[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8913-8918]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03756]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-038]
Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric From the People's Republic of
China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: February 16, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Heaney at (202) 482-4475 or
Scott Hoefke (202) 482-4947, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement &
Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On January 20, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
received an antidumping duty (AD) petition concerning imports of
certain amorphous silica fabric (silica fabric) from the People's
Republic of China (PRC), filed in proper form on behalf of Auburn
Manufacturing, Inc. (Auburn) (Petitioner).\1\ The AD petition was
accompanied by a countervailing duty (CVD) petition for the PRC.\2\
Petitioner is a domestic producer of silica fabric.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See the Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric
from the PRC, dated January 20, 2016 (the Petition) at Volumes I and
II.
\2\ Id. at Volume III.
\3\ See Volume I of the Petition at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 27, 2016, the Department requested additional
information and clarification of certain areas of the Petition.\4\
Petitioner filed responses to these requests on February 1, 2016.\5\ On
February 10, 2016, Petitioner submitted further clarification regarding
the scope of the investigation.\6\ On January 27, 2016, the Department
determined to toll all deadlines four business days as a result of the
Federal Government closure during snowstorm Jonas, which is applicable
to this initiation.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Letters from the Department to Petitioner entitled ``Re:
Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duties on Imports of Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's
Republic of China: Supplemental Questions dated January 27, 2016
(General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire) and ``Re: Petition for
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Amorphous
Silica Fabric from the People's Republic of China: Supplemental
Questions Antidumping'' dated January 27, 2016.
\5\ See ``Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's
Republic of China: Amendment to Volume I of the Petition'' dated
February 1, 2016 (General Issues Supplement); see also ``Re: Certain
Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's Republic of China:
Amendment to Volume II of the Petition'' dated February 1, 2016 (AD
Supplemental Response).
\6\ See Scope Supplement to the Petition, dated February 10,
2016 (Scope Supplement).
\7\ See Memorandum to the Record from Ron Lorentzen, Acting
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, regarding
``Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Government
Closure During Snowstorm Jonas,'' dated January 27, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), Petitioner alleges that imports of silica fabric
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 supporting 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 demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the
initiation of the AD investigation that Petitioner is requesting.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the
Petition'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
Because the Petition was filed on January 20, 2016, the period of
investigation (POI) is, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), July 1, 2015
through December 31, 2015.
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this investigation is silica fabric from the
PRC. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the
``Scope of the Investigation,'' in Appendix I of this notice.
Comments on Scope of the Investigation
During our review of the Petition, the Department issued questions
to, and received responses from, Petitioner 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.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Memorandum to the File, Phone Call with Counsel to
Petitioner,'' dated February 10, 2016; see also Letter from
Petitioner to the Department, ``Certain Amorphous Silica Fiber from
the People's Republic of China: Scope Clarification Letter,'' dated
February 10, 2016; see also Memorandum to the File, ``Phone Call
with Counsel to Petitioner,'' dated February 12, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,\10\
we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues
regarding product coverage (scope). The Department will consider all
comments received from parties and, if necessary, will consult with
parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determination. If
scope comments include factual information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)),
all such factual information should be limited to
[[Page 8914]]
public information. In order to facilitate preparation of its
questionnaires, the Department requests all interested parties to
submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Monday, March 7,
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 Thursday, March 17, 2016, which is 10 calendar
days after the initial comments deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296,
27323 (May 19, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 also be filed on the record of the concurrent CVD
investigation.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically
using Enforcement & Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\11\ An electronically
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the
time and date when it is due. Documents excepted from the electronic
submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form)
with Enforcement & 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 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 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires
The Department requests comments from interested parties regarding
the appropriate physical characteristics of silica fabric to be
reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaires. This
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics
of the subject merchandise 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, although there
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers
to describe silica fabric, 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, all comments must be filed
by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 7, 2016, which is 20 calendar days from the
signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments must be filed by
5:00 p.m. ET on March 14, 2016. All comments and submissions to the
Department must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained
above, on the record of this less-than-fair-value investigation.
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) 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,\12\ 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.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\13\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F.
