[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 9 (Tuesday, January 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2410-2415]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-00522]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-008]
Calcium Hypochlorite From the People's Republic of China:
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, formerly Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: January 14, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kabir Archuletta, Office V, AD/CVD
Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
2593.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On December 18, 2013, the Department of Commerce (``Department'')
received an antidumping duty (``AD'') petition concerning imports of
calcium hypochlorite from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''),
filed in proper form on behalf of Arch Chemicals, Inc.
(``Petitioner''), a domestic producer of calcium hypochlorite.\1\ The
AD Petition
[[Page 2411]]
was accompanied by a countervailing duty (``CVD'') petition concerning
imports of calcium hypochlorite from the PRC. On December 19, 2013, and
December 24, 2013, the Department requested additional information and
clarification of certain areas of the Petition, and on December 23,
2013, and December 30, 2013, Petitioner filed a response to each
request.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties on Calcium Hypochlorite from the People's
Republic of China,'' dated December 18, 2013 (hereafter referred to
as the ``Petition'').
\2\ See Petitioner's December 23, 2013, filing titled, ``Calcium
Hypochlorite from the People's Republic of China: Response to
Supplemental Questions'' (``PRC AD Supplement''); see also
Petitioner's December 30, 2013, filing titled, ``Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Calcium Hypochlorite
from the People's Republic of China: Response to General
Supplemental Questions''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the ``Act''), Petitioner alleges that imports of calcium
hypochlorite from the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731
of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or
threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States. Also,
consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petition is
accompanied by information reasonably available to Petitioner in
support of its allegations.
The Department finds that Petitioner filed this Petition on behalf
of the domestic industry because Petitioner is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also finds that
Petitioner has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to
the initiation of the AD investigation that Petitioner is
requesting.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition''
section, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (``POI'') is April 1, 2013, through
September 30, 2013, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this investigation is calcium hypochlorite
from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of the investigation,
please see the ``Scope of Investigation'' in the appendix to this
notice.
Comments on the Scope of the Investigation
During our review of the Petition, we solicited information from
Petitioner to ensure that the proposed scope language is an accurate
reflection of the product for which the domestic industry is seeking
relief. Moreover, as discussed in the preamble to the Department's
regulations,\4\ we are setting aside a period for interested parties to
raise issues regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all
interested parties to submit such comments by January 27, 2014, which
is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. All
comments must be filed on the record of the AD investigation, as well
as the concurrent CVD investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on the Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaire
The Department requests comments from interested parties regarding
the appropriate physical characteristics of calcium hypochlorite to be
reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaire. This
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics
of the merchandise under consideration in order to report the relevant
factors and costs of production accurately, as well as to develop
appropriate product-comparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide any information or comments that
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product
characteristics and (2) product-comparison criteria. We note that it is
not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-
comparison criteria. We base product-comparison criteria on meaningful
commercial differences among products. In other words, while there may
be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers to
describe calcium hypochlorite, it may be that only a select few product
characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical
characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the
order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching
products. Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important
physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics
last.
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in
developing and issuing the AD questionnaire, we must receive comments
on product characteristics no later than January 27, 2014. Rebuttal
comments must be received no later than February 3, 2014. All comments
and submissions to the Department must be filed electronically using
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS'').
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically
using IA ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received
successfully in its entirety by the Department's electronic records
system, IA ACCESS, by 5 p.m. on the due date. Documents excepted from
the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in
paper form) with the Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit,
Room 1870, 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 deadline established by the Department.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1). Information on help using IA ACCESS
can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook
can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filing%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Determination of Industry Support for the Petition
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(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 732(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) if there is a large number of producers in
the industry, the Department may 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
[[Page 2412]]
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 the Department and the ITC must apply
the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,\6\
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.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\7\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F.
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioner does not offer
a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of the
investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on
the record, we have determined that calcium hypochlorite, as defined in
the scope of the investigation, constitutes a single domestic like
product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic
like product.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist:
Calcium Hypochlorite from the People's Republic of China (``AD
Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry
Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Calcium Hypochlorite from the People's Republic of China
(``Attachment II''). This checklist is dated concurrently with this
notice and on file electronically via IA ACCESS. Access to documents
filed via IA ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit
(``CRU''), Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In determining whether 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 Investigation'' section above. To
establish industry support, Petitioner provided its production of the
domestic like product in 2012, and compared this to the estimated total
production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic
industry.\9\ Petitioner estimated total 2012 production of the domestic
like product using its own production data and knowledge of the
industry.\10\ We have relied upon data Petitioner provided for purposes
of measuring industry support.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 3-4 and Exhibit GEN-2.
