19 CFR Part 351 - ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTIES

The Department of Commerce (the Department) is modifying the applicability date contained in the final rule published in the Federal Register on March 24, 2016. The original applicability date language did not convey the Department's intention, i.e., to apply the newly amended regulations to all segments of proceedings initiated on or after the effective date contained in the rule. This action is necessary to ensure that there is no ambiguity in the application of the modified regulations.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) proposes to modify the applicability date contained in the final rule published in the Federal Register on March 24, 2016, Modification of Regulations Regarding Price Adjustments in Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 81 FR 15641, and is seeking comments from parties. The original applicability date language did not convey the Department's intention, i.e., to apply the newly amended regulation to all segments of proceedings initiated on or after the effective date contained in the Federal Register notice. This action is necessary to ensure that there is no ambiguity in the application of the modified regulations.

The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) proposes to modify the regulation pertaining to written argument in antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings and is seeking comments from parties. This modification, if adopted, is intended to establish word limits for submission of case and rebuttal briefs. This action is necessary to streamline the process contained in the current regulation, to better align with current Department practices and to reduce the strain on resources.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) is modifying its regulations pertaining to price adjustments in antidumping duty proceedings. These modifications clarify that the Department does not intend to accept a price adjustment that is made after the time of sale unless the interested party demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the Department, its entitlement to such an adjustment. The Department has further adopted in this final rule a non-exhaustive list of factors that it may consider in determining whether to accept a price adjustment that is made after the time of sale.

On June 29, 2015, President Obama signed into law the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015. The Act provides a number of amendments to the antidumping duty (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) laws but does not specify dates of application for those amendments. This notice of determination establishes a date of application for each statutory revision pertaining to the Department of Commerce and provides notice thereof to all interested parties to AD and CVD proceedings and to the public.

The International Trade Administration's Enforcement and Compliance publishes this rule to change the room number of the Administrative Protective Order and Dockets Unit (APO/Dockets Unit). This rule also changes the web address of Enforcement and Compliance's electronic filing system, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). Finally, this rule changes the web address for the location of the ACCESS Handbook on Electronic Filing. Consistent with this action, this rule makes appropriate conforming changes in the regulations.

The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) proposes to modify two regulations pertaining to price adjustments in antidumping duty proceedings and is seeking comments from parties. These modifications, if adopted, are intended to clarify that the Department generally will not consider a price adjustment that reduces or eliminates a dumping margin unless the party claiming such price adjustment demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the Department, through documentation that the terms and conditions of the adjustment were established and known to the customer at the time of sale.

The International Trade Administration's Enforcement and Compliance Unit publishes this rule to announce a change in the name of Enforcement and Compliance's electronic filing system from “IA ACCESS” to “ACCESS.” Consistent with this action, this rule makes appropriate conforming changes in part 351 of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This action is being taken to ensure that the regulations reflect the change in nomenclature from Import Administration to Enforcement and Compliance.

Enforcement and Compliance (formerly Import Administration), International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce (the Department), hereby publishes this Final Rule not to apply the previously withdrawn regulatory provisions governing targeted dumping in less-than-fair-value investigations. Following the Court of International Trade's decision in Gold East (Jiangsu) Paper Co. v. United States, 918 F. Supp. 2d 1317 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2013), the Department sought clarification of the status of the previously withdrawn targeted dumping regulations and input on whether to reinstate the regulations or to continue to treat them as withdrawn. The Department has considered the comments received and, as explained below, determines to continue not to apply the withdrawn targeted dumping regulations in less-than-fair-value investigations. Rather, the Department will continue to determine whether to apply an alternative comparison method as appropriate based upon the particular facts in each case.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) proposes to modify its regulations to establish time limits for the submission of requests for sampling, and comments on sampling in antidumping (AD) administrative reviews. The modifications to the time limits, if adopted, will more clearly prescribe the time for filing requests for sampling in AD administrative reviews, and the time for filing comments and rebuttal comments with respect to such requests. The modifications will provide sufficient opportunity for the Department to determine whether it will employ sampling in selecting respondents for individual examination when conducting administrative reviews in which a request for sampling is timely submitted.

Effective October 1, 2013, the Department of Commerce (Department), through internal department organizational orders, changed the name of “Import Administration” to “Enforcement and Compliance.” Consistent with this action, this rule makes appropriate conforming changes in the Code of Federal Regulations. The rule also sets forth a Savings Provision that preserves, under the new name, all actions taken under the name of Import Administration and provides that any references to Import Administration in any document or other communication shall be deemed to be references to Enforcement and Compliance.

Import Administration proposes not to apply, upon the effective date of this rule if implemented, the previously withdrawn regulatory provisions governing targeted dumping in antidumping duty investigations. Following the Court of International Trade's decision in Gold East (Jiangsu) Paper Co. v. United States, Import Administration is seeking comments from parties to clarify the status of the previously withdrawn regulatory provisions with regard to antidumping duty investigations. Import Administration also invites comment on the effect of this proposed rulemaking on recent modifications to its regulations concerning the calculation of the weighted-average dumping margin and assessment rate in certain antidumping proceedings.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) is modifying its regulation concerning the extension of time limits for submissions in antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) proceedings. The modification clarifies that parties may request an extension of time limits before any time limit established under Part 351 expires. 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.

