIL-A-46100D,
• MIL-DTL-46100-E,
• MIL-46177C,
• MIL-S-16216K Grade HY80,
• MIL-S-16216K Grade HY100,
• MIL-S-24645A HSLA-80;
• MIL-S-24645A HSLA-100,
• T9074-BD-GIB-010/0300 Grade HY80,
• T9074-BD-GIB-010/0300 Grade HY100,
• T9074-BD-GIB-010/0300 Grade HSLA80,
• T9074-BD-GIB-010/0300 Grade HSLA100, and
• T9074-BD-GIB-010/0300 Mod. Grade HSLA115,

except that any cut-to-length plate certified to one of the above specifications, or to a military grade armor specification that references and incorporates one of the above specifications, will not be excluded from the scope if it is also dual- or multiple-certified to any other non-armor specification that otherwise would fall within the scope of this order;

(3) stainless steel plate, containing 10.5 percent or more of chromium by weight;

(4) CTL plate meeting the requirements of ASTM A-829, Grade E 4340 that are over 305 mm in actual thickness;

(5) Alloy forged and rolled CTL plate greater than or equal to 152.4 mm in actual thickness meeting each of the following requirements:

(a) Electric furnace melted, ladle refined & vacuum degassed and having a chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):

• Carbon 0.23-0.28,
• Silicon 0.05-0.20,
• Manganese 1.20-1.60,
• Nickel not greater than 1.0,
• Sulfur not greater than 0.007,
• Phosphorus not greater than 0.020,
• Chromium 1.0-2.5,
• Molybdenum 0.35-0.80,
• Boron 0.002-0.004,
• Oxygen not greater than 20 ppm,
• Hydrogen not greater than 2 ppm, and
• Nitrogen not greater than 60 ppm;

(b) With a Brinell hardness measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness falling within one of the following ranges:

(i) 270-300 HBW,

(ii) 290-320 HBW, or

(iii) 320-350HBW;

(c) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.5, B not exceeding 1.0, C not exceeding 0.5, D not exceeding 1.5; and

(d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 2 mm flat bottom hole;

(6) Alloy forged and rolled steel CTL plate over 407 mm in actual thickness and meeting the following requirements:

(a) Made from Electric Arc Furnace melted, Ladle refined & vacuum degassed, alloy steel with the following chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):

• Carbon 0.23-0.28,
• Silicon 0.05-0.15,
• Manganese 1.20-1.50,
• Nickel not greater than 0.4,
• Sulfur not greater than 0.010,
• Phosphorus not greater than 0.020,
• Chromium 1.20-1.50,
• Molybdenum 0.35-0.55,
• Boron 0.002-0.004,
• Oxygen not greater than 20 ppm,
• Hydrogen not greater than 2 ppm, and
• Nitrogen not greater than 60 ppm;

(b) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.5, B not exceeding 1.5, C not exceeding 1.0, D not exceeding 1.5;

(c) Having the following mechanical properties:

(i) With a Brinell hardness not more than 237 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 75ksi min and UTS 95ksi or more, Elongation of 18% or more and Reduction of area 35% or more; having charpy V at −75 degrees F in the longitudinal direction equal or greater than 15 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 20 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens) and conforming to the requirements of NACE MR01-75; or

(ii) With a Brinell hardness not less than 240 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 90 ksi min and UTS 110 ksi or more, Elongation of 15% or more and Reduction of area 30% or more; having charpy V at −40 degrees F in the longitudinal direction equal or greater than 21 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 31 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens);

(d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 3.2 mm flat bottom hole; and

(e) Conforming to magnetic particle inspection in accordance with AMS 2301;

(7) Alloy forged and rolled steel CTL plate over 407 mm in actual thickness and meeting the following requirements:

(a) Made from Electric Arc Furnace melted, ladle refined & vacuum degassed, alloy steel with the following chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):

• Carbon 0.25-0.30,
• Silicon not greater than 0.25,
• Manganese not greater than 0.50,
• Nickel 3.0-3.5,
• Sulfur not greater than 0.010,
• Phosphorus not greater than 0.020,
• Chromium 1.0-1.5,
• Molybdenum 0.6-0.9,
• Vanadium 0.08 to 0.12
• Boron 0.002-0.004,
• Oxygen not greater than 20 ppm,
• Hydrogen not greater than 2 ppm, and
• Nitrogen not greater than 60 ppm.