\10\ Id.
\11\ See AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on information provided in the Petition, supplemental
submission, and other information readily available to the Department,
we determine that Petitioner has met the statutory criteria for
industry support under section 732(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.\12\ Based on information provided in the Petition, the
domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for
industry support under section 732(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. Accordingly, the Department determines
that the Petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within
the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Id.
\13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department finds that Petitioner filed the Petition on behalf
of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined
in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the antidumping duty investigation
that it is requesting the Department initiate.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
Petitioner alleges that 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
sold at less than normal value (``NV''). In addition, Petitioner
alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold
provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price depression
or suppression; lost sales and revenues; reduced production and
capacity utilization; decline in employment variables; and decline in
financial performance.\16\ 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.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 17-30 and Exhibits INJ-1
through INJ-8.
\17\ See AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the
Petitions Covering Calcium Hypochlorite from the People's Republic
of China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegation of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
The following is a description of the allegation of sales at less
than fair value upon which the Department has based its decision to
initiate investigations of imports of calcium hypochlorite from the
PRC. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to
U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the AD Initiation
Checklist.
Export Price
Petitioner based export price (``EP'') on the POI average unit
values (``AUVs'') of U.S. imports of calcium hypochlorite from the PRC,
under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States subheading
2828.10.0000.\18\ From the POI AUV, Petitioner deducted an amount for
foreign brokerage and handling charges in the PRC and foreign inland
freight from the manufacturing plant to the port of exportation.\19\
Petitioner made no other adjustments.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See AD Initiation Checklist at 5-6; see also Volume II of
the Petition, at 4 and Exhibits AD-4, AD-5 and AD-14; and PRC AD
Supplement, at 2-4 and revised Exhibit AD-14.
\19\ See AD Initiation Checklist at 5-6; see also Volume II of
the Petition, at Exhibits AD-6 through AD-14; and PRC AD Supplement,
at 2-4 and revised Exhibits AD-9, AD-11, and AD-14, and Exhibits AD-
28 and AD-29.
\20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value
Petitioner states that the Department has treated the PRC as a non-
market economy (``NME'') country in every proceeding in which the PRC
has been involved.\21\ The presumption of NME status for the PRC has
not been revoked by the Department and, therefore, in accordance with
section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, remains in effect for purposes of the
initiation of this investigation.
[[Page 2413]]
Accordingly, the NV of the product for the investigation is
appropriately based on factors of production valued in a surrogate
market-economy country in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. In
the course of this investigation, all parties will have the opportunity
to provide relevant information related to the issues of the PRC's NME
status and granting of separate rates to individual exporters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner contends that the Philippines is the appropriate
surrogate country for the PRC because: (1) It is at a level of economic
development comparable to that of the PRC; and (2) it is a significant
producer of comparable merchandise.\22\ Based on the information
provided by Petitioner, we conclude that it is appropriate to use the
Philippines as a surrogate country for initiation purposes.\23\ After
initiation of this investigation, interested parties will have the
opportunity to submit comments regarding surrogate country selection
and, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an
opportunity to submit publicly available information to value factors
of production (``FOPs'') within 30 days before the scheduled date of
the preliminary determination.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Id., at 2-4 and Exhibits AD-2 and AD-3.
\23\ See AD Initiation Checklist.
\24\ See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i). Note that this is the revised
regulation published on April 10, 2013. See http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner calculated NV using the Department's NME methodology as
required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C) and 19 CFR 351.408. Petitioner
based its NV on two different production methods.\25\ For a non-
integrated production process, which Petitioner believes to be
comparable to calcium hypochlorite producers in the PRC, Petitioner
based NV on its own U.S production experience during the time period
January-September 2013.\26\ For the production process of an integrated
producer of calcium hypochlorite, Petitioner based NV on a 2009
feasibility study conducted by Petitioner that analyzed the costs
associated with setting up a fully integrated facility.\27\ This study
was supported by an affidavit from the individual who assisted with the
calculation of expected per-kg factors of production (``FOPs'').\28\
Petitioner also submitted information indicating that at least one
major PRC producer employs an integrated production process.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 5-6.