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to 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 the 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 silica fabric, as defined in the
scope, constitutes a single domestic like product and we have analyzed
industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in
this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist:
Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's Republic of China
(PRC AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of
Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Petitions Covering Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's
Republic of China (Attachment II). This checklist is 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 18022 of the main Department of Commerce
building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 8915]]
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 the Investigation,'' in Appendix I of this
notice. To establish industry support, Petitioner provided its own
production of the domestic like product in 2015, and conservatively
compared this to the estimated total production of the silica fabric
(both industrial grade and aerospace grade) for the entire domestic
industry.\15\ We have relied upon data Petitioner provided for purposes
of measuring industry support.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 4-6; see also General
Issues Supplement, at 1-2 and Exhibit Supp. I-1.
\16\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our review of the data provided in the Petition, General Issues
Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department
indicates that Petitioner has established industry support.\17\ 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, the Department is not required to
take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g.,
polling).\18\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have 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.\19\ Finally, 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.\20\
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Id.
\18\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also PRC AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\19\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\20\ 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 AD investigation that it is
requesting the Department initiate.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ 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.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 37 and Exhibit I-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price suppression
or depression; lost sales and revenues; declines in domestic industry
production, capacity utilization, and U.S. shipments; declines in
financial performance; and declines in employment indicators.\23\ 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.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 22-25, 34-48, and Exhibits
I-12--I-14 and I-15--I-26.
\24\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III,
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric from the People's Republic
of China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations 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 based its decision to
initiate an investigation of imports of silica fabric 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 initiation
checklist.
Export Price
Petitioner based U.S. price on an offer for sale for silica fabric
from a Chinese producer. Petitioner made deductions from U.S. price for
movement expenses consistent with the delivery terms.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 7-10 and AD Exhibits 6
through 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value
Petitioner stated that the Department has found the PRC to be a
non-market economy (NME) country in every administrative proceeding in
which the PRC has been involved.\26\ In accordance with section
771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the presumption of NME status remains in
effect until revoked by the Department. The presumption of NME status
for the PRC has not been revoked by the Department and, therefore,
remains in effect for purposes of the initiation of this investigation.
Accordingly, the NV of the product is appropriately based on factors of
production (FOPs) valued in a surrogate market economy country, in
accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. In the course of this
investigation, all parties, and the public, will have the opportunity
to provide relevant information related to the issues of the PRC's NME
status and the granting of separate rates to individual exporters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner claims that Thailand is an appropriate surrogate country
because it is a market economy that is at a level of economic
development comparable to that of the PRC and it is a significant
producer of comparable merchandise.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Id. at 3-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the information provided by Petitioner, we believe it is
appropriate to use Thailand as a surrogate country for initiation
purposes. 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 FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled
date of the preliminary determination.
Factors of Production
Petitioner based the FOPs for materials, labor, and energy on its
consumption rates for producing silica fabric as it did not have access
to the consumption rates of PRC producers of the subject
merchandise.\28\ Petitioner notes that it chose its production
experience because, like the Chinese producer from which the U.S. price
quote was obtained, Petitioner is an integrated producer of silica
fabric.\29\ Petitioner valued the estimated factors of production using
surrogate values from Thailand.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 11 and AD Exhibit 23.
\29\ Id. at 11.
\30\ Id. at 12 and AD Exhibit 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Raw Materials
Petitioner valued the FOPs for raw materials (e.g., hydrochloric
acid,
[[Page 8916]]
acrylic polymers, lime, etc.) using reasonably available, public import
data for Thailand obtained from the Global Trade Atlas (GTA) for the
period covering June 2015 to November 2015, the most recent POI-
contemporaneous data available at the time the Petition was filed.\31\
Petitioner excluded all import values from countries previously
determined by the Department to maintain broadly available, non-
industry-specific export subsidies and from countries previously
determined by the Department to be NME countries. In addition, in
accordance with the Department's practice, the average import value
excludes imports that were labeled as originating from an unidentified
country. The Department determines that the surrogate values used by
Petitioner are reasonably available and, thus, are acceptable for
purposes of initiation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Id. at AD Exhibit 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Labor
Petitioner valued labor using monthly Thai labor data published by
Thailand's National Statistics Office (NSO).\32\ Specifically,
Petitioner relied on data pertaining to wages and benefits earned by
Thai workers engaged in the manufacturing sector of the Thai
economy.\33\ Petitioner converted the wage rates to hourly and
converted to U.S. dollars using the average exchange rate during the
POI.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Id. at 13 and AD Exhibit 15.