(b) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.0(t) and 0.5(h), B not exceeding 1.5(t) and 1.0(h), C not exceeding 1.0(t) and 0.5(h), and D not exceeding 1.5(t) and 1.0(h);

(c) Having the following mechanical properties: A Brinell hardness not less than 350 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 145ksi or more and UTS 160ksi or more, Elongation of 15% or more and Reduction of area 35% or more; having charpy V at −40 degrees F in the transverse direction equal or greater than 20 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 25 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens);

(d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 3.2 mm flat bottom hole; and

(e) Conforming to magnetic particle inspection in accordance with AMS 2301.

At the time of the filing of the petition, there was an existing antidumping duty order on certain cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate products from Korea. See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cut-To-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate Products from Korea, 64 FR 73,196 (Dep't Commerce Dec. 29, 1999), as amended, 65 FR 6,585 (Dep't Commerce Feb 10, 2000) (1999 Korea AD Order). The scope of the antidumping duty investigation with regard to cut-to-length plate from Korea covers only (1) subject cut-to-length plate not within the physical description of cut-to-length carbon quality steel plate in the 1999 Korea AD Order, regardless of producer or exporter; and (2) cut-to-length plate produced and/or exported by those companies that were excluded or revoked from the 1999 Korea AD Order as of April 8, 2016. The only revoked or excluded company is Pohang Iron and Steel Company, also known as POSCO.

At the time of the filing of the petition, there was an existing countervailing duty order on certain cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from Korea. See Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate From the Republic of Korea, 64 FR 73,176 (Dep't Commerce Dec. 29, 1999), as amended, 65 FR 6,587 (Dep't Commerce Feb. 10, 2000) (1999 Korea CVD Order). The scope of the countervailing duty investigation with regard to cut-to-length plate from Korea covers only (1) subject cut-to-length plate not within the physical description of cut-to-length carbon quality steel plate in the 1999 Korea CVD Order regardless of producer or exporter, and (2) cut-to-length plate produced and/or exported by those companies that were excluded or revoked from the 1999 Korea CVD Order as of April 8, 2016. The only revoked or excluded company is Pohang Iron and Steel Company, also known as POSCO.

Excluded from the scope of the antidumping duty investigation on cut-to-length plate from China are any products covered by the existing antidumping duty order on certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate from the People's Republic of China. See Suspension Agreement on Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From the People's Republic of China; Termination of Suspension Agreement and Notice of Antidumping Duty Order, 68 FR 60,081 (Dep't Commerce Oct. 21, 2003), as amended, Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From the People's Republic of China, 76 FR 50,996, 50,996-97 (Dep't of Commerce Aug. 17, 2011). On August 17, 2011, the U.S. Department of Commerce found that the order covered all imports of certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate products with 0.0008 percent or more boron, by weight, from China not meeting all of the following requirements: aluminum level of 0.02 percent or greater, by weight; a ratio of 3.4 to 1 or greater, by weight, of titanium to nitrogen; and a hardenability test (i.e., Jominy test) result indicating a boron factor of 1.8 or greater.

The products subject to the investigations are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers: 7208.40.3030, 7208.40.3060, 7208.51.0030, 7208.51.0045, 7208.51.0060, 7208.52.0000, 7211.13.0000, 7211.14.0030, 7211.14.0045, 7225.40.1110, 7225.40.1180, 7225.40.3005, 7225.40.3050, 7226.20.0000, and 7226.91.5000.

The products subject to the investigations may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7208.40.6060, 7208.53.0000, 7208.90.0000, 7210.70.3000, 7210.90.9000, 7211.19.1500, 7211.19.2000, 7211.19.4500, 7211.19.6000, 7211.19.7590, 7211.90.0000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, 7214.10.000, 7214.30.0010, 7214.30.0080, 7214.91.0015, 7214.91.0060, 7214.91.0090, 7225.11.0000, 7225.19.0000, 7225.40.5110, 7225.40.5130, 7225.40.5160, 7225.40.7000, 7225.99.0010, 7225.99.0090, 7206.11.1000, 7226.11.9060, 7229.19.1000, 7226.19.9000, 7226.91.0500, 7226.91.1530, 7226.91.1560, 7226.91.2530, 7226.91.2560, 7226.91.7000, 7226.91.8000, and 7226.99.0180.

