90 FR 123 pgs. 27838-27841 - Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar From Algeria, Egypt, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations
Type: NOTICEVolume: 90Number: 123Pages: 27838 - 27841
Pages: 27838, 27839, 27840, 27841Docket number: [C-721-002, C-729-806, C-552-854]
FR document: [FR Doc. 2025-12044 Filed 6-27-25; 8:45 am]
Agency: Commerce Department
Sub Agency: International Trade Administration
Official PDF Version: PDF Version
[top]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-721-002, C-729-806, C-552-854]
Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar From Algeria, Egypt, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations
AGENCY:
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
DATES:
Applicable June 24, 2025.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shane Subler or Henry Wolfe at (202) 482-6241 or (202) 482-0574, respectively, (Algeria), Lingjun Wang at (202) 482-2316 (Egypt), and Christopher Williams at (202) 482-5166 (the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam)), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On June 4, 2025, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) received countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of steel concrete reinforcing bar (rebar) from Algeria, Egypt, and Vietnam filed in proper form on behalf of the Rebar Trade Action Coalition (the petitioner) and its individual members, domestic producers of rebar. 1 The CVD Petitions were accompanied by antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of rebar from Algeria, Bulgaria, Egypt, and Vietnam. 2
Footnotes:
1 ? See Petitioner's Letter, "Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties," dated June 4, 2025 (Petitions). The individual members of the Rebar Trade Action Coalition are Byer Steel Corporation, Commercial Metals Company, Gerdau Ameristeel US Inc., Nucor Corporation, Optimus Steel, and Steel Dynamics, Inc.
2 ? Id.
Between June 10 and 20, 2025, Commerce requested supplemental information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions in supplemental questionnaires. 3 Between June 13 and 23, 2025, the petitioner filed timely responses to these requests for additional information. 4
Footnotes:
3 ? See Commerce's Letters, "Supplemental Questions," dated June 9, 2025 (First General Issues Questionnaire), First Country-Specific CVD Supplemental Questionnaires: Algeria CVD Supplemental and Egypt CVD Supplemental, dated June 10, 2025, and Second Country-Specific CVD Supplemental Questionnaires: Second Algeria CVD Supplemental and Second Egypt CVD Supplemental, dated June 18 and 20, 2025; see also Memorandum, "Teleconference with Counsel to the Petitioner," dated June 20, 2025 (June 20, 2025, Memorandum).
4 ? See Petitioner's Letters, "Petitioners' Response to Supplemental Questions-General Issues," dated June 11, 2025 (First General Issues Supplement) and "Petitioner's Response to the 2nd Supplemental Questionnaire Regarding Common Issues and Injury Volume I of the Petition," dated June 23, 2025 (Second General Issues Supplement); see also Country-Specific CVD Supplemental Responses: Algeria CVD Supplement and Egypt CVD Supplement," dated June 13 and 16, 2025; and Second Country-Specific CVD Supplemental Responses: Second Algeria CVD Supplement and Second Egypt CVD Supplement, dated June 23, 2025.
In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that the Government of Algeria (GOA), Government of Egypt (GOE), and Government of Vietnam (GOV) (collectively, Governments) are providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of rebar in Algeria, Egypt, and Vietnam, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic industry producing rebar in the United States. Consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged programs on which we are initiating CVD investigations, the Petitions were accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry, because the petitioner and its individual members are interested parties, as defined in sections 771(9)(C) and (F) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the requested CVD investigations. 5
Footnotes:
5 ? See section on "Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions," infra.
Periods of Investigation
Because the Petitions were filed on June 4, 2025, the period of investigation for the Algeria, Egypt, and Vietnam CVD investigations is January 1, 2024, through December 31, 2024. 6
Footnotes:
6 ? See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these investigations is rebar from Algeria, Egypt, and Vietnam. For a full description of the scope of these investigations, see the appendix to this notice.
Comments on the Scope of the Investigations
On June 20, 2025, Commerce requested information and clarification from the petitioner regarding the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions is an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. 7 On June 23, 2025, the petitioner provided clarifications. 8 The description of merchandise covered by these investigations, as described in the appendix to this notice, reflects these clarifications.
Footnotes:
7 ? See June 20, 2025, Memorandum.
8 ? See Second General Issues Supplement at 1-2.