The Department of Commerce (“Department”) is modifying its regulation which states that the Department normally will use the price that a nonmarket economy (“NME”) producer pays to a market economy supplier when a factor of production is purchased from a market economy supplier and paid for in market economy currency, in the calculation of normal value (“NV”) in antidumping proceedings involving NME countries. The rule establishes a requirement that the input at issue be produced in one or more market economy countries, and a revised threshold requiring that “substantially all” ( i.e., 85 percent) of an input be purchased from one or more market economy suppliers before the Department uses the purchase price paid to value the entire factor of production. The Department is making this change because it finds that a market economy input price is not the best available information for valuing all purchases of that input when market economy purchases of an input do not account for substantially all purchases of the input.

The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) is amending the regulation which governs the certification of factual information submitted to the Department by a person or his or her representative during antidumping (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) proceedings. The amended regulation is intended to strengthen the current certification requirements. For example, the amendment revises the certification in order to identify to which document the certification applies, to identify to which segment of an AD/CVD proceeding the certification applies, to identify who is making the certification, and to indicate the date on which the certification was made. In addition, the amendments are intended to ensure that parties and their counsel are aware of potential consequences for false certifications.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) is amending its regulations to add a subsection that strengthens the accountability of attorneys and non-attorney representatives who appear in proceedings before the Import Administration (IA). The rule provides that both attorneys and non-attorney representatives will be subject to disciplinary action for misconduct based upon good cause. The rule will assist the Department in maintaining the integrity of its proceedings by deterring misconduct by those who appear before it in antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) proceedings.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) is modifying its regulations, which define “factual information” and establish time limits for the submission of factual information in antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) proceedings. The modifications to the definition of factual information more clearly describe the types of information that can be submitted by a person or placed on the record by the Department in a segment of the proceeding. The modifications to the time limits enable the Department to efficiently determine the type of information being submitted and whether it is timely filed; they also ensure that the Department has sufficient opportunity to review submissions of factual information.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) proposes to modify its regulation concerning the extension of time limits for submissions in antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) proceedings. The modification, if adopted, will clarify that parties may request an extension of time limits before any time limit established under this part expires. This modification will also clarify under which circumstances the Department will grant untimely- filed requests for the extension of time limits.

On July 10, 2012, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published a proposed rule in the Federal Register requesting comments regarding a proposed modification to the definition of factual information and to the time limits for the submission of factual information in antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) proceedings. The Department has decided to extend the comment period, making the new deadline for the submission of public comment September 24, 2012.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) proposes to modify its regulations which define “factual information” and establish time limits for the submission of factual information in antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) proceedings. The modifications to the definition of factual information, if adopted, will more clearly describe the types of information that can be submitted by a person or placed on the record by the Department in a segment of a proceeding. The modifications to the time limits in which such information may be submitted or placed on the record, if adopted, will enable the Department to efficiently determine what type of information is being submitted and whether it is timely filed, and to provide sufficient opportunity for the Department to review submissions of factual information.

The Department of Commerce (“Department”) proposes to modify its regulation which states that the Department normally will use the price that a nonmarket economy (“NME”) producer pays to a market economy supplier when a factor of production is purchased from a market economy supplier and paid for in market economy currency, in the calculation of normal value (“NV”) in antidumping proceedings involving NME countries. The rule, if adopted, would establish (1) a requirement that the input at issue be produced in one or more market economy countries, and (2) a revised threshold requiring that “substantially all” of an input be purchased from one or more market economy suppliers before the Department would use the purchase price paid to value the entire factor of production. Through this proposed modification, the Department is announcing its proposed definition of “substantially all” to be 85 percent of the total purchased volume of the particular input. The Department invites public comment on this proposed change.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) proposes to amend its regulations to add a subsection that strengthens the accountability of attorneys and non-attorney representatives who appear in proceedings before the Import Administration (IA). If this proposed rule is implemented, the Department will continue its long-standing practice of permitting attorneys and non-attorney representatives to appear before IA. The proposed rule provides that both attorneys and non-attorney representatives will be subject to disciplinary action for misconduct based upon good cause. The proposed rule will assist the Department in maintaining the integrity of its proceedings by deterring misconduct by those who appear before it in antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) proceedings. The Department is requesting comments on the proposed rule as discussed in more detail below.

The Department of Commerce (the Department) is amending its regulations concerning the revocation of antidumping and countervailing duty orders in whole or in part, and the termination of suspended antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. This rule eliminates the provision for revocation of an antidumping or countervailing duty order with respect to individual exporters or producers based on those individual exporters or producers having received antidumping rates of zero for three consecutive years, or countervailing duty rates of zero for five consecutive years.