\33\ Id.
\34\ Id. at 14 and AD Exhibits 15 and 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Packing Materials
Petitioner valued the packing materials used by PRC producers based
on Thai import data obtained from GTA for the period covering June 2015
to November 2015.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See Volume II of the Petition at 16 and AD Exhibit 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Energy
Petitioner calculated energy usage based upon its own production
experience associated with both electricity and natural gas.\36\
Petitioner valued natural gas using the average unit value of imports
of liquefied natural gas into Thailand, as reported by GTA.\37\ To
value electricity, Petitioner used public information, as compiled by
the Thai Metropolitan Electricity Authority.\38\ This information was
reported in Thai baht, converted into U.S. dollars/kilowatt hours, and
multiplied by Petitioner's factor usage rates.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Id. at 15.
\37\ Id. at 16 and AD Exhibits 12, 18 and 23; see also AD
Supplemental Response, at 1-2 and AD-Supp. Exhibit 3.
\38\ Id. at 15-16 and AD Exhibit 19.
\39\ Id. at AD Exhibits 17 19, Exhibit 22 and Exhibit 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yield Loss
Petitioner based its calculation of yield loss upon its own
production experience incurred during the leaching and dry line process
stages.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ Id. at 15 and AD Exhibit 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Factory Overhead, Selling, General and Administrative
Expenses, and Profit
Petitioner calculated surrogate financial ratios (i.e.,
manufacturing overhead, SG&A expenses, and profit) using the 2014
audited financial statement of Thai Toray Textile Mills Public Company,
a Thai producer of comparable merchandise (i.e., an industrial
textile).\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Id. at 15-16 and AD Exhibit 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by Petitioner, there is reason to
believe that imports of silica fabric 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, in accordance with section 773(c) of the
Act, the estimated dumping margin for silica fabric from the PRC is
160.28 percent.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ See Volume II of the Petition at 17 and AD Exhibit 24; see
also PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation
Based upon the examination of the AD Petition on silica fabric from
the PRC, we find that the Petition meets the requirements of section
732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an AD investigation to
determine whether imports of silica fabric from the PRC are being, or
are 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 intend to make our preliminary
determination no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.
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.\43\ 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.\44\ The amendments to
sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are applicable to all
determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply
to this AD investigation.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
\44\ 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).
\45\ Id. at 46794-95. The 2015 amendments may be found at
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Respondent Selection
Petitioner named 81 companies as producers/exporters of silica
fabric.\46\ In accordance with our standard practice for respondent
selection in cases involving NME countries, we intend to issue Q&V
questionnaires to producers/exporters of merchandise subject to the
investigation \47\ and base respondent selection on the responses
received. In addition, the Department will post the Q&V questionnaire
along with filing instructions on the Enforcement and Compliance Web
site at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ See Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit 11.
\47\ See Appendix I, ``Scope of the Investigations.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exporters/producers of silica fabric from the PRC that do not
receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the
Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy from the Enforcement &
Compliance Web site. The Q&V response must be submitted by the relevant
PRC exporters/producers no later than March 1, 2016, which is two weeks
from the signature date of this notice. All Q&V responses must be filed
electronically via ACCESS.
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation,
exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate application.\48\
The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application in
the PRC investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself,
which is available on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separate-rate
application will be due 30 days after publication of this initiation
notice.\49\ Exporters and
[[Page 8917]]
producers who submit a separate-rate application and have been selected
as mandatory respondents will be eligible for consideration for
separate-rate status only if they respond to all parts of the
Department's AD questionnaire as mandatory respondents. The Department
requires that respondents from the PRC submit a response to both the
Q&V questionnaire and the separate-rate application by their respective
deadlines in order to receive consideration for separate-rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at
http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin
05.1).