\26\ Id., at 5-6 and Exhibits AD-17 and AD-19.
\27\ Id., at 6 and Exhibits AD-16, AD-17 and AD-19.
\28\ Id., at Exhibit AD-18.
\29\ Id., at 5 and Exhibit AD-15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner valued the factors of production using reasonably
available, public surrogate country data, specifically, Philippine
import data from the Global Trade Atlas (``GTA'') for the most recent
six-month period for which data was available (i.e., March 2013 through
August 2013).\30\ Petitioner excluded from these GTA import statistics
imports from NME countries, countries that maintain broadly available
export subsidies, and any imports from ``unspecified'' countries.\31\
Further, Petitioner made currency conversions, where applicable, based
on the POI-average Philippine Peso/U.S. dollar exchange rates.\32\ The
Department determines that the surrogate values used by Petitioner are
reasonably available and, thus, are acceptable for purposes of
initiation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Id., at Exhibit AD-20.
\31\ Id., at 6.
\32\ Id., at Exhibit AD-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner determined direct materials costs from Philippine import
data from the GTA.\33\ Petitioner applied certain conversion factors to
align the units of measure with its own FOPs.\34\ Petitioner calculated
financial ratios (i.e., factory overhead expenses, selling, general,
and administrative (``SG&A'') expenses, and profit) on the financial
statements of Mabuhay Vinyl Corporation (``Mabuhay Vinyl''), a
Philippine manufacturer of sodium hypochlorite (a product that
Petitioner claims is comparable to calcium hypochlorite), for the year
ending December 31, 2012.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ Id., at 6-7 and Exhibit AD-20.
\34\ Id., at Exhibit AD-17.
\35\ Id., at 8 and Exhibit AD-26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by Petitioner, there is reason to
believe that imports of calcium hypochlorite from the PRC are being, or
are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value.
Based on comparisons of EP to NV for both integrated and non-integrated
production processes in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act,
Petitioner calculated the estimated dumping margins to be 182.51-210.52
percent with respect to imports of calcium hypochlorite from the
PRC.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See PRC AD Supplement, at 3-4 and Exhibit AD-27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of AD Investigation
Based on our examination of the Petition on calcium hypochlorite
from the PRC, the Department finds that the Petition meets the
requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an
AD investigation to determine whether imports of calcium hypochlorite
from the PRC are being, or likely to be, sold in the United States at
less than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will issue our
preliminary determination no later than 140 days after the publication
date of this initiation. For a discussion of evidence supporting our
initiation determination, see the AD Initiation Checklist which
accompanies this notice.
Respondent Selection and Quantity and Value Questionnaire
In accordance with our standard practice for respondent selection
in AD investigations involving NME countries, we intend to issue
quantity and value questionnaires to each potential respondent, and
will base respondent selection on the responses received. In addition,
the Department will post the quantity and value questionnaire along
with the filing instructions on the Enforcement and Compliance Web site
(http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp). Exporters and producers of
calcium hypochlorite from the PRC that do not receive quantity and
value questionnaires via mail may still submit a quantity and value
response, and can obtain a copy from the Enforcement and Compliance Web
site. The quantity and value questionnaire must be submitted by all PRC
exporters/producers no later than January 21, 2014. All quantity and
value questionnaires must be filed electronically using IA ACCESS.
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate rate status in an NME AD investigation,
exporters and producers must submit a separate rate application.\37\
The specific requirements for submitting the separate rate application
in the PRC investigation are outlined in detail in the application
itself, which will be available on the Department's Web site at http://trade.gov/enforcement/ia-highlights-and-news.html on the date of
publication of this initiation notice in the Federal Register. The
separate rate application will be due 60 days after the publication of
this initiation notice. For exporters and producers who submit a
separate rate status application and have been selected as mandatory
respondents, these exporters and
[[Page 2414]]
producers will no longer be eligible for consideration for separate
rate status unless they respond to all parts of the Department's AD
questionnaire as mandatory respondents. The Department requires that
the PRC respondents submit a response to the separate rate application
by the deadline referenced above in order to receive consideration for
separate rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005) (Separate
Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin), available on the Department's
Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of Combination Rates
The Department will calculate combination rates for certain
respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME
investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin
states:
{w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate
rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will
now assign in its NME investigations will be specific to those
producers that supplied the exporter during the period of
investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the
exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise
to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both
to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated
separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms
receiving the weighted-average of the individually calculated rates.