The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the investigations is dispositive.

Footnotes

1.  See “Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Austria, Belgium, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, Taiwan, and Turkey—Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,” dated April 8, 2016 (Petitions).

2.  Id., Volume I at 2.

3.  See Letter from the Department, “Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Austria, Belgium, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, Taiwan, and Turkey: Supplemental Questions,” April 13, 2016 (General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire); see also Memorandum to the File from Vicki Flynn “Phone Call with Counsel to Petitioners,” April 21, 2016.

4.  See Letter from Petitioners, “Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Austria, Belgium, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, Taiwan, and Turkey: Petitioners' Amendment to Petition Volume I Related to General Issues,” April 18, 2016 (General Issues Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioners to the Secretary of Commerce “Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Austria, Belgium, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, Taiwan, and the Republic of Turkey—Petitioners' Amendment to Petition Volume I Related to General Issues” (April 25, 2016) (Second General Issues Supplement).

5.  See Letter from the Department “Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Brazil: Supplemental Questions,” April 13, 2016.

6.  See Letter from the Department, “Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from the Republic of Korea: Supplemental Questions,” April 13, 2016.

7.  See Letter from Petitioners “Re: Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Austria, Belgium, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, Taiwan, and Turkey—Petitioners' Amendment to Petition,” dated April 18, 2016.

8.  See “Determination of Industry Support for the Petition” section, below.

9.  See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).

10.  See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also General Issues Supplement; Second General Issues Supplement.

11.  See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).

12.  See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21).

13.  See 19 CFR 351.303(b).

14.  See 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements); see also Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011), 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.

15.  See Memo to the File, from Katie Marksberry, Case Analyst, Re: Countervailing Duty Petition on Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-To-Length Plate from the People's Republic of China: Comments from the Government of the People's Republic of China Regarding the Petition, dated April 25, 2016.

16.  As the GOK did not request consultations prior to the initiation of this investigation, the Department and the GOK did not hold consultations.

17.  S ee section 771(10) of the Act.

18.  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)).

19.  For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in this case, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Brazil (Brazil CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Austria, Belgium, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, Taiwan, and the Republic of Turkey (Attachment II); Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from the People's Republic of China (PRC CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; and Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from the Republic of Korea (Korea 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.

20.  See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2-4 and Exhibits I-3 through I-5; see also General Issues Supplement, at 7-11 and Exhibits I-Supp-2 through I-Supp-4 and I-Supp-11.

21.  See Volume I of the Petitions, at 3 and Exhibit I-4; see also General Issues Supplement, at 7.

22.  See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2-4 and Exhibits I-4 and I-5; see also General Issues Supplement, at 8-11 and Exhibits I-Supp-2, I-Supp-3, and I-Supp-11. For further discussion, see Brazil CVD Initiation Checklist, PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, and Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.

23.  See Brazil CVD Initiation Checklist, PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, and Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.

24.  As mentioned above, Petitioners established that shipments are a reasonable proxy for production data. Section 351.203(e)(1) of the Department's regulations states “production levels may be established by reference to alternative data that the Secretary determines to be indicative of production levels.”

25.  See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also Brazil CVD Initiation Checklist, PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, and Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.

26.  See Brazil CVD Initiation Checklist, PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, and Korea CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.

27.  Id.

28.  Id.

29.  See Volume I of the Petitions, at 25-29 and Exhibits I-13 and I-16.

30.  See section 771(36)(A)-(B) of the Act.

31.  See Second General Issues Supplement, at 1-4 and Exhibit 1.

32.  See Volume I of the Petitions, at 20-22, 34-47 and Exhibits I-4, I-5, I-9, I-10, I-12 through I-14, I-16, and I-17; see also General Issues Supplement, at 11-15 and Exhibits I-Supp-1, I-Supp-6, I-Supp-7, and I-Supp-9.

33.  See Brazil CVD Initiation Checklist, PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, and Korea 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 Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Austria, Belgium, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, Taiwan, and the Republic of Turkey.

34.  See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).

35.  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.

36.  See Applicability Notice, 80 FR at 46794-95.

37.  See Petition, Volume I at Exhibit I-8.

38.  See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.

39.  See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.

40.  See section 782(b) of the Act.

41.  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.