\49\ Although in past investigations this deadline was 60 days,
consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(a), which states that ``the Secretary
may request any person to submit factual information at any time
during a proceeding,'' this deadline is now 30 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Investigation 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.\50\
\50\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 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 has been
provided to the government of the PRC via ACCESS. To the extent
practicable, we 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
We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determinations by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date
on which the Petition were filed, whether there is a reasonable
indication that imports of silica fabric from the PRC are materially
injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry.\51\ A
negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being
terminated; \52\ otherwise, this investigation will proceed according
to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
\52\ 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 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). Any party, when submitting
factual information, must specify under which subsection of 19 CFR
351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted \53\ 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.\54\ 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. Please review the regulations prior to
submitting factual information in these investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
\54\ 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, 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 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. ET 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 these investigations.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\55\
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 petition
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.\56\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\56\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import
Administration during Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
administrative protective order (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 in 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: February 16, 2016.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this investigation is woven (whether from
yarns or rovings)
[[Page 8918]]
industrial grade amorphous silica fabric, which contains a minimum
of 90 percent silica (SiO2) by nominal weight, and a
nominal width in excess of 8 inches. The investigation covers
industrial grade amorphous silica fabric regardless of other
materials contained in the fabric, regardless of whether in roll
form or cut-to-length, regardless of weight, width (except as noted
above), or length. The investigation covers industrial grade
amorphous silica fabric regardless of whether the product is
approved by a standards testing body (such as being Factory Mutual
(FM) Approved), or regardless of whether it meets any governmental
specification.
Industrial grade amorphous silica fabric may be produced in
various colors. The investigation covers industrial grade amorphous
silica fabric regardless of whether the fabric is colored.
Industrial grade amorphous silica fabric may be coated or treated
with materials that include, but are not limited to, oils,
vermiculite, acrylic latex compound, silicone, aluminized polyester
(Mylar[supreg]) film, pressure-sensitive adhesive, or other coatings
and treatments. The investigation covers industrial grade amorphous
silica fabric regardless of whether the fabric is coated or treated,
and regardless of coating or treatment weight as a percentage of
total product weight. Industrial grade amorphous silica fabric may
be heat-cleaned. The investigation covers industrial grade amorphous
silica fabric regardless of whether the fabric is heat-cleaned.
Industrial grade amorphous silica fabric may be imported in
rolls or may be cut-to-length and then further fabricated to make
welding curtains, welding blankets, welding pads, fire blankets,
fire pads, or fire screens. Regardless of the name, all industrial
grade amorphous silica fabric that has been further cut-to-length or
cut-to-width or further finished by finishing the edges and/or
adding grommets, is included within the scope of this investigation.
Subject merchandise also includes (1) any industrial grade
amorphous silica fabric that has been converted into industrial
grade amorphous silica fabric in China from fiberglass cloth
produced in a third country; and (2) any industrial grade amorphous
silica fabric that has been further processed in a third country
prior to export to the United States, including but not limited to
treating, coating, slitting, cutting to length, cutting to width,
finishing the edges, adding grommets, or any other processing that
would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the
investigation if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-
scope industrial grade amorphous silica fabric.
Excluded from the scope of the investigation is amorphous silica
fabric that is subjected to controlled shrinkage, which is also
called ``pre-shrunk'' or ``aerospace grade'' amorphous silica
fabric. In order to be excluded as a pre-shrunk or aerospace grade
amorphous silica fabric, the amorphous silica fabric must meet the
following exclusion criteria: (l) The amorphous silica fabric must
contain a minimum of 98 percent silica (SiO2) by nominal
weight; (2) the amorphous silica fabric must have an areal shrinkage
of 4 percent or less; (3) the amorphous silica fabric must contain
no coatings or treatments; and (4) the amorphous silica fabric must
be white in color. For purposes of this scope, ``areal shrinkage''
refers to the extent to which a specimen of amorphous silica fabric
shrinks while subjected to heating at 1800 degrees F for 30 minutes.
Areal shrinkage is expressed as the following percentage:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN23FE16.001
Also excluded from the scope are amorphous silica fabric rope
and tubing (or sleeving). Amorphous silica fabric rope is a knitted
or braided product made from amorphous silica yarns. Silica tubing
(or sleeving) is braided into a hollow sleeve from amorphous silica
yarns.
The subject imports are normally classified in subheadings
7019.59.4021, 7019.59.4096, 7019.59.9021, and 7019.59.9096 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), but may
also enter under HTSUS subheadings 7019.40.4030, 7019.40.4060,
7019.40.9030, 7019.40.9060, 7019.51.9010, 7019.51.9090,
7019.52.9010, 7019.52.9021, 7019.52.9096 and 7019.90.1000. HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes only;
the written description of the scope of this investigation is
dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2016-03756 Filed 2-22-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P