This practice is referred to as the application of ``combination
rates'' because such rates apply to specific combinations of
exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned
to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the
firm in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter
during the period of investigation.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin at 6
(emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petition have been
provided to the Government of the PRC. Because of the particularly
large number of producers/exporters identified in the Petition, the
Department considers the service of the public version of the Petition
to the foreign producers/exporters to be satisfied by the provision of
the public version of the Petition to the Government of the PRC,
consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(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 calcium hypochlorite from the PRC materially
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.\39\ A negative
ITC determination will result in the investigation being
terminated.\40\ Otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
\40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submission of Factual Information
On April 10, 2013, the Department published Definition of Factual
Information and Time Limits for Submission of Factual Information:
Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 2013), which modified two
regulations related to AD and CVD proceedings: 1) The definition of
factual information (19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and 2) the time limits for
the submission of factual information (19 CFR 351.301). The final rule
identifies five categories of factual information in 19 CFR
351.102(b)(21), which are summarized as follows: (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). The final rule 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. The final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301 so that, rather
than providing general time limits, there are specific time limits
based on the type of factual information being submitted. These
modifications are effective for all proceeding segments initiated on or
after May 10, 2013, and thus are applicable to this investigation.
Please review the final rule, available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to
submitting factual information for this investigation.
Revised Extension of Time Limits Regulation
On September 20, 2013, the Department modified its regulation
concerning the extension of time limits for submissions in AD and CVD
proceedings. The modification clarifies that parties may request an
extension of time limits before a time limit established under Part 351
expires, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an
extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the
time limit established under Part 351 expires. For submissions which
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.
Examples include, but are not limited to: (1) Case and rebuttal briefs,
filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309; (2) factual information to value
factors under section 19 CFR 351.408(c), or to measure the adequacy of
remuneration under section 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2), filed pursuant to 19
CFR 351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, clarification and correction filed
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(iv); (3) comments concerning the
selection of a surrogate country and surrogate values and rebuttal; (4)
comments concerning CBP data; and (5) quantity and value
questionnaires. Under certain circumstances, the Department 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, the Department 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. This modification also requires that an extension
request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission, and
clarifies the circumstances under which the Department will grant
untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. These
modifications are effective for all segments initiated on or after
October 21, 2013. Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule,
available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in this segment.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\41\
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are
in effect for company/government officials as well as their
representatives in all AD or CVD investigations or proceedings
initiated on or after August 16, 2013,
[[Page 2415]]
including this investigation.\42\ The formats for the revised
certifications are provided at the end of the Final Rule. The
Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting
party does not comply with the revised certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\42\ See Certifications of Factual Information To Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (``Final Rule'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
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/index.html.
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: January 7, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this investigation is calcium
hypochlorite, regardless of form (e.g., powder, tablet (compressed),
crystalline (granular), or in liquid solution), whether or not
blended with other materials, containing at least 10% available
chlorine measured by actual weight. The scope also includes
bleaching powder and hemibasic calcium hypochlorite.
Calcium hypochlorite has the general chemical formulation
Ca(OCl)2, but may also be sold in a more dilute form as
bleaching powder with the chemical formulation,
Ca(OCl)2.CaCl2.Ca(OH)2.2H2
O or hemibasic calcium hypochlorite with the chemical formula of
2Ca(OCl)2.Ca(OH)2 or
Ca(OCl)2.0.5Ca(OH)2. Calcium hypochlorite has
a Chemical Abstract Service (``CAS'') registry number of 7778-54-3,
and a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA) Pesticide Code
(``PC'') Number of 014701. The subject calcium hypochlorite has an
International Maritime Dangerous Goods (``IMDG'') code of Class 5.1
UN 1748, 2880, or 2208 or Class 5.1/8 UN 3485, 3486, or 3487.
Calcium hypochlorite is currently classifiable under the
subheading 2828.10.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (``HTSUS''). The subheading covers commercial calcium
hypochlorite and other calcium hypochlorite. When tableted or
blended with other materials, calcium hypochlorite may be entered
under other tariff classifications, such as 3808.94.5000 and
3808.99.9500, which cover disinfectants and similar products. While
the HTSUS subheadings, the CAS registry number, the U.S. EPA PC
number, and the IMDG codes are provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation
is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2014-00522 Filed 1-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P