[top] As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage ( i.e., scope). 9 Commerce will consider all comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. If scope comments include factual information, all such factual information should be limited to public information. 10 Commerce requests that interested parties provide at the beginning of their scope comments a public executive summary for each comment or issue raised in their submission. Commerce further requests that interested parties limit their public executive summary of each comment or issue to no more than 450 words, not including citations. Commerce intends to use the public executive summaries as the basis of the comment summaries included in the analysis of scope comments. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that scope comments be submitted by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on July 14, 2025, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, and should also be limited to public information, must be
Footnotes:
9 ? See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) ( Preamble ).
10 ? See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining "factual information").
Commerce requests that any factual information that parties consider relevant to the scope of these investigations be submitted during that time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may be relevant, the party must contact Commerce and request permission to submit the additional information. All scope comments must be filed simultaneously on the records of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), unless an exception applies. 11 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due.
Footnotes:
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 Commerce's electronic filing requirements, effective August 5, 2011. Information on 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_on_Electronic_Filing_Procedures.pdf.
Consultations
Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce notified the GOA, GOE, and GOV of the receipt of the Petitions and provided an opportunity for consultations with respect to the Petitions. 12 Commerce held consultations with the GOV on June 20, 2025, 13 and the GOE on June 23, 2025. 14 The GOA did not request consultations.
Footnotes:
12 ? See Commerce's Letters, "Invitation for Consultations to Discuss the Countervailing Duty Petition," dated June 9, 2025.
13 ? See Memorandum, "Consultations with the Government of Vietnam," dated June 20, 2025; see also GOV's Letter, "Comments on Countervailing Duty Petition," dated June 23, 2025.
14 ? See Memorandum, "Consultations with the Government of Egypt," dated June 23, 2025; see also GOE's Letter, "Consultations Statement," dated June 23, 2025.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce 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 Commerce to look to 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 Commerce and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product, 15 they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce'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. 16
Footnotes:
15 ? See section 771(10) of the Act.
16 ? 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 Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 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, the petitioner does not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigations. 17 Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that rebar, as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product. 18
Footnotes:
17 ?For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as applied to these cases and information regarding industry support, see Checklists, "Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklists: Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Algeria, Egypt, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam" dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Algeria, Bulgaria, Egypt, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Attachment II). These checklists are on file electronically via ACCESS.
18 ?For further discussion, see Attachment II of the Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists.
In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the "Scope of the Investigations," in the appendix to this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioners provided the 2024 production of the domestic like product for the U.S. producers that support the Petitions and compared this to total production of the domestic like product by the U.S. rebar industry. 19 We relied on data provided by the petitioner for purposes of measuring industry support. 20
Footnotes:
19 ? Id.
20 ?For further discussion, see Attachment II of the Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists.
[top] Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the First General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the Petitions. 21 First, the Petitions 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, Commerce is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support ( e.g., polling). 22 Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product. 23 Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support
Footnotes:
21 ? Id.
22 ? Id.; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
23 ? See Attachment II of the Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists.
24 ? Id.
25 ? Id.
Injury Test
Because Egypt and Vietnam are "Subsidies Agreement Countries" within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to these investigations. 26 Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from Egypt and/or Vietnam materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.
Footnotes:
26 ?We note that Algeria is not a member of the World Trade Organization. As such, it is unclear whether Algeria is a "Subsidies Agreement Country" within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, and whether the ITC is required to determine whether the allegedly subsidized imports of subject merchandise from Algeria materially injure or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. For purposes of these initiations, we have considered the petitioner's injury allegation as a whole, regardless of whether Algeria meets the provisions for "Subsidies Agreement Country" under sections 702(b)(2) or 702(b)(3) of the Act.
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are benefiting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioner alleges that subject imports from Algeria, Egypt, and Vietnam individually exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act. 27
Footnotes:
27 ?For further information regarding negligibility and the injury allegation, see Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Algeria, Bulgaria, Egypt, and Vietnam (Attachment III).
The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by the significant volume of subject imports; reduced market share; underselling and price depression and/or suppression; lost sales and revenues; and declines in the domestic industry's production, capacity utilization, shipment values, and financial performance. 28 We assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, causation, cumulation, as well as negligibility, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation. 29
Footnotes:
28 ? See Attachment III of the Country-Specific CVD Initiation Checklists.
29 ? Id.
Initiation of CVD Investigations
Based upon the examination of the Petitions and supplemental responses, we find that they meet the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating CVD investigations to determine whether imports of rebar from Algeria, Egypt, and Vietnam benefit from countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOA, GOE, and GOV, respectively. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation.
