[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 213 (Monday, November 4, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59353-59355]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23732]
[[Page 59353]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-112 and C-570-113]
Certain Collated Steel Staples From the People's Republic of
China: Preliminary Affirmative Determinations of Critical Circumstances
in the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines
that critical circumstances exist with respect to certain imports of
certain collated steel staples (collated staples) from the People's
Republic of China (China).
DATES: Applicable November 4, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Palmer (CVD) or Sergio
Balbontin (AD), AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-9068 or (202) 482-6478, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On June 6, 2019, Commerce received antidumping (AD) and
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of collated
staples from China filed in proper form on behalf of Kyocera Senco
Industrial Tools, Inc. (the petitioner).\1\ On July 3, 2019, Commerce
initiated the AD and CVD investigations of collated staples from
China.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Petitioner's Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Certain Collated Steel
Staples from Korea, the People's Republic of China, and Taiwan,''
dated June 6, 2019 (the Petition).
\2\ See Certain Collated Steel Staples from the People's
Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation,
84 FR 31840 (July 3, 2019); and Certain Collated Steel Staples from
the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan:
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 84 FR 31833 (July
3, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the AD investigation, Commerce selected Tianjin Jin Xin Sheng
Long Metal Products Co., Ltd. (Tianjin JXSL) and Tianjin Hweshcun
Fasteners Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Tianjin Hweshcun) as mandatory
respondents for individual examination.\3\ In the CVD investigation,
Commerce selected Hai Sheng Xin Group Co., Ltd. (Xin Group), Zhejiang
Best Nail Industrial Co., Ltd. (Best Nail),\4\ and Ningbo Deli
Stationery (Ningbo Deli) as mandatory respondents for individual
examination.\5\ On September 17, 2019, the petitioner alleged that
critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of collated
staples from China, pursuant to sections 703(e)(1) and 733(e)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.206.\6\ On
October 11 and 15, 2019, the petitioner filed a supplement to its
critical circumstances allegation for the AD and CVD investigations,
respectively.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Memorandum, ``Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of
Collated Steel Staples from the People's Republic of China:
Respondent Selection,'' dated July 30, 2019.
\4\ See Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Certain Collated Steel Staples from the People's Republic of China:
Respondent Selection,'' dated July 26, 2019.
\5\ See Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Certain Collated Steel Staples from the People's Republic of China:
Additional Respondent Selection,'' dated August 19, 2019.
\6\ See Petitioner's Letter, ``Certain Collated Steel Staples
from the People's Republic of China: Allegation of Critical
Circumstances,'' dated September 17, 2019 (Critical Circumstances
Allegation).
\7\ See Petitioner's Letter, ``Certain Collated Steel Staples
from the People's Republic of China: Supplement to Critical
Circumstances Allegation {AD{time} ,'' dated October 11, 2019
(Petitioner Supplement to AD Allegation); see also Petitioner's
Letter, ``Certain Collated Steel Staples from the People's Republic
of China: Supplement to Critical Circumstances Allegation
{CVD{time} ,'' dated October 15, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.206(c)(2)(i), if the petitioner
submits an allegation of critical circumstances more than 20 days
before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination, Commerce
must issue a preliminary finding whether there is a reasonable basis to
believe or suspect that critical circumstances exist by no later than
the date of the preliminary determination.\8\ In these AD and CVD
investigations, the petitioner requested that Commerce issue
preliminary critical circumstances determinations on an expedited
basis.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The preliminary determination for the AD investigation is
currently due no later than November 19, 2019, and the preliminary
determination for the CVD investigation is currently due no later
than November 4, 2019.
\9\ See Critical Circumstances Allegation at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 703(e)(1) of the Act provides that Commerce, upon receipt
of a timely allegation of critical circumstances, will preliminarily
determine that critical circumstances exist in CVD investigations if
there is a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that: (A) The alleged
countervailable subsidy is inconsistent with the Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures (SCM) Agreement of the World Trade
Organization; and (B) there have been massive imports of the subject
merchandise over a relatively short period. Section 733(e)(1) of the
Act provides that Commerce, upon receipt of a timely allegation of
critical circumstances, will preliminarily determine that critical
circumstances exist in AD investigations if there is a reasonable basis
to believe or suspect that: (A)(i) There is a history of dumping and
material injury by reason of dumped imports in the United States or
elsewhere of the subject merchandise, or (ii) the person by whom, or
for whose account, the merchandise was imported knew or should have
known that the exporter was selling the subject merchandise at less
than its fair value and that there was likely to be material injury by
reason of such sales; and (B) there have been massive imports of the
subject merchandise over a relatively short period.
Sections 351.206(h)(2) and (i) of Commerce's regulations provide
that imports must increase by at least 15 percent during the
``relatively short period'' to be considered ``massive'' and defines a
``relatively short period'' as normally being the period beginning on
the date the proceeding begins (i.e., the date the petition is filed)
and ending at least three months later. Commerce's regulations also
provide, however, that if Commerce finds that importers, or exporters
or producers, had reason to believe, at some time prior to the
beginning of the proceeding, that a proceeding was likely, Commerce may
consider a period of not less than three months from that earlier
time.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See 19 CFR 351.206(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical Circumstances Analysis
Alleged Countervailable Subsidies Are Inconsistent With the SCM
Agreement
To determine whether an alleged countervailable subsidy is
inconsistent with the SCM Agreement, in accordance with section
703(e)(1)(A) of the Act, Commerce considered the evidence currently on
the record of the CVD investigation. Specifically, as reflected in the
initiation checklist, the following subsidy programs, alleged in the
Petition and supported by information reasonably available to the
petitioner, appear to be export contingent, which would render them
inconsistent with the SCM Agreement: \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See CVD Initiation Checklist: Certain Collated Steel
Staples from the People's Republic of China, dated June 26, 2019.
Export Loans from Chinese State-Owned Banks
Export Seller's Credit
Export Buyer's Credit
Export Credit Insurance Subsidies
Export Credit Guarantees
[[Page 59354]]
Subsidies for the Development of Famous Brands and China World
Top Brands
SME International Market Exploration Fund
Export Assistance Grants
Export Interest Subsidies for Enterprises Located in Zhejiang
Province
Therefore, Commerce preliminarily determines that there is a
reasonable basis to believe or suspect that alleged subsidies in the
CVD investigation are inconsistent with the SCM Agreement.
History of Dumping and Material Injury/Knowledge of Sales Below Fair
Value and Material Injury
To determine whether there is a history of dumping pursuant to
section 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, Commerce generally considers
current or previous AD orders on subject merchandise from the country
in question in the United States and current orders imposed by other
countries regarding imports of the same merchandise. However, in the
Critical Circumstances Allegation, the petitioner did not provide
information on the history of dumping.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Critical Circumstances Allegation at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine whether importers knew or should have known that
exporters were selling the subject merchandise at less than fair value
pursuant to section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act, we typically consider
the magnitude of dumping margins, including margins alleged in the
petition.\13\ Commerce has found margins of 15 percent or more (for
constructed export price) to 25 percent or more (for export price) to
be sufficient for this purpose.\14\ The dumping margins of 119.37
percent and 122.55 percent alleged in the AD Petition significantly
exceed the 15 to 25 percent threshold.\15\ Therefore, on that basis, we
preliminarily conclude importers knew, or should have known, that
exporters in China were selling at less than fair value (LTFV).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determinations of Critical
Circumstances: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from
Australia, the People's Republic of China, India, the Republic of
Korea, the Netherlands, and the Russian Federation, 67 FR 19157,
19158 (April 18, 2002), unchanged in Notice of Final Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel
Flat Products from Australia, 67 FR 47509 (July 19, 2002), Notice of
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-
Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from the People's Republic of
China, 67 FR 62107 (October 3, 2002), Notice of Final Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel
Flat Products from India, 67 FR 47518 (July 19, 2002), Notice of
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-
Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea, 67 FR 62124 (October
3, 2002), Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value and Critical Circumstances: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel
Flat Products from The Netherlands, 67 FR 62112 (October 3, 2002),
and Notice of the Final Determination Sales at Less Than Fair Value
and Critical Circumstances: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat
Products from the Russian Federation, 67 FR 62121 (October 3, 2002).
\14\ Id.
\15\ See Petitioner's Letter, ``Certain Collated Steel Staples
from China: Petition Supplement,'' dated June 14, 2019, at Exhibit
9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine whether importers knew, or should have known, that
there was likely to be material injury caused by reason of such imports
pursuant section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act, Commerce normally will
look to the preliminary injury determination of the International Trade
Commission (ITC).\16\ If the ITC finds a reasonable indication of
material injury to the relevant U.S. industry, Commerce will determine
that a reasonable basis exists to impute importer knowledge that
material injury is likely by reason of such imports. In these
investigations, the ITC found that there is a ``reasonable indication''
of material injury to the domestic industry because of the imported
subject merchandise.\17\ Therefore, the ITC's preliminary injury
determination in the AD investigation is sufficient to impute importer
knowledge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See, e.g., Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Investigations of Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada:
Preliminary Determinations of Critical Circumstances, 82 FR 19219,
19220 (April 26, 2017) (Softwood Lumber from Canada Preliminary
Critical Circumstances Determination), unchanged in Certain Softwood
Lumber Products from Canada: Final Affirmative Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final Determination of
Critical Circumstances, 82 FR 51806, 51807-08 (November 8, 2017)
(Softwood Lumber from Canada Final AD Determination).