Algeria
Based on our review of the Petitions, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 24 programs alleged by the petitioner. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see the Algeria CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is available on ACCESS.
Egypt
Based on our review of the Petitions, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 25 programs alleged by the petitioner. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see the Egypt CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is available on ACCESS.
Vietnam
Based on our review of the Petitions, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 39 programs alleged by the petitioner. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see the Vietnam CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is available on ACCESS.
Respondent Selection
Algeria, Egypt, and Vietnam
In the Petitions, the petitioners identified four companies in Algeria, 13 companies in Egypt, and 10 companies in Vietnam as producers and/or exporters of rebar. 30 Commerce intends to follow its standard practice in CVD investigations and calculate company-specific subsidy rates in the investigations. Following standard practice in CVD investigations, in the event Commerce determines that the number of companies is large, and it cannot individually examine each company based upon Commerce's resources, where appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for imports under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheading(s) listed in the "Scope of the Investigations," in the appendix.
Footnotes:
30 ? See Petitions at Volume I (page 18 and Exhibit I-10).
On June 23, 2025, Commerce released CBP data on imports of rebar from Algeria, Egypt, and Vietnam under administrative protective order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment on CBP data and/or respondent selection must do so within three business days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of these investigations. 31 Comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety via ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. ET on the specified deadline. Commerce will not accept rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or respondent selection.
Footnotes:
31 ? See Country-Specific Memoranda, "Release of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Entry Data," dated June 23, 2025.
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 Commerce's website at https://www.trade.gov/administrative-protective-orders.
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
[top] In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petitions has been provided to the GOA, GOE, and GOV via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petitions to each exporter named in the Petitions, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
Commerce will notify the ITC of its initiation, as required by section 702(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determinations by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of rebar from Egypt, and/or Vietnam are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry. 32 A negative ITC determination for either country will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country. 33 Otherwise, these CVD investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
Footnotes:
32 ? See section 703(a)(1) of the Act. As noted above, it is unclear whether Algeria is a "Subsidies Agreement Country" and whether the ITC is required to make a determination with respect to the allegedly subsidized imports from Algeria.
33 ? 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 of production 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 Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)-(iv). Section 351.301(b) of Commerce's regulations requires any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted? 34 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. 35 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. Interested parties should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information in these investigations.
Footnotes:
34 ? See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
35 ? 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 351.301, or as otherwise specified by Commerce. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by Commerce. 36 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, Commerce 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 a letter or memorandum of 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, standalone submission; under limited circumstances we will grant untimely filed requests for the extension of time limits, where we determine, based on 19 CFR 351.302, that extraordinary circumstances exist. Parties should review Commerce's regulations concerning the extension of time limits and the Time Limits Final Rule prior to submitting factual information in these investigations. 37
Footnotes:
36 ? See 19 CFR 351.302.
37 ? See 19 CFR 351.301; see also Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013) ( Time Limits Final Rule ), available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information. 38 Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g). 39 Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification requirements.
Footnotes:
38 ? See section 782(b) of the Act.
39 ? 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 https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements of 19 CFR 351.103(d) ( e.g., by filing the required letters of appearance). Note that Commerce has amended certain of its requirements pertaining to the service of documents in 19 CFR 351.303(f). 40
Footnotes:
40 ? See Administrative Protective Order, Service, and Other Procedures in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 88 FR 67069 (September 29, 2023).
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: June 24, 2025.
Abdelali Elouaradia,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise subject to these investigations is steel concrete reinforcing bar imported in either straight length or coil form (rebar) regardless of metallurgy, length, diameter, or grade or lack thereof.
The subject merchandise includes rebar that has been further processed in the subject countries or a third country, including but not limited to cutting, grinding, galvanizing, painting, coating, or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of these investigations if performed in the country of manufacture of the rebar.
Specifically excluded are plain rounds ( i.e., nondeformed or smooth rebar).
The subject merchandise is classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) primarily under item numbers 7213.10.0000, 7214.20.0000, and 7228.30.8010. The subject merchandise may also enter under other HTSUS numbers including 7221.00.0017, 7221.00.0018, 7221.00.0030, 7221.00.0045, 7222.11.0001, 7222.11.0057, 7222.11.0059, 7222.30.0001, 7227.20.0080, 7227.90.6030, 7227.90.6035, 7227.90.6040, 7228.20.1000, and 7228.60.6000. HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes; however, the written description of the scope remains dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2025-12044 Filed 6-27-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P