\17\ See Certain Collated Steel Staples from China, Korea, and
Taiwan: Investigation Nos. 701-TA-626 and 731-TA-1452-1454
(Preliminary), 84 FR 35884 (July 25, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Massive Imports
In determining whether there are ``massive imports'' over a
``relatively short period,'' pursuant to sections 703(e)(1)(B) and
733(e)(1)(B) of the Act, Commerce normally compares the import volumes
of the subject merchandise for at least three months immediately
preceding the filing of the petition (i.e., the base period) to a
comparable period of at least three months following the filing of the
petition (i.e., the comparison period).\18\ Imports will normally be
considered massive when imports during the comparison period have
increased by 15 percent or more compared to imports during the base
period.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Softwood Lumber from Canada Preliminary Critical
Circumstances Determination, 82 FR at 19220, unchanged in Softwood
Lumber from Canada Final AD Determination, 82 FR at 51807-08.
\19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, to determine preliminarily whether there has been a
massive surge in imports for each participating mandatory respondent
which provided shipment data, including Tianjin JXSL, Commerce compared
the total volume of shipments from June 2019 through August 2019, the
comparison period (i.e., all months for which shipment data was
available), with the preceding three-month period of March 2019 through
May 2019, the base period. Although the petitioner argued that Commerce
should use a two-month comparison period for its analysis with respect
to Tianjin JXSL,\20\ our preference is to use at least a three-month
comparison period.\21\ There is no such evidence on the record of the
AD or CVD proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Petitioner Supplement to AD Allegation at 6-8.
\21\ See 19 CFR 351.206(h)(2)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the CVD investigation, for all others, Commerce compared
Global Trade Atlas (GTA) data for the period June 2019 through August
2019 with the preceding three-month period of March 2019 through May
2019,\22\ after subtracting from the GTA data shipments reported by the
mandatory respondents which provided such data. Similarly, regarding
the AD investigation, for non-individually examined companies
requesting separate rate status, we performed the same comparison. For
those respondents in either the CVD or AD investigation that are not
participating in the investigation, we preliminarily determine, on the
basis of adverse facts available,\23\ that there has been a massive
surge in imports. Accordingly, based on our analysis of the information
on the record, we preliminarily determine that certain producers/
exporters of collated staples from China had massive surges in
imports.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Commerce gathered GTA data under the following harmonized
tariff schedule number: 8305.20.00.
\23\ See section 776 of the Act.
\24\ See Memorandum, ``Certain Collated Steel Staples from the
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Massive Imports Analysis,''
dated concurrently with this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the criteria and findings discussed above, we
preliminarily determine in the AD investigation that critical
circumstances exist with respect to imports of collated staples from
China shipped by Tianjin Hweshcun and all other producers and exporters
except Tianjin JXSL. Additionally, we preliminarily determine in the
CVD investigation that critical circumstances
[[Page 59355]]
exist with respect to imports of collated staples from China shipped by
Best Nail, Xin Group, Ningbo Deli, and all other producers and
exporters.
Final Critical Circumstances Determinations
We will issue our final determinations concerning critical
circumstances when we issue our final CVD and AD determinations. All
interested parties will have the opportunity to address these
determinations in case briefs to be submitted after the issuance of the
preliminary CVD and AD determinations. Commerce will specify the
applicable deadlines at a later date.
ITC Notification
In accordance with sections 703(f) and 733(f) of the Act, we will
notify the ITC of these preliminary determinations of critical
circumstances.
Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 703(e)(2) of the Act, because we have
preliminarily found that critical circumstances exist with regard to
imports from all producers and exporters of collated staples from
China, if we make an affirmative preliminary determination that
countervailable subsidies have been provided to these same producers/
exporters at above de minimis rates, we will instruct U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of
subject merchandise from these producers/exporters that are entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the date that is
90 days prior to the effective date of provisional measures (e.g., the
date of publication in the Federal Register of the notice of an
affirmative preliminary determination that countervailable subsidies
have been provided at above de minimis rates). At such time, we will
also instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the estimated
preliminary subsidy rates reflected in the preliminary determination
published in the Federal Register. The suspension of liquidation will
remain in effect until further notice.
In accordance with section 733(e)(2) of the Act, because we have
preliminarily found that critical circumstances exist with regard to
imports from certain producers and exporters of collated staples from
China, if we make an affirmative preliminary determination that sales
at LTFV have been made by these same producers/exporters at above de
minimis rates, we will instruct CBP to suspend liquidation of all
entries of subject merchandise from these producers/exporters that are
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the
date that is 90 days prior to the effective date of provisional
measures (e.g., the date of publication in the Federal Register of the
notice of an affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV at
above de minimis rates). At such time, we will also instruct CBP to
require a cash deposit equal to the estimated preliminary dumping
margins reflected in the preliminary determination published in the
Federal Register. The suspension of liquidation will remain in effect
until further notice.
Notification to Interested Parties
These determinations are issued and published pursuant to section
777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206(c)(2).
Dated: October 24, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019-23732 Filed 11